The range from camera at which low res textures load?

[Lt Bull]

Hello

I am well aware that the CM graphics engine seems to load hi or low res textures for terrain depending on how far away from the camera they are.  This is for all the CM titles.  Some terrain types/features which are more 3D (like wheat fields or vineyards) actually look like flat terrain when viewed at ranges beyond this high res texture loading range. Although I understand that this is a way to reduce the graphical load on the PC/gfx card, it doesn't really look too nice when you pan/zoom around the map and you see the high res textures swapping out fro lower res versions.

I am wondering whether this seemingly arbitrary "radius from camera" distance can be modified to suit higher specked systems.  It does seem odd that this arbitrary "radius" range at which high res textures flip to has (in my experience) has remained fixed from when CM first came out, despite PC systems and graphics cards becoming more capable.  Are we stuck with this range or can it be modified?

Unless someone can correct me, I am quite sure that because of the (idiosyncratic/unorthodox) way CM graphics have been designed/coded, the game engine does not allow higher performance systems/graphics cards to process the game graphics as well as they would/should.  It's like the graphics performance bottleneck is more a function of the game coding than it is of the PC system, which really is a shame.

PS:  I have also realised that this dynamic transitional low/high res texture change that occurs is most pronounced when the high res/close range textures are not very similar to the distant/low res textures (of course). Would be interesting to hear from terrain modders how/if they ever deal with this issue. Where/what exactly are the low res distant textures anyway?  I have seen mod terrain graphics with the word "distant" in them as well as "mini" and I think both are related to the "low res" textures that get loaded.

Edited May 30, 2016 by Lt Bull

[Vanir Ausf B]

The model detail level setting adjusts this to a limited extent but the difference is not dramatic.

[ht-57]

Lt Bull,

Try what Van has suggested, But try it during game. shift + ] and  shift + [  to raise and lower detail,  I have a fairly decent rig

and I find myself raising and lowering this setting during a battle, to balance the situation you speak of with fps,

I was just playing a "large" quick battle on the "foy" map  with a  40% point reduction

meaning axis has 3268 purc points allied or defender had 3620. @ set up you start in a wooded corner of map and I was only getting15 fps,

dialed the detail setting down which is really the ground texture draw distance if you will, and fps went up to 24. after set up and a turn or two

as I moved my units away from the map  edge I was able to dial the setting back up to balanced and get 30fps. I use vertical sync in adaptive (halve refresh rate)

so my fps locks @ 30.  my pc spec is intel I7quad oc to 3.6/16g ram/ 2x intel x86 80g ssd (1which has os win 7 pro 64)/ 1 samsung evo 250g ssd (game drive)

1200w psu/ nvidia gtx 980/ 3x asus ips 27" mon. I run all games @ 3840 x 1024

[Lt Bull]

15 hours ago, ht-57 said:

Try what Van has suggested, But try it during game. shift + ] and  shift + [  to raise and lower detail

Thanks for bringing that up, the effect of increasing the "hi detailed textures radius range" is more pronounced as I thought.  I was aware that there was a "quality" setting but always assumed thought I had it on max from day 1 in all my CM titles, but that wasn't the case. Looks like I had it in what appears to be the default "Balanced" mid setting. To make this a more educational post, I can say that there are 8 discrete levels that can be set and each does affect this "radius of detail" I am referring to enough so that the setting I am now using is a notably different to what I was using.

On a related note, I want to know what peoples experiences are like when they try and take screenshots of CM.  Again I think this may be related to the kind of way CM graphics are coded but if I want to take a screenshot of what I currently see in CM, I must, for some unknown reason, first TAB out of CM then just TAB back in THEN take the screenshot in CM.  If I do not do this TAB in/out/back in routine and try to take a screenshot, the resulting screenshot will actually be what was on the screen the LAST time I TABed back in to CM...very odd.  Further to that, the screenshots that are consequently taken within game aren't always what the actual in game screen looked like.  Typically some hig res textures have been instead substituted by those lower res textures.  Consequently I can't guarantee that my CM screenshots capture all the detail I actual see.  This happens if I use the standard Print Screen button on the keyboard and paste to a graphics program or if I use a third party screenshot program like Snagit.

Does anyone have this TAB in/out/in issue and lost detail in screenshots issues with CM?

If not, what screenshot program are you using?

[Vanir Ausf B]

I use Fraps for screen shots and don't have that issue.

[Bulletpoint]

On 31/5/2016 at 7:38 AM, Lt Bull said:

Thanks for bringing that up, the effect of increasing the "hi detailed textures radius range" is more pronounced as I thought.  I was aware that there was a "quality" setting but always assumed thought I had it on max from day 1 in all my CM titles, but that wasn't the case. Looks like I had it in what appears to be the default "Balanced" mid setting.

The graphics detail setting affects both the range for loading detailed textures and the range for loading detailed models. I believe it's the models that cause performance to drop. It's a bit strange that the textures are not completely controlled by the texture detail setting.

As for taking screenshots, I also use "fraps", and it works flawlessly.

Edited June 1, 2016 by Bulletpoint

[Lt Bull]

I've got Fraps as well but have only use it for vids, preferring something like Snagit that auto saves screens and opens them up in an editor. Thanks will look in to it.

[MikeyD]

One mistake people do is they max out EVERYTHING in an attempt to get the best picture. What happens, though, is your graphics card starts struggling to max-render those twenty vehicles on screen and those thirty buildings and hundred fir trees. The game attempts to dynamically mitigate excessive demands on the graphics card by dropping resolution on the terrain. The effect is usually the opposite of what you want. Most often 'good enough' graphic settings gives the best 'overall' quality picture. I don't usually max out my graphics settings unless I'm taking pretty screenshots. I prefer my gameplay to be smooth and the machine not struggling.