Look at the FPS with B-17s in formation :)

FSIC Messageboard

Tech Talk

profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: Look at the FPS with B-17s in formation :)
Razor747 Pilot	posted 03-02- 10:02 PM I removed some polys that were not needed on the B-17 and I get WAY better FPS with it. I deleted all the higher LODs on the wings & tail sections. I left the body the same. I deleted the chairs, etc..., from the cockpit. Just look at the picture for the proof. Not in the picture is 8 more F4Fs for a total of 18 planes. Should it be released for the next PP? It will make the FPS way better. I am running: AMD Athlon 650 128mb Ram V3 3000 AGP ------------------ Thanks, James "Razor747" Smith Check out the SDOE Flight Line! I am constantly adding new things. Click on image above to go to my site. [This message has been edited by Razor747 (edited 03-02-2000).] [This message has been edited by Razor747 (edited 03-02-2000).] IP: Logged
Captain CanucK Pilot	posted 03-02- 10:16 PM All I can say is: WOW I think my prayers are being answered.... This is amazing! I truly hope that this new found solution to the FPS problem gets implemented into new plane packs... WOW WOW WOW WOW WOW ------------------ -Capt. CanucK 166 Bulldog Sqn, RCAC IP: Logged
Hawker Pilot	posted 03-02- 10:19 PM the chairs only make good firewood when ya belly land anyways Man those fps are un believable!!!!! i think a bomber overhaul is in order ,think ya can test out the lanc also???I think its a definite if the planes still look ok and im a bomber jock! IP: Logged
Jerry Pilot	posted 03-02- 10:29 PM Razor747, you're running a pretty heafty system there so naturally your FPS is going to be better than most of us. For comparison sake what would the FPS be for the same exact view of unaltered B-17's? IP: Logged
Razor747 Pilot	posted 03-02- 10:56 PM I just checked it with the unaltered B-17s. It was about 12FPS lower than that one. I also tried it up close and got about the same difference in them. It may not be worth the fix. ------------------ Thanks, James "Razor747" Smith Check out the SDOE Flight Line! I am constantly adding new things. Click on image above to go to my site. [This message has been edited by Razor747 (edited 03-02-2000).] IP: Logged
Nat Pilot	posted 03-02- 11:05 PM hhhmmmm... it looks really cool though thing is... I don't even get 40fps to start with, so I'd have to go with Jerry there, I'd love to see large bomber formations, but right now, my system couldn't coupe with it real well, I'm getting around 24/25 fps in a standard type mission, so imagine your bombers dropped in there.. lol I'm not diggin at all, cause anything at all the helps can't be bad can it! As to it being worth it though.. well if it's not too much work, I reckon it is worth it, if it helps some ppl then great, it'll help me one day if not now. Don't hold back progression for the sake of those of us that can't make use of it. ------------------ JV~44 "Naturlich" If you can't beat em.... out run em! http://members.xoom.com/naturlich/ IP: Logged
charmstar Pilot	posted 03-02- 11:15 PM Nat- Everybody can use a more efficient plane. Just because most of us won't be able to get the fps razor is achieving doesn't mean that we wouldn't benefit too. Razor said it was 12 FPS lower with unaltered B17s. That means he went from 28 to 40. For us it might be more like 14 to 20, but no matter how you look at it, it's about 40% faster, right? I think that is a BIG improvement. The way I look at it, if I used to be able to have 3 bombers in a mission, now I can have 4 with the same FPS. If I used to have 5, now I can have 7! charm IP: Logged
Captain CanucK Pilot	posted 03-02- 11:29 PM Charm, you stole the words right outta my mouth ...I was just about to post a reply to that effect I think this is a great advancement, and it should be implemented, because - as Charm pointed out it is approx a 40% increase, something that I and many others would certainly greatly benefit from. Again, good job Razor =) ------------------ -Capt. CanucK 166 Bulldog Sqn, RCAC IP: Logged
Hawker Pilot	posted 03-02- 11:54 PM not to mention netmaxplayers setting can go as high as 32 in the ini now i know at the moment 32 is pushing it but maybe 18 to 20 i mean in general do we not all get better fps online with humans flying then we do offline in a big mission with ai flying? IP: Logged
