Recent content by Nikolai Ludovik

I clean reinstalled the game and with Beta 1.2.0 it's a bit better. They are on the right track with the optimizations as far as I have seen. I understand your issues. My PC is high end, not the top ofcourse, but I also think the game underperforms considering the hardware.
Also, play on custom battles on Desert Maps, I want to see if you have this exponential fps boost that I do. (It's weird how a bunch of trees and vegetation can cause so much lag)

[UPDATE]
As of now with the same settings i have noticed a bigger improvement with Medium settings on singleplayer battles with BETA e1.2.0
Murat Türe thanks for you and your team's hard work.

Keep up this pace, I will continue to update with the improvements.

SickStyle said:

And I know game will run smooth on a High-End pc.

Click to expand...

I have

GPU: Gigabyte GTX 1070 4GB VRAM
CPU: i76700K 4.00GHz Skylake 14nm Technology
RAM: 16,0GB
Motherboard: Gigabyte Technology Co. Ltd. Z170X-Ultra Gaming-CF (U3E1)
Storage Device (HDD): 931GB Western Digital WDC WD10EZEX-00RKKA0 (SATA )

The game runs at ~35-40 fps with 250v250 infantry in custom battles (also tested in campaign), and it can also drop as low as 23fps when getting close to the troops and melee.
So the game probably runs good either on SSD's only (which I don't know how it would make any sense), or, my pc isn't high end enough which doesn't make any sense.

JakobvanBicke said:

Your teammate will, however, then spawn as Infantry twice. So there's no real difference (only if 1 of you is a god in Cav and the other one a god in Inf). Also it'll cost you some seconds (between 10 and 20). That is time you don't spend fighting / capturing flags. Don't think that's a problem tbf


Well... I get that complaint quite often. I don't get it though. Shieldwall towards the archers, then go into line or light formation and charge them. You outnumber the enemy and therefore win the melee. If you keep your guys in shieldwall whilst charging you'll get **** on (as AI plays very defensive when in shieldwall). Same applies on how to deal with Cav charges. If you got your guys in shieldwall, square, or circle, they'll play defensive. I deal with cav charges by having my guys in square and then set them to charge when the cav is about to hit me. That way they actually try to kill the enemy and don't only hold their position.

Click to expand...

so there is more micromanaging to be done... hmm

Speaking of classes, can you people please explain to me how is it balanced that an unit of archers that have a chainmail, a shield, and a sword can 1v1 my armored infantry in melee?. (As an example i clearly remember: Imperial Legionary vs Khuzait top tier archers)

I have noticed there are plenty of situations where I just can't seem to defeat top tier archers that are geared. Not to mention the monumental amount of damage they deal and even with a shield wall formation I still bleed units.

Also, speaking of infantry, I remember using every infantry unit of Battania against the Imperial Legionaries and I couldn't defeat a single unit in combat. Took maces, all that stuff, I don't know...

Any tips and tricks? Me and my friends can't wrap around on how to combat in this game in some situations. It just makes no sense and it's not intuitive.

this really needs a fix...

The multiplayer is both unfinished in combat mechanics and unbalanced with the classes.
There are plenty of times where I have to be amazed by archers that have swords and shields,chainmail and mange to 1v1 my armored infantry ON MELEE.
Cavalry just get's stopped by spears and goes away to prepare for another attack without enough penalty.
Archers deal a ton of damage and shield hitbox is a bit too small for projectile based weaponry, so even if you have shields you still bleed units because of that.
Heavy damage infantry on one faction (Aserai) surpass Heavy damage infantry on another (Empire).
[Just to explain it, Aserai has axes that deal a ton of damage (same with Sturgia), while the Empire has something that is more of a spear and get outplayed in melee.]
Chambers are close to unusable and have to be reworked.
Stances shouldn't serve a real purpose except aesthetics. They shouldn't influence if you can do chambers or not and they also shouldn't speed up your attacks. Not to mention how players just spin around each other when they fight. You can't even use them properly.
And the list goes on.

Do this thread again, but in singleplayer section, you are in the multiplayer one.

I also had the same problem, 8 out of 9 matches were Khuzait.
I suppose it might've been bad luck, it didn't happen for a while now.

With e1.0.11 there are some marginal improvements. With Medium Settings, 250v250 infantry, It's around 35-40 fps, unless I get close to my troops. It's better, even if a bit, in singleplayer, but the multiplayer appears to run worse now than I remember.

Anyway, in singleplayer, turn shadows down to low, without anything else, or play with no shadows. Also get foliage to very low and terrain quality as well.
It ain't much, but it helps at least a bit.
On desert maps however, it appears as they play with an average of ~15 FPS more than the forest / plain ones. I don't know why, but they are running with close to even 20 fps bonus (50-55 fps in total) in both multiplayer and singleplayer. Again, unless I get close to my troops, then the performance goes as low as 23fps


NOTE: Updated initial post to match recent performance tests.

Murat Türe Is our only savior in these dark times

Murat Türe said:

Thanks for your feedback. Is the campaign and custom battle different regarding this numbers?

Click to expand...

Sorry for responding so late, yes, the campaign has the same performance, same fps as custom battle.

Murat Türe said:

With the 1.0.8 patch, we have fixed many of the memory leak issues in the game. Can you check whether the issue is ongoing? Thanks in advance.

Click to expand...

Tried again with 1.0.8 patch. Medium settings, 250v250 infantry on battle, there is a bit of improvement, from 30-35 fps it goes to 40 from time to time, so i gained an average of 5 fps.

However, I have also done the tests on Very High and found that I get 25-30fps, so there is only a difference of 5 fps between the two.
You might be on the right track, maybe look into what causes more CPU usage? Regarding to troop pathfinding, maybe? How many commands the AI does on an individual level and how many are necessary, etc?

Frostic said:

I have in fact done it with graphics at max and at lowest presets (so yea dynamyic shadows turned on and off) and only got 1 fps more.



This proves my point a bit more, I really think Intel CPU's are underpreforming for no apparent reason. Thank you for the info.

Click to expand...

Same. Also, one of the reasons Intel's CPUs underperform could be not because the game is at fault in all regards, but because the design of their processors is utter **** compared to AMD at this stage. they have recycled their same architecture in a lot of places and used plenty of tricks in order to get more performance in game. Which in the long run is not a good idea anyway. Just a fun fact, you can do some more research yourself on the matter technology wise on that, but besides that, yes, the game looks like it also has a lot of problems in handling, calculating and effectively using ANY PROCESSOR, never mind Intel's

Frostic said:

My i7 8700K @3.7 GHz can't handle 500v500 battles, running at a sloppy 20-30 fps. I'm pretty sure that it's a cpu bottleneck because turning graphics down gives me maybe 1 fps more. There seems to be a general issue with Intel proccessors, my guess is that Intel's cores arent utilized properly.

Click to expand...

My friend, I have the same kind of post and a similar i7 processor from Intel as well.
Same problem, and it might as well be because of that.