Unplayable due to low fps..

[phil stanbridge]

I got past mission one, but mission 2 is physically unplayable for me, on any settings. It runs at a few fps at various times. I think it's a memory leak from my experience. Empire Total War had a similar problem. The only way round it (prior the patch to fix it) was to restart the pc, as just restarting the game had no effect. It's definitely not a problem with my pc, as it is stable with everything else, including TOW2 Africa.

[Magnum50]

agreed, there is definitely a big memory leak in this game.

[outammo]

less than 10fps. changing settings make 1 or 2 fps difference.

really want to like this game... but i give up till problem is patched.

windows 7

AMD duel core 3.2

8gig ddr3 ram

nvidia gtx 250

[phil stanbridge]

I managed to continue for a while longer but its no fun when you are trying to plot movements and move the mouse around at less than 10fps. Everything stutters. I'm tempted to shelve the game until it is fixed as I'm sure it is ruining my enjoyment. Curiously the demo didn't suffer these problems!

[Knokke]

Same thing for me, since the latest patch (game was running smoothly from begining to end of the battle before). I don't think this is related to computer being unable to handle the graphics, nor to a high number of dead bodies displayed at the latter stages in the battle (turning "hide bodies" on or of doesn't change anything). Nothing to do with the display or numerous hits on vehicles with the F4 button too.

I'm wondering if this could not be related to the AI infantry behavior since the patch, as I've two squad members exhibiting a strange behavior: I've ordered one of my squads to move to a position with the assault order (they're all on the reverse slope of a hill with no ennemies in sight, all have full health, so nothing seems to be impairing their movement). Most of the squad behave normally, and quickly get to the position assigned, while two other squad members seems to have entered a "loop" where they don't know which stance to use to move. Looking at the animations, it seems they don't know if they should move with short rush or with stealth (they constantly shift from "rush" to stealth" every second, and so are unable to keep up with the remainder of the squad. Is it normal behavior? like if they where too tired to move faster (they've being walking from one end of the map to the other back and again) or could this possibly be a problem with the AI being in a loop?

No amount of saving, quiting the game and loading the save again changes anything. Others have mentionned that rebooting the computer, will cure the problem for a while. For me, it didn't do the trick.

This problem wasn't in the demo two campaign missions, so i don't think this could be caused by a difference in the number of units between campaign missions and mission generator created missions. It looks like it is tied with the lenght a battle is played, rather than the number of units involved. I believe there is new problem introduced with patch 1.2.4, as before I was not experiencing this and game was running smoothly from the beginining to the end of the battle.

[phil stanbridge]

I've seen similar things Knokke. One thing that did give me improvements (albeit temporary) was to remove game shadows. Although they do add a lot to the game graphics they are a resource hog.

[Enrico62]

I agree with you Phil. As I have already said in different thread with a similar topic, mine is not a super PC, but I can run easily, and with high, or medium settings, the following games:

Combat Mission Shock Force (with any mod, and with all the due expansions)

Theatre of War 2 Africa 1943

Total War EW and Total War Napoleon, even with mods that allow THOUSANDS of troops fighting on the battlefield.

I love Kursk, it's simply outstanding, but I'm gonna shelve it till they sort this thing out, whatever it is.

[Nokturnal]

Unfortunately i've experienced this too.

I'm not sure if my PC would be considered "super" but it's deffinately not average.

Windows 7 x64, i7 950 (3.0ghz i believe), 6gb RAM DDR3 and an Nvidia GTX 275.

It runs perfectly when i throw together a battle with the generator, but the campaign missions seem to have too many units on screen and it becomes quite unplayable. I didn't have fraps running but it took about 30-60seconds for 1 second in-game to pass...

I am happy to continue to play in the generator till these issues are fixed but i'm also curious as to how they came about? Tow 2 Africa ran fine, though i don't think i ever saw as many units on screen as there are in the first mission of the Kursk campaign.

[kondor999]

I have the same problem, and have possibly the fastest PC that can be easily made:

i7-920@ 4.2Ghz, dual ATI 5870's, 8gb DDR3, Intel G2 SSD, Velociraptor.

If that won't run it - it's hopeless. This machine runs Napoleon: Total War easily at 5760x1200 (Eyefinity) with 2xAA and Ultra settings.

[outammo]

wow you got a fast pc and that wont run it!

i was getting 10-15 frames a second so i doubled my ram to 8gig ddr3, turned off occlusion lighting, turn grass down to low, rez down to 1280 by 800. everything else on high and i also happened to uninstall norton. now is running 20 to 30 fps. even up to 40 which is not fast but is fine and playable. maybe uninstalling norton is a coincidence but after i rebooted with those setting i play campaign and barely any slowdown even with arty and air strikes.

i was just up to 3rd axis mission where end of mission german and russian reinforcements both controlled by AI turn up and it started to chug. maybe it is AI...

great game if you can get it to run smoothly.

windows 7 64bit

amd 3.1 dualcore

8gig drr3

nvidia gts250

[phil stanbridge]

It's poorly coded if you have to remove all the graphical settings to get the thing to run properly! The biggest hog is the shadows I have found. Remove them and it looks crap, but at least you get some frames back.

[kip]

I've been having the same issues with the slowdown. I've turned the res down a little. Didn't really help. The game runs perfectly smooth on half speed for me. I'm pretty far thru the campaigns, so I just decided to try to figure out how to get the performance up so I can play on normal speed. I am using a application called IObit\Game Booster it simply lets you toggle off unnecessary back ground processes for gaming. It helped alittle. Plus it has a individual game defrag option. This helped alot. I used the campaign (russian) Novoselovka as a tester. Theres alot going on here and I was still alittle choppy while running on normal speed. But it was playable on normal. Fraps average was about 18. I did get 5 but I also got up to 40+. I noted near the end my frames were staying around 18, so I quick saved, went and defraged and then launched again and in the same spot I got 30 fps. So I don't know whats wrong with the game, but defraging it seems to help for a while.

ASUS P5E

Q6600 2.4ghz

2g DDR2 Ram

Nividia 8800 GTX 512

1000 watt power

[Deputy]

I wish I would have found this thread before I bought the game.

I also experienced the slideshow effect in the very first scenario of the campaign (along with CTD and freezes). I also have never had a problem running some of the most graphics-processor intensive games available. Note that the specs suggest a 64 bit operating system for recommended system requirements:

Recommended system requirements:

•Desktop PC with Operating system: 64-bit Windows Vista or Windows 7

•CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 or AMD Phenom II X550

•RAM: 4GB

•Graphics: nVidia GF 8800 or AMD Radeon HD 4850 with 512MB RAM or better

•Sound card: DirectX 9-compatible

•DVD-ROM drive (for the disc version)

•Free harddisk space: 3.5GB

•DirectX 9.0c

Most all of you exceed what the recommended requirements are. So do I.

While my system isn't the newest, it does have plenty of power:

64-bit Windows XP

CPU: Dual Intel Xeon 3.4Gig processors (two actual processors, not just dual core)

RAM: 4 GIG

Graphics: nVidia 9800GT with 1 Gig of onboard RAM

I notice that the manufacturer recommends a 64-bit system. That I find odd.

64-bit systems are able to support in excess of 4 GIG of RAM. Normal Windows XP has a RAM limit of 4 GIG. You can read about it here:

http://members.cox.net/slatteryt/RAM.html

"A 64-bit computer running a 64-bit operating system will have an enormous address space. The Microsoft document referenced above says that 64-bit Windows XP allows 128GB of RAM. That's 37 bits of address space. (a full 64-bit address space would be something like 18 quintillion (18x1015) bytes. I don't think any hardware or software manufacturer is to that point yet.) That system would have no problem accessing every bit of your 4GB of RAM."

Note you have to have a computer capable of USING 64 bit of RAM in order for it to recognize it. It's a hardware/software combo that is needed.

Note also that your video RAM is added into that 4 GIG number.

What I am wondering is if TOW Kursk was actually written to take advantage of in excess of 4 GIG of RAM? If so, it would be contradicted by outammo's system which actually has 8+ GIG of RAM.

I am also seeing comments from some folks who DON'T have "killer systems" and the sim is running fine with no framerate drops. Very strange.

