Jade_Monkey Posted March 26, 2015 Posted March 26, 2015 Can you imagine in this beautiful game... This is not near 50 but it was nice to see. A bomber formation of ~8 Pe-2 and a few La-5 over them as escorts. It's in the Veteranen campaign missions (the third mission if I remember correctly).
[KWN]T-oddball Posted March 28, 2015 Posted March 28, 2015 the short answer is that most game engines are still very dependent on clock speed/IPC, there is no game engine that I am aware of that is any state close to parallelization (the last one of which implies automation when used in context, refers to converting sequential code into multi-threaded or vectorized (or even both) code in order to utilize multiple processors simultaneously) which for example if BOS was in a state off %100 parallelization the following formula would apply to proc's, clock x core=? in my case my I5 2500k at 3.3ghz would run at the equivalent of 13.2ghz. I have a stress test mission for CLOD which as 154 A.I and I am getting an AVG of 19FPS on a gtx660 on medium presets at 1080 and core 0 is almost pegged a %100 usage, if i were to OC to say 4.4GHZ I might get 5 more fps but as I mentioned if the engine was in a state of %100 parallelization I would be getting an AVG FPS of 76. I suspect much of the same is true with BOS, it's incapable of utilizing available resources and that will not change unless there is a core rewrite or a major jump in core/IPC performance in future chips.
Feathered_IV Posted March 28, 2015 Posted March 28, 2015 Having two kinds of AI complexity to choose from, Full and Simplified, when placing aircraft in a mission would fix the problem.
unreasonable Posted March 29, 2015 Posted March 29, 2015 Having two kinds of AI complexity to choose from, Full and Simplified, when placing aircraft in a mission would fix the problem. I always wondered why they did not do this; after all does anyone really care that an AI plane some kms away from the player is using a table based, simple FM?
Recommended Posts