Size of forces affecting system performance

[awdougherty 0]

I was thinking about getting into making missions for Operation Flashpoint. Now I plan to start small, but I wanted to ask how drastically the size of the forces in the game would affect system performance? Some missions seem to have a decent number of people in them so I was just curious. Thanks

[aiki 0]

hi,

I make co-op missions only.

Some of my missions can provide 200 ennemy units (or more, one is over 400). But theses units are created 'dynamically' in waves (from 12 to 24 units max). The battlefield move with the players, and there are not a bunch of units at the same time, in the same area.

With this rule, the lag is acceptable in my LAN, ( PIII-700/512Mo RAM) but i don't tryed to play that in the NET.

This is for a funny 'Shoot' mission, but you can also make an intensive map with few units if you take the time of reflection.

[Chris Death 0]

hmm - i think, awdougherty was talking about system

performance, not lag.

However - this depends on the system.

Just try to place group after group, and you'll see, at which

point of size your system performance gets affected.

OK, the system gets affected anyway, but what i mean is

drastically affected (like being unplayable).

Best way, to see that: use a sniper, and try to kill enemies.

If killing becomes very hard, because of a dia-show in your

sniper's scope, then you know: it was the system performance.

~S~ CD

[awdougherty 0]

I think DV Chris Death was closer to what I meant. Why don't I describe what I was thinking and you tell me what you guys think as far as feasibility.

Basically I want the player(s) to roam around the island and encounter enemies everywhere (as if they were way behind enemy lines disrupting things). I figured armor columns could drive in circles through 3 or 4 cities. Patrols could walk around towns and take some hikes through the woods. Airfields would send up the occasional patrol. Anyway, the players could attack wherever they wanted and when they needed to heal or resupply, they would have to raid a town with supplies in it. Then when they decided they were done (or killed a specific number of enemies) they head to an extraction point to end the mission and get their tallies. Is this possible in OFP with the editor included with the game?

Thanks

[Chris Death 0]

There are more ways to save performance in this case.

Way 1:

Let the enemy troops wait at their starting location.

Place the first waypoint close to the group/unit or

exactly onto them and syncronize it with a trigger, which

becomes active, once you enter the scene there.

e.g: trigger size 300/300, activated by West/present

syncronized with the relevant wayoints (press F5 and drag a line form trigger to waypoint).

This way, they will wait there until they are required to start

moving. - It depends up on your idea, how big you size

the area of the triggers.

Way 2:

Use createUnit or createVehicle commands to create enemy

soldiers, once they become attractive for your mission.

:note - way 2 is the more complicated way, but will save

a lot more performance. By using this way, you might need

some scripting experience, because you aren't able to place

waypoints for later-created units.

~S~ CD

[walker 0]

Hi awdougherty

At the Chain of Command we have been constructing missions in the 300 to 400 unit range.

The site will be open tommorow afternoon or evening.

Because we are dealing in multiple squad control, platoons and and companies, we have found that the major cost on CPU time and reources has been the scripts; which as they give a full strategic interface are quite complex.

However we have had advice on the subject from the expert and are now optimising the core system. This may be out for the launch we dont know yet.

That said we have a mission involving the control of a company plus on the player side and two and a half companies on the AI side its in the region of 300 plus soldiers.

I developed it on 633mhz celeron with 256mb and 64mb GForce 2MX it plays very well on this system, if you turn view distance down. The mission is a night mission which I am reliably informed is higher cpu requirements than day time.

Regards walker

[awdougherty 0]

thank you for your replies. I figured I could have most of the units just standing still until a trigger told them the players were approaching, then they could "come alive" for the encounter (except for the vehicles, that way the players could pick an ambush spot and hit them there).

The thing is, I wanted the players to be able to steal a chopper and take out targets, or steal a tank, or basically do it however they felt like. It seems possible, hopefully it's not the hardest thing in the world.

Thanks again.

[Chris Death 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The mission is a night mission which I am reliably informed is higher cpu requirements than day time<span id='postcolor'>

hmm - you really sure about that?

Just think about, what does cause performance loss in

single player. Is it a black screen, or is it a light screen with

many objects (polygons) on it?

OK, then again you could say: there are all the stars on

the sky - i would say yes, maybe.

I'm not sure, what really causes more performance loss, but

i also wouldn't bet on night time.

~S~ CD

[Cloney 0]

From my experience triggers cause slowdowns because the PC needs to be checking the radius constantly. One way around this is to use smaller trigger radii or to use fewer triggers.