The Blue Bar Returns!

[CogNative]

Tried a tiny test scenario last PM and I got all wobbly when I saw the Blue Bar on the LCD and no it was not the Nog:D

The tiny Hotty Pants scenario zipped along! I will try some of the Division scale Super Size soon and report the FPS improvements. I am sure v1.11 is an improvement.

[Battlefront.com]

Steiner14,

Do i remember correctly, that you always denied the arguments, that realtime puts restrictions on the game-engine, that true WEGO wouldn't?

You do not remember correctly I said PRACTICALLY speaking RealTime puts no restrictions on the game that WeGo wouldn't also have. In fact, the irony here is that WeGo was the system that couldn't handle things, not RealTime. And even then it's only people with more marginal systems, not the bulk of our customer base. So I stand by my previous statements 110%.

Plus, the main limitation for RealTime is CPU speed. CPUs are only getting faster and, of course, we haven't coded the game to take advantage of more than one core. That's a major chunk of development time so we're putting it off for as long as we can. However, if we suddenly found ourselves in need of massive amounts of CPU power to keep things moving forward... no problem! Just raise the min computer specs or raise the specs and recode for multi-core support.

Since the goal of you at Battlefront always has been to achieve the most realistic results, i'm confident at some future point - sometime after WWII-title's release - you will yourself be interested enough about the results of a higher battlefield resolution, and you will start to implement WEGO-only functionalities, if they can be implemented without much labour.

Wrong. We will never implement WeGo only functions. There's absolutely no PRACTICAL reason why we would have to do that.

The latest development seems great in that regard for me, since game calculation and realtime graphics display in WEGO have been seperated even more.

Also a full-game replay - at least for WEGO - seems to have come a step closer because of the better separation.

Not true. Full game replay is just as viable today as it was before v1.11. The technical problems have nothing to do with precomputation, therefore having precomputation means ziltch.

See... this is what I've been saying since the beginning. You guys who think the Blue Bar is some sort of panacea for all sorts of features are just plain wrong. Precomputing does two things and only two things:

1. Helps out framerate on low-mid range computers.

2. Allows you to skip forward instead of being forced to sit through 60 seconds of play.

Now, I'm definitely saying that these two things are important and highly desirable. I'm very glad they are in now and even happier to see the huge positive reaction. As I said from the start... this is a win-win improvement for everybody. But don't confuse what a feature actually provides and what it doesn't. These two items are all it provides, the rest aren't.

Steve

[huhr]

I agree with Wildman, I like the WeGo system b/c I can't move around the screen like a wildman (no pun intended), I have to do some research on this Normandy game, where did this come from I am interested!!!!!

[wolf66]

The Blue Bar is Back .... and it is great !! Smooooth replay and a solid not wonky mouse pointer at last ! Ahhh the joy !!

[Prince of Eckmühl]

Why does it matter when the calculations are done in WEGO, before or during the graphics display, if the outcome is the same?

I'm glad that the patch fixed the frame-rate problem for you WEGO players, BTW. I want you to be able to enjoy the game as much as I do playing it RT.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Wrath of Dragon,

I think the feeling of saving time will be real, but actual time savings might not be. That's because for every turn you watch in full one time you have to add to it the time spent computing the turn. The max time for computing would be 60 seconds, but I doubt many people will see that unless they habitually play big battles on low-mid range computers.

But hey... if you guys feel like the game is going faster for you, what the heck do we care if it actually is or isn't?

Steve

Actually it only takes me 1-2 seconds to calculate the turn in the first battle of Rolling Thunder campaign. Now if the M1's would just quit ignoring RPG's, life would be good.

[Battlefront.com]

Prince of Eckmühl,

Why does it matter when the calculations are done in WEGO, before or during the graphics display, if the outcome is the same?

There are competing interests for resources within the game. One is the graphical representation, the other are various sections of game code. The two big ones are pathfinding and LOS/LOF calculations. Generally speaking, the computers within specs have enough power to do both simultaneously. The problem some WeGo players had with lower end spec computers and big scenarios prior to v1.11 was sudden, the massive onslaught of requests for game related calculations. They could be so severe that there were practically no resources available for the graphics. In other words, the system was so bogged down calculating game results that they couldn't be displayed concurrently. I outlined the specific reasons for this in my opening post.