Hawker Pilot	posted 03-02- 11:57 PM razor can u package that baby up for me or send th sm if thats all i need and maybe the mission u used too i want to test on my celeron 400 with 128 ram and a banshee 16 meg 3d card just to see.I think your system prolly better but i bet it makes a decent improvment i may test it in som othe existing missions see what i get also. my email is kincaid4730@home.com IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 03-03- 02:02 AM Yes please the B17s are FPS piggys IP: Logged
Kraftwerk Pilot	posted 03-03- 05:56 AM Yes! A bomber rework is definately needed. What if we could block off the bomb bay and delete the lods and textures inside it, and block off the radio room from the waist gunners. Anyways, it is a better deal for all as fps will be better for any system (except Ati cards) right? :-I IP: Logged
Sv Pilot	posted 03-03- 07:36 AM Razor747, Removing stuff like chairs should make no FPS difference. They should switch out by the time you even view the plane from anywhere outside the cockpit. As fare as the high detail LODS, leave them!!! Just lower the switchin distance REAL close. That way if you F5 to a b17 it looks sweet, but more than like 100 feet away you switch to the low detail. IMO the switchouts are WAY to far! This would also be easier work. I bet I could make the FPS way better without removing a LOD with little effeect on the look. MH, anyone, whay are the switchins SO high! Is this just to guarentee 100% a smooth transition from LOD to LOD? I have found that I can make VERY LARGE changes here and still barely see the switch happen. Right now the plane is a spec before the high detail LODS get switched out. Or our you guys running in 8000 X 6000 resolution? ------------------ -Sv =FC= WWI in SDOE! IP: Logged
Loco Pilot	posted 03-03- 07:47 AM Razor, Great man! Yesterday I�m thinking to upgrade my computer, now I�m dreaming with these improvements. We need save money This community is getting better and better. Thanks. IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 03-03- 11:09 AM >more than like 100 feet away you switch to the low detail. You can change the switchout distances by changing the object detail slider in your preferences. Even at 100 feet if you are sitting inside a bomber or attacking bombers flying formation you're going to have the high detail model for your bomber plus the one on either side. TS IP: Logged
Sv Pilot	posted 03-03- 11:33 AM That is true TS, for the second you zip by. I guess if you hover on the 6 of B17 formation... but how long will you last there anyway? Yea, maybe this: We make a sperate special B17-LE. This can be gutted to death and used especialy for big-bomber missions. I do think we need to cool B17 for many other fun reasons. Here are some thing to think about: If you get clever with textures you can lower poly cound and still get a great looking B17 from distance. Stuff like windshields, etc. just get textured. Also slight sadowing on the textures can hint at 3D stuff that is not there. This looks real good from far away, but laughable and unrealistc right up close. Kinda like MSCFS ground scenery. So we have a B17-LE with now cockpit, no "real" windows, no gear, lower poly count - special texture, no alpha prop... hmmm. This would take less FPS than any current fighter, right? -Sv IP: Logged
Stark Pilot	posted 03-03- 04:48 PM I think SV is spot on with the add another low poly bomber instead of changing the default one. This way we still have the high detail bomber for the pretty factor and the low poly count ones for the large formations. With this method we could setup online missions with 1 or 2 high-poly bombers to be manned by people and many more AI only bombers with very low poly counts. The best of both worlds! People dont get stuck flying low poly "ugly" planes when they fly a bomber and we can keep the FPS reasonable with more planes in the air. In fact it might be reasonable to do this to all AC - and see just how a big a mission we can make! Most planes already have the lower detail lower count second level lods right? Why not just make them the first level for these low count planes and remove the internal stuff that the AI doesnt need to see (like guages, glass, throttle etc...) this would cut the poly count alot and free up more porcessor for physics calcs for those planes. Naming would be easy too - just use the existing name with AI tacked on the end - so people know it is meant only for the AI to fly. -Stark{GS} IP: Logged
STef Pilot	posted 03-03- 05:25 PM The best would be the progam to switch to lower models when used by AI and detailed modeled when used by a human. ------------------ P/O STef Editor http://stephan.bondier.free.fr/gazette.html IP: Logged
Whirlwind Pilot	posted 03-03- 05:37 PM In the mean time, we can always add a B-17G-AI (ie) to the plane list, STeF. IP: Logged
Whirlwