Best editing workflow… need some advice

[chromium]

I’m building a fictionary scenario, with Russia & NATO country against Georgia & Turkey. The scenario work with every unit already placed on the map, so I have a lot of static, movers, etc etc that start with random trigger at the beginning of a mission.

Trying to build a semi-realistic Abkhazian army composition (from wiki information), I’ve something like 380 units only for abhkazia. My question is: for “frames per second” reason Is it better to place those 380 units in few bigger groups (3 groups x 63 units MBT & APC & IFV + 4 groups x 24 units Artillery + others… ) OR in multiple small groups of 10-15 units each?.

Please note that if I have to “split” those mega-groups in smaller ones, those will be together during the action (the number of single units visible in a sortie, for example, will be always 63 but they will be in different groups instead of a single one)

Thanks in advance for the answer.

[chromium]

no-one can help? I also like everyone opinion about workin on >800 units; >150 groups (about 80% random triggered at mission start) vs. Frame per seconds potential issues.

[STP Dragon]

I think nobody have the experience for that. So test it and poste your results please. :)

[chromium]

Will be done!

 

If it works... I'll share the scenario

[AKA_Clutter]

My guess is that you very likely will have problems with frame rates if they are all activated within the same aera. You may also have problems with the game locking up with that many units being activated at once. I have seen that issue and that was with about 10 to 11 groups with 5 units each. Hopefully that is just me!

 

Good luck!

Edited March 19, 2010 by AKA_Clutter

[Grimes]

The more objects in a single frame the less FPS you will have. I would personally split them into smaller groups. You have more control over what they do, where they are, and to an extent how they act. I don't think there is a formula out there showing x units creates y frame hit. But from personal experience putting 50 vehicles into a single group isn't the best idea.

[chromium]

Yes, in fact with >1000 units moving in the scenario I dropped by 45 fps to 3. Now I will reduce units to max 12 per group, without add more groups, and use active units only in the Front line area... but that will reduce the scenario plan... to my Idea I need that all the scenario is moving according to the situation.

[chromium]

Last result: number of groups do not exactly affect fps, cause in a SP view you can get a lot more fps than in F10 view with all units displayed. To my idea of a semi dynamic scenario in witch build mission, I may really find useful to know how exactly units number and composition could impact FPS in multi or single player mode... maybe someone from ED could help? :(

[JimMack]

The critical issue seems not to be necessarily the number of units, but the number of units firing within a particluar time period. If the mission starts with every unit firing at each other simultaneously you can get a crash.

[chromium]

first of all thanks for the fast and accurate answer, JimMack. At starting situation no units is firing to anyone, so I think I can hold a 40 fps in single player view. To complete the 0.9 version of my scenario (only Abkhazia and Georgia completed) I need at least a pair of week. When It will be ready, maybe I'll post it here so who wants could try and use it as a base-layer for missions.

[chromium]

small update: lots of groups from 4 to 20 units per group, some firing each other, 30 fps. starting to think about that extremely large group (>40 units) could cause an FPS drop even if not firing. See that in F10 view if everything is not hidden the fps are less that in F1 view, and that using the tweak that sets to 20 Km instead of 80 the distance of drawing units in the world it's quite helpful in this scenario... but I do not execute any test since now. I'm at 50% of completion of first mission, 65% of the scenario (no sea units, no special building)