By allowing precomputation the people that used to have problems under v1.10 (and that was the tipping point, it seems) now don't. That's because all the expensive game calculations are done without any care about visual display because that comes later. When it does come the system is basically only handling the graphics.

Again, I find it ironic that the first major speed bottleneck problem we've experienced was with WeGo and not RealTime. Logic would suggest it would be the other way around. But Human logic and computer logic often come to different conclusions

Wrath of Dagon,

Actually it only takes me 1-2 seconds to calculate the turn in the first battle of Rolling Thunder campaign.

Yup, it's highly variable (scenario size, number of units, terrain density, amount of enemy contact, etc.) and very much tied to how powerful your computer is. I'm happy to see that overall the computation times are quick.

Now if the M1's would just quit ignoring RPG's, life would be good.

heh... well, in earlier versions we had vehicles spotting RPG teams too easily, so I'm not sure we're going to change it from the way it is. Or at least not much.

Steve

[Patrocles]

I dont find WeGo in Cmx1 more deep and complex than CMSF Real time. How is that so? I do find the second more fun and a time saver too though.

"You just don't get it!!!!"

[Prince of Eckmühl]

Prince of Eckmühl,

There are competing interests for resources within the game. One is the graphical representation, the other are various sections of game code. The two big ones are pathfinding and LOS/LOF calculations. Generally speaking, the computers within specs have enough power to do both simultaneously. The problem some WeGo players had with lower end spec computers and big scenarios prior to v1.11 was sudden, the massive onslaught of requests for game related calculations. They could be so severe that there were practically no resources available for the graphics. In other words, the system was so bogged down calculating game results that they couldn't be displayed concurrently. I outlined the specific reasons for this in my opening post.

By allowing precomputation the people that used to have problems under v1.10 (and that was the tipping point, it seems) now don't. That's because all the expensive game calculations are done without any care about visual display because that comes later. When it does come the system is basically only handling the graphics.

Again, I find it ironic that the first major speed bottleneck problem we've experienced was with WeGo and not RealTime. Logic would suggest it would be the other way around. But Human logic and computer logic often come to different conclusions

Steve

I understand the technical aspect of the situation. But I have to point out that truly large scenarios could take a long, long time to resolve in CM1, on modest-hardware, as well. At that point, having waited fifteen-minutes, or so, for all the numbers to get crunched, players could fast forward the game through the sixty-seconds of graphics if they chose to do so. What I don't understand is why so many folks insist that decoupling the graphics from the computational phase makes for an inherently superior gaming experience. Or am I wrong in my belief that the results are the same. Do the two methods, blue-bar vs no-blue-bar actually generate different outcomes?

BTW, I was sincere in my expression of support for WEGO players that were struggling with game-performance issues. They paid for a WEGO game and I think it was a stand-up move on your part to address the slow-down with a patch. Well done.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Battlefront.com]

PoE,

I understand the technical aspect of the situation. But I have to point out that truly large scenarios could take a long, long time to resolve in CM1, on modest-hardware, as well. At that point, having waited fifteen-minutes, or so, for all the numbers to get crunched, players could fast forward the game through the sixty-seconds of graphics if they chose to do so.

Ah yes, I have memories of this as well My favorite one, which I mention frequently, was trying to run Rune's infamous 'Battle of the Bulge' CMBO scenario. 20 minutes or so per turn and the framerate was about 1-2fps because my system couldn't handle all the polygons. Crazy stuff!

What I don't understand is why so many folks insist that decoupling the graphics from the computational phase makes for an inherently superior gaming experience.

It's mostly an emotional reaction That's fine, BTW, since this is a game. If there were no emotional reactions then we'd be in big trouble.

The good thing, from our perspective, is that the positive emotional reaction towards the reintroduction of the Blue Bar is a nice counter to the negative one we had without it. In other words, people weren't just saying that they missed the Blue Bar so that they could grumble about something, they really did miss it. Besides the inability to skip through boring turns, I don't understand either reaction Having said that, skipping through boring turns is definitely a very good thing so we've never misunderstood the desire for it. It's just that this is an example where our development priorities took a while to get into synch with customer desires. Happens all the time, but this one was obviously a big one.

Or am I wrong in my belief that the results are the same. Do the two methods, blue-bar vs no-blue-bar actually generate different outcomes?

