Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 52 53 [54] 55 56 ... 306

Author Topic: Future of the Fortress  (Read 1842231 times)

smjjames

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #795 on: November 27, 2014, 05:16:57 pm »

Any more plans for optimization soon? Even with only 80 fort dwarves there is still quite a significant difference in FPS from .34 to .40.

I'd actually like to see the data on this! Mostly because speculating on causes of slowdown is my favorite counterproductive thing to do.

EDIT: No sarcasm, I really do enjoy speculating on slowdown causes even though that's a fruitless endeavor leading to nothing but sorrow if acted upon
...goddammit let me go on record as not making fun of anybody here

Theres several threads scattered around, this one is the most recent: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=145703.0 , long discussion over here: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=143631.0, theres a few more threads further back and there's probably a few in the DF fort mode and general questions sections.

Other than the trees dropping leaves and fruit in the fall, nobody really agrees on what's causing the lag issues.

I don't think anybody has done a thorough scientific look at the possible causes yet. Though Toady One proably has better tools to do that.

I do agree that Toady One needs to urgently look at the FPS issues.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2014, 05:51:33 pm by smjjames »
Logged

reality.auditor

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #796 on: November 27, 2014, 06:16:27 pm »

Nopes. ToadyOne has made it an urgent goal, to make DF run only as slowly as possible.
Sarcasm fail. Actually, Toady indeed makes DF run as slowly as possible - albeit unintentionally (by adding new features).
Logged
Are weapons like the least lethal thing in DF?

Putnam

  • Bay Watcher
  • DAT WIZARD
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #797 on: November 27, 2014, 06:38:35 pm »

If you really think that, then you have absolutely no idea what "as slowly as possible" means.

smeeprocket

  • Bay Watcher
  • Collectivist Socialist Feminist Freeloader
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #798 on: November 27, 2014, 06:42:40 pm »

young pocket worlds with a 4 tile or less embark and with max pop dwarves and an ocean I am running pretty fast (didn't check exact fps but things move quickly) This is after I have been playing long enough that some of the children have grown to adults and I am the mountainhome.

Anything more than that and my forts die fps deaths before they fall any other way.
Logged
Steam Name: Ratpocalypse
Transpersons and intersex persons mod for Fortress mode of DF: http://dffd.wimbli.com/file.php?id=10204

Twitch: http://www.twitch.tv/princessslaughter/

"I can't wait to throw your corpse on to a jump pad and watch it take to the air like a child's imagination."

endlessblaze

  • Bay Watcher
  • likes dragons for their fiery breath
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #799 on: November 27, 2014, 06:49:22 pm »

I find pocket worlds effective for frame rate
Logged
Kids make great meat shields.
I nominate endlessblaze as our chief military executive!

Tristan Alkai

  • Bay Watcher
  • [SPHERE_CURIOSITY]
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #800 on: November 27, 2014, 11:00:39 pm »

Does the new breeding mechanic play nice with egg-laying critters?
Females spend nearly their entire adult lives on the nest box, because if one clutch is gathered late or hatches she will instantly lay another clutch in that same box, and they can't have other creatures sharing rooms with them because if one of those extras steps on her nest box tile she will get disturbed and the eggs die. Because of this, every other clutch dies because when one clutch hatches the female immediately lays a second, and the hatchlings immediately disturb her and thus kill the eggs, and the player must micro-manage egg layers pastures to get them to breed at a reasonable rate, which means only females, or only one female, per pasture. But with this mechanic, a male must share a room with egg-laying females, correct? Otherwise fertilization will never occur. But then the male must immediately be removed...

If Toady didn't change behaviour to reflect change (breeding on touch instead of spores), I predict that some species will have problems with breeding (egglayers?...) and it will be significantly slower in some cases (grazers on any bigger pasture, anyone?).

Toady probably will have to address it after complaints of players.

I also wonder whether the new breeding system will play nice with egg-layers.  In earlier versions, I studied the wiki and decided that birds were the best livestock for leather production, and kept them for that purpose.  With leather in mind, I actively (and, with very few exceptions, successfully) tried to avoid harvesting the eggs, which involved disallowing them in both the kitchen menu and food stockpiles.  To ensure continued reliable supply with minimal micromanagement under the new system, I would like to see either an option to revert to the previous breeding by pollen behavior, or a way to disallow egg-layers from laying non-fertilized eggs.  This sort of thing would especially benefit elk birds, according to what I have read about them on the wiki. 

