Optimised?

[con20or]

Performance has been improved. Norb has also introduced threading into SOWWL but I am not sure to what extent.

My system is good but by no means the best you could have.

i5-4690k 3.5Ghz
8GB RAM
GTX970 4GB

I have all settings at max, 1:6 sprite ratio and a 2000 yard tree/object/unit draw distance.

I get 20+ FPS on corps size battles. On the D'Erlon attack scenario which is one of our biggest with lots of other corps nearby and lots of arty LOS calcs I get about 20.

[Saddletank]

Those screens look great are you guys enhancing the graphics?

I use Jolly's terrain mod, also called the GCM terrain mod. Its available on here in the mods section, first post. It takes away the bright green trees and other vegetation and yellows them down a lot. I find that suits a summery look better, and in rainy/foggy battlefields the suppressed palette seems to look better as well.

For an improved immersion PoV I delete unit 'flags' and road march markers as well. Otherwise the game is untouched.

@ Con20or - that sounds promising!

[Gunfreak]

Performance has been improved. Norb has also introduced threading into SOWWL but I am not sure to what extent.

My system is good but by no means the best you could have.

i5-4690k 3.5Ghz
8GB RAM
GTX970 4GB

I have all settings at max, 1:6 sprite ratio and a 2000 yard tree/object/unit draw distance.

I get 20+ FPS on corps size battles. On the D'Erlon attack scenario which is one of our biggest with lots of other corps nearby and lots of arty LOS calcs I get about 20.

Have you tried the full waterloo battle, how was fps there?

[Jubal Early]

Those screens look great are you guys enhancing the graphics?

I use Jolly's terrain mod, also called the GCM terrain mod. Its available on here in the mods section, first post. It takes away the bright green trees and other vegetation and yellows them down a lot. I find that suits a summery look better, and in rainy/foggy battlefields the suppressed palette seems to look better as well.

For an improved immersion PoV I delete unit 'flags' and road march markers as well. Otherwise the game is untouched.

@ Con20or - that sounds promising!

Thanks I must check out the terrain mod.

Just checked my system is 3.6 Ghz not 3.4 Ghz Im no expert but id hope that's decent.

[con20or]

Have you tried the full waterloo battle, how was fps there?

I honestly don't remember but it probably would not be very useful to quote a single figure of FPS for the full battle. Some areas have more troops, some have no fighting at different times, etc.

I have not had any laggy battles, if that helps. I fired up a sandbox the other day with the two allied armies V the french army. That was a bit jittery after they started manouvering, but hardly surprising with that many troops and all the settings on max. If I wanted to play a battle that big I would just lower my visibility distances, amount of veg, sprite ratio.

[Saddletank]

So that would be the full 73k French, 68k Allies and 45k Prussians or thereabouts? Wow.

[Gunfreak]

Have you tried the full waterloo battle, how was fps there?

I honestly don't remember but it probably would not be very useful to quote a single figure of FPS for the full battle. Some areas have more troops, some have no fighting at different times, etc.

I have not had any laggy battles, if that helps. I fired up a sandbox the other day with the two allied armies V the french army. That was a bit jittery after they started manouvering, but hardly surprising with that many troops and all the settings on max. If I wanted to play a battle that big I would just lower my visibility distances, amount of veg, sprite ratio.

It's just 20+ fps isn't considered that good.

I doubt the reviewer known as total biscuit wil review it. But if i did, and 20+ is what je gets it would go like this:

I'm on a pc that has "lots of impressive hardware" and i get less then 30fps on full, that's not good enough in this day of age. Ect. Most gamers with a high end gaming pc, demands to play games on max with 60fps. They would say i can play witcher 3 or crysis 3 on max and have 80fps, yet this game bearly gices 30fps.

It would not help to say, you can lower the sprite ratio or view distance. They would expect any game be optimised well enough for them to play it on max.

Now from my understandig, this games runs mostly on the cpu, then ram and lastly gpu.
most other games run on gpu, then ram and cpu second, infact most expansive graphics showcase games use very little cpu (exception being gta v)

And since you have a modest cpu, but standard ram and good gpu, i assume the modest cpu is whats holding you back. So is perfectly possible those with i7 cpu's ect. will get close to 60fps on the same settings as you, in that case no problem, the question is, how much better would an i7 3770k 3.5ghz play then your i5?

I have that i7 and get less the 30fps in gettysburg just at the start of an army vs army sandbox game, even before anybody stars to move, with 1500 view distance on trees, objects and troopers.

But since waterloo is optimised, can i expect a 100%, 50% or just 20% increase in fps on avarage?

[con20or]

So that would be the full 73k French, 68k Allies and 45k Prussians or thereabouts? Wow.

It was quite a bit more than that, it was the three full armies from the whole campaign.

[Saddletank]

Gunfreak - remember that the only motion in the game is 2D sprites which have limited numbers of animation frames anyway. You're not following a moving 1st person view like in shooters and you're not seeing smooth 3D graphics, beautiful spectral lighting like in IL2 and volumetric cloud effects like in RoF. Honestly the eye can't see much flicker at 24fps so 20fps is perfectly good.

What the hell is people's obsession with high frame rates? Not all games need them. I often play at 10 to 15 and honestly I don't see any drop in the smoothness of the game.

When you're critically reinforcing a collapsing flank of your division with a reserve brigade and the enemy guns are pounding your centre you simply stop seeing much of the graphics; your brain is too busy fighting the battle

[Marching Thru Georgia]

I always find it puzzling, this obsession with fps. This isn't some mindless first person shooter. The number of frames each sprite has to perform a certain action is small, so a certain coarseness of action is built in. In reality, any fps in double digits is fine. You will never see the difference.

Edit: Oops, looks like Saddletank and I said the same thing.