The results are identical. Some people assume that since there are now theoretically unlimited CPU cycles available for WeGo that we can make the WeGo game itself more advanced. For example, really deep thinking AI. In theory this is true, but in reality it won't be for two reasons:

1. For better AI, smaller map resolution, etc. we have to do a LOT of other work. Tons of it, in fact. Some of which, like smaller map resolution, have a huge impact on other things like RAM, polygon count, user interface, etc. It's work we don't have time for. At least not in the near future.

2. We will not have a different experience for WeGo and RealTime games. And that cuts BOTH ways. Making two different underlying game systems is impractical for us for many reasons, mostly from a development standpoint. Skeptics are prone to say "ah-ha... see!! You are holding back WeGo for stupid RealTime play!". The truth is that because of the first issue, we are not.

As I've said, so far the only major problem we experienced with resource bottlenecks has been WeGo, not RealTime. So without precalculated WeGo results we would have had to hold back RealTime gameplay!! This is why I said that the only other option (other than precalculated results) was to raise our minimum computer specs. We're not going to allow WeGo to hold back improvements to the game system any more than we're going to let RealTime hold advancements back.

Steve

[CogNative]

Did a save of Mark Ezra's "Open Season" to update it to v1.11 then a stopwatch test on Mark "Open Season". Mark's map is 3008 m x 1505 m so large with plenty of armored vehicles moving and shooting but little foliage and I don't remember any buildings. Should qualify as large sized map.

RT loading time = 49"

RT save game time = 32"

Turn Based loading time = 49"

Turn Based save game time = 32"

Turn Based "Blue Bar" calculation time = 10"

Hot Seat loading time = 49"

Hot Seat save game time = 32"

All identical times in a sub Division scale Super Size but certainly a large to huge size map for my laptop.

IMO:The Blue Bar extra 10" for the connivence of fast forward or skip is worth it.

MacBook Pro 2.5 using XP3 in Boot Camp.

Now the longest time I recorded was shutting down out of OSX and starting XP in Booty Camp = 3:15! That is over 6 minutes to get out of work to play CMSF and jump back to the work side. Then that should be in another thread.

[Battlefront.com]

The shutdown time for XP in Boot Camp is strange. Sometimes it's quicker than MacOS, sometimes I think I should take a nap and then double check that it actually shut down. It's been a while since I used a true XP system, so I can't remember if this is just another "feature" of Windows or if it has something to do with Boot Camp.

CogNative,

Yup, that looks about right to me. The 10 seconds does add up, but depending on how long the game is and how many replays are completely skipped over, that might or might not make a difference. For example, if a game is 60 turns long and you wind up skipping 6 turns, that's a net savings of 300 seconds for the skipped replays. For the remaining 54 turns that would add up to 540 seconds, for a net loss of 240 seconds compared to v1.10 and earlier. But even in such a situation, I too would be happy to add 4 minutes to a game spread out over the course of the game to fast forward through dull turns.

And of course, the smaller the battle, the more it has to do with maneuvering, the less the player cares about watching his guys execute them, the better the computer played on... the more likely there will be net time savings by the time the game is over. Massive time savings in some cases.

Steve

[Apocal]

Honestly, I'm still stuck on someone using "more realistic" to support an argument for WeGo. Seriously?

[CogNative]

You are correct Steve. I only timed shutting down out of OS X and starting XP in Booty Camp = 3:15. I did not actually time the reverse and just assumed it was about the same so doubled the 3:15. Yes, I am still exploring the... just another "feature" of Windows aspect myself:rolleyes:

Now if I could get something like VMware Fusion or another virtualization application to correctly and efficiently play CMSF, the Modules, and Normandy for 2009 I would happily pay to play. I suspect Apple's "Snow Leopard" will boost multi cpu usage over the current Leopard OS X.

Honestly, Blue Bar 10" is well worth the trade off considering the extra utility of the replay features. Your addition of various time playback increments in v1.11 is useful and appreciated. Forgot to mention the improved 5" pause feature for commands as well. The WeGo players should be happy. I still enjoy CM more as a RT experience but having options of WeGo and RT should cover most all the bases for most CM players I would think.

I look back at where I was this summer in v1.08 with sub par graphics settings and single digit FPS and now with v1.11 a huge scenario like Mark's "Open Season" and all the graphics options set to best on a laptop driving a 23" external LCD in 1920 x 1200 and FPS in the playable range and I have nothing to complain about.