For me, I uninstalled it. I use all the Combat Missions series and they work fine. They don't have all the eye candy and some of the new features (which may also be new problems), but they don't suffer framerate hits and they are a blast to play. I believe TOW Kursk was released with minimal or no beta testing. Or maybe in spite of the beta testing in the rush to make some quick cash and the hopes the bugs will be worked out "some time in the future". That's being pretty unfair to customers paying $45 for a COMPLETED sim.

But it seems to be SOP nowadays for many software companies. My opinion...in the long run that type of business strategy is gonna hurt them. People are gonna get tired of paying big money when money is tight for something that is obviously not even close to being playable. Ubisoft has done this exact same thing with Silent Hunter 5.

Dep

[Griz6thP]

This game is poorly coded like some of thier other games if you think back, and like I had said when the demo come out there is something not right with this game, I can play Napoleon Total war and it works great and Dragon age Origins, and all the other total war games and all the other theatre of war games but not this one sure its my PC thats what they say yea right. I thank Deputy said it best in his post.

[Ssnake51]

I wish I would have found this thread before I bought the game.

I also experienced the slideshow effect in the very first scenario of the campaign (along with CTD and freezes). I also have never had a problem running some of the most graphics-processor intensive games available. Note that the specs suggest a 64 bit operating system for recommended system requirements:

Recommended system requirements:

•Desktop PC with Operating system: 64-bit Windows Vista or Windows 7

•CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 or AMD Phenom II X550

•RAM: 4GB

•Graphics: nVidia GF 8800 or AMD Radeon HD 4850 with 512MB RAM or better

•Sound card: DirectX 9-compatible

•DVD-ROM drive (for the disc version)

•Free harddisk space: 3.5GB

•DirectX 9.0c

Most all of you exceed what the recommended requirements are. So do I.

While my system isn't the newest, it does have plenty of power:

64-bit Windows XP

CPU: Dual Intel Xeon 3.4Gig processors (two actual processors, not just dual core)

I don't see 64-bit XP in the recommended list. Nor do I see dual processors listed.

[Paulverisor64]

Recommended system requirements:

•Desktop PC with Operating system: 64-bit Windows Vista or Windows 7

•CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 or AMD Phenom II X550

Ssnake51: Focus in a bit more.

[Ssnake51]

Ssnake51: Focus in a bit more.

I see Windows Vista 64 and Windows 7 64 listed.

Do you see XP 64 listed?

And I see Core 2 Dual porcessor listed.

Do you see dual processors listed?

[Paulverisor64]

I see Windows Vista 64 and Windows 7 64 listed.

Do you see XP 64 listed?

And I see Core 2 Dual porcessor listed.

Do you see dual processors listed?

No I don't even see XP recommended.

The recommended processors are both dual core.

I would like to be able to run this on a slower computer that I have but it wouldn't be able to cut it.

[Deputy]

I see Windows Vista 64 and Windows 7 64 listed.

Do you see XP 64 listed?

And I see Core 2 Dual porcessor listed.

Do you see dual processors listed?

They are ALL 64 bit processing systems. Just newer versions. The big advantage for 64 bit processing systems IS the abaility to exceed the 4 GIG RAM limit present in 32 bit systems. What I listed was the OPTIMUM, meaning maximum performance systems. Not the MINIMUM specs. And as you can see, 32 bit systems ARE supported along with Windows XP. It's NOT the OS that's the problem. It's the GAME. A dual processor is the EXACT SAME THING AS DUAL CORE. Intel just "squished" two processors into one core because it was CHEAPER to produce.