On the "disturbing the mother" issue: Back in 34.11, I actually had eggs hatch after I had slaughtered the mother on two separate occasions (both incidents involved geese, if it matters).  According to my admittedly limited experience, eggs hatched very consistently unless moved to a food stockpile.  Then again, I was following the recommendations of using a battery farm, albeit without the doors (I left space to install them later, but the area was off to the side with no through traffic, and hatchlings that were free to wander were much easier to pick up and move to a different stall).

This might also be the place to ask about a way to "automatically forbid eggs laid in this box" so they can hatch (I seem to remember forbidding the nest box itself and that not working).  Better yet, "automatically forbid eggs laid in this box, then un-forbid them three months after they get laid," under the premise that if they haven't hatched by that point they never will.  An automated system could keep track of when they got laid much better than the player. 
Logged

reality.auditor

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #801 on: November 28, 2014, 08:52:59 am »

If you really think that, then you have absolutely no idea what "as slowly as possible" means.
In my book, adding tons of details that does not influence gameplay and almost never are visible in any way (except bugs, of course) certainly counts. It makes game slower for no benefit of anyone.
Logged
Are weapons like the least lethal thing in DF?

PigtailLlama

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #802 on: November 28, 2014, 11:42:56 am »

Quote from: Toady One
  • Got rid of mating-at-a-distance

Thank goodness. I'm running a fortress here, not a baby factory. Even then, if I was running a baby factory, it would be gobbo babies to use as catapult ammo.
Logged

Pseudopuppet

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #803 on: November 28, 2014, 02:06:37 pm »

If you really think that, then you have absolutely no idea what "as slowly as possible" means.
In my book, adding tons of details that does not influence gameplay and almost never are visible in any way (except bugs, of course) certainly counts. It makes game slower for no benefit of anyone.

World activation is required framework if Toady wants to go into further development of the economy and armies, despite it being almost unnoticeable during the gameplay of your fort.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2014, 02:10:41 pm by Pseudopuppet »
Logged

endlessblaze

  • Bay Watcher
  • likes dragons for their fiery breath
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #804 on: November 28, 2014, 03:28:36 pm »

he is right about that. I think world gen is worth it. or at least will be.
Logged
Kids make great meat shields.
I nominate endlessblaze as our chief military executive!

Putnam

  • Bay Watcher
  • DAT WIZARD
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #805 on: November 28, 2014, 04:21:42 pm »

If you really think that, then you have absolutely no idea what "as slowly as possible" means.
In my book, adding tons of details that does not influence gameplay and almost never are visible in any way (except bugs, of course) certainly counts. It makes game slower for no benefit of anyone.

No, I am dead serious. "As slowly as possible" is a gigantic exaggeration. "As slowly as possible" is perfectly synonymous with "Your FPS is 1/(total age of the universe past present and future)".

MrWiggles

  • Bay Watcher
  • Doubt Everything
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #806 on: November 28, 2014, 08:09:51 pm »

The question itself was just asinine though, border line troll bait. Of Course optimization is going to continue to happen, and is continuing to happens.
Logged
Doesn't like running from bears = clearly isn't an Eastern European
I'm Making a Mush! Navitas: City Limits ~ Inspired by Dresden Files and SCP.
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=113699.msg3470055#msg3470055
http://www.tf2items.com/id/MisterWigggles666#

Authority2

  • Bay Watcher
  • [ETHIC: INCREASE_FPS: REQUIRED]
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #807 on: November 29, 2014, 04:34:16 am »

Putnam, people can do hyperbole without not knowing about reality.
Logged
"But I tell you what the Queen wants is impossible. The story of her mandate to create floodgates in our desert fortress cannot be told in less than 314160 stanzas! Art bows not to any dwarf!"

Putnam

  • Bay Watcher
  • DAT WIZARD
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #808 on: November 29, 2014, 04:42:21 am »

I'm aware, but I feel like if the joke were made about my work I'd be far more annoyed.

By which I mean that I'm not speaking for Toady at all, just feeling the exasperation behind what's being said here without even being the target of it. It's that annoying an idea to me.

Authority2

  • Bay Watcher
  • [ETHIC: INCREASE_FPS: REQUIRED]
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #809 on: November 29, 2014, 05:21:44 am »

Though I do agree that it's an annoying idea, the act of othering people by jumping to the conclusion that they lack a particular fundamental understanding is similarly particularly annoying to me. I'm glad you don't mean it that way, but perhaps this thought could be more directly expressed?
Logged
"But I tell you what the Queen wants is impossible. The story of her mandate to create floodgates in our desert fortress cannot be told in less than 314160 stanzas! Art bows not to any dwarf!"
Pages: 1 ... 52 53 [54] 55 56 ... 306