But being a loyal CM customer:)... a native CMx2 and 3 with RT playback would be sweet:D

[Prince of Eckmühl]

MacBook Pro 2.5 using XP3 in Boot Camp.

I don't want you to get a big head, or anything, but you are WAY OVER MINIMUM SPECS for CMSF:

http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=shop.flypage_bfc&product_id=162&category_id=9&manufacturer_id=0&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=26

Out of curiosity, I fired up the "Thin Black Line" scenario, just now, and my memory usage on an XP system was pushing 700mb when the scenario opened and there were only a few blue units deployed on the map. That level of memory usage suggests that playing the game on a 256MB system (the minimum memory spec) would cause the game to begin paging-out to the hard-drive. Were that to occur, the calculations phase would slow to a proverbial crawl.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[acrashb]

1. A significant number of customers have asked for this feature,

I like to think that means me, and that I'm personally responsible for the ROTBB.

So - when will the 1.11 demo be out?

[Wrath of Dagon]

heh... well, in earlier versions we had vehicles spotting RPG teams too easily, so I'm not sure we're going to change it from the way it is. Or at least not much.

Steve

If the tank is selected, it shows the RPG as spotted, yet it chooses to shoot at some infantry instead. One time I even told it to target the RPG, yet it seemed to completely ignore the order, and got knocked out as the result. I don't know if there's any difference on Veteran between what is displayed and what the tank actually knows.

[Canada Guy]

I think Steve and Charles should have ticked everyone off and made the bar green or red instead of blue. The hue and cry would have been loud and you would have had at least 5 people ask if they could somehow mod it to blue.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

I think Steve and Charles should have ticked everyone off and made the bar green or red instead of blue. The hue and cry would have been loud and you would have had at least 5 people ask if they could somehow mod it to blue.

Yup, and all I've been able to think about regarding the subject is the failure of Koiosworks to use the correct color on the Panzer Command progress bar. Perhaps they're color-blind!

[GSX]

Honestly, I'm still stuck on someone using "more realistic" to support an argument for WeGo. Seriously?

From a pure wargaming point of view (and by that I mean controlling every man on the field) then of course WEGO is going to be better for multi player. If your into single player games then RT will more than likely be the way to go for smaller games, but for a large game then it will still have to be WEGO.

The ability to review your last minute for as long as you like will make a more realistic wargame in my opinion. Now a realistic wargame may not be a simulation of a real life event, Im not even attempting to say WEGO is more real. But it is more wargamey....

I suppose some guys may just not get it!

[wolf66]

It just is ........ better !!

[Other Means]

I'm just glad it's back. Bring on the battalions.

[Apocal]

From a pure wargaming point of view (and by that I mean controlling every man on the field) then of course WEGO is going to be better for multi player. If your into single player games then RT will more than likely be the way to go for smaller games, but for a large game then it will still have to be WEGO.

Not that my experience on the two-way range is all that extensive, but I'm pretty sure company and battalion commanders don't get a unlimited one minute review of their battles. It'd be realistic to have nothing shown that the commander didn't see for himself, with a radio log off to the side of significant events.

Significant as in "1st Platoon consolidating on OBJ LAKERS. 2nd Platoon, OBJ HEAT clear, saddling up and pushing PL CHEVY. Apache Company reports 3 WIA, two priority, one emergency CASEVAC requests."

Having a unlimited replay takes away the real challenge of shifting through bull**** to get an accurate tactical picture.

Ah I see. I always figured the point of wargames was to present the player with a similar set of capabilities, limitations and variables as a historical warfighter or combat leader and test the player's ability to perform under the same (or as similar as possible) circumstances.

But I came into wargaming from Close Combat, where that was a stated design goal of the game, with a campaign victory system that reflected that; advance faster than historical, you "win" as Allies, slow the Allied offensive down longer than historical, you win as Axis.

Must not. I grew out of my desire to micromanagement pixeltroops after I graduated boot camp, many moons ago.

[Smaragdadler]

It's all about wargaming. Boys playing games with plastic toys on big tables with lots of rules till dawn. Just with computer. The fuzz about 'realistic' is just the second thought. If I want to PLAY a game, I need control and must be free to do, what and when I like to do it. Otherwise the game just plays with me. That's why realtime is just some funny extra but WEGO will allways be the true 'real' thing.

[ChrisND]

That's why realtime is just some funny extra but WEGO will allways be the true 'real' thing.