Here, read this:

http://desktops.consumerelectronicsnet.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=38547

Your PC should meet the following minimum requirements for the game to run properly:

•Operating system: Windows XP or Vista

•CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo or AMD Athlon64 X2 (2,4GHzor better)

•RAM: 2GB

•Graphics: nVidia GeForce 6600 or AMD Radeon X1900 with 256 MB RAM or better

•Sound card: DirectX 9-compatible

•DVD-ROM drive (for the disc version)

•Free harddisk space: 3.5GB

•DirectX 9.0c

[Ssnake51]

They are ALL 64 bit processing systems. Just newer versions. The big advantage for 64 bit processing systems IS the abaility to exceed the 4 GIG RAM limit present in 32 bit systems. What I listed was the OPTIMUM, meaning maximum performance systems. Not the MINIMUM specs. And as you can see, 32 bit systems ARE supported along with Windows XP. It's NOT the OS that's the problem. It's the GAME. A dual processor is the EXACT SAME THING AS DUAL CORE. Intel just "squished" two processors into one core because it was CHEAPER to produce.

Here, read this:

http://desktops.consumerelectronicsnet.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=38547

Your PC should meet the following minimum requirements for the game to run properly:

•Operating system: Windows XP or Vista

•CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo or AMD Athlon64 X2 (2,4GHzor better)

•RAM: 2GB

•Graphics: nVidia GeForce 6600 or AMD Radeon X1900 with 256 MB RAM or better

•Sound card: DirectX 9-compatible

•DVD-ROM drive (for the disc version)

•Free harddisk space: 3.5GB

•DirectX 9.0c

Thanks for the link. I'm still not sure if you would get the same results running a dual core processor and two seperate processors.

And I'm not trying to say your system doesn't have a lot of power. But you do have a system configuaration that is out of the norm. Not many people have two seperat processors and also xp - 64 bit. Sometimes a very powerful system can have problems with software because of the configuration.

Wonder if any of the beta testers on this game had that particular configuaration?

And you processor is optimized for servers not for gaming. Am guessing that you also have a motherboard that is not opitmized to run gaming software.

[outammo]

Have you guys noticed that the mission generator made missions have no frame rate problem?

I can play a mission made in the mission generator on 19040x1080(highest res available with my system) with all the lighting and shadows on consistently over 20 frames a second. weird...

you can use the generator to make campaigns too i think.

[Deputy]

Thanks for the link. I'm still not sure if you would get the same results running a dual core processor and two seperate processors.

And I'm not trying to say your system doesn't have a lot of power. But you do have a system configuaration that is out of the norm. Not many people have two seperat processors and also xp - 64 bit. Sometimes a very powerful system can have problems with software because of the configuration.

Wonder if any of the beta testers on this game had that particular configuaration?

And you processor is optimized for servers not for gaming. Am guessing that you also have a motherboard that is not opitmized to run gaming software.

Yes, it's a workstation comp that I use for games. But I have had NO problem running more processor and RAM intensive games than TOW Kursk.

Dual core and two processors is the same thing. You can believe what you want. Until TOW Kursk I NEVER had a problem running any sim no matter how much power it needed. The fact is most software, even the newest game software, rarely uses the second processor to run with. It's the heavier numbers-crunching programs that require two processors. My computer was MADE to use Win XP 64 bit. It is optimized from HP to use it.

I wonder if there ever WERE beta testers for this game. People with more modern and more advanced dual core processors with more RAM than mine are having the exact same problems. Face it...it's the game, not the computers that are the problem. If a motherboard says it is optimized for games, that is just advertising hype. If you pay extra for it, you are being ripped off. How would the motherboard maker know which games people play?

[Knaust1]

Well...no problem here with fps...1, 2, 3 German missions

[Deputy]

Well...no problem here with fps...1, 2, 3 German missions

Please post your system specs...processor, RAM, video card with onboard RAM, operating system, etc. It might help us figure out what is going on. And you are talking about the CAMPAIGN, correct? Not the mission generator. The framerate problems don't seem to happen in the mission generator. That has it's own set of problems.

[Deputy]

I have the same problem, and have possibly the fastest PC that can be easily made:

i7-920@ 4.2Ghz, dual ATI 5870's, 8gb DDR3, Intel G2 SSD, Velociraptor.

If that won't run it - it's hopeless. This machine runs Napoleon: Total War easily at 5760x1200 (Eyefinity) with 2xAA and Ultra settings.

WOW!!! I totally missed this post!!!! Well that certainly lays to rest any possibilities of it being a problem with the computers. If you can't run it without a slideshow, then that means it's DEFINITELY the game and not our comps that's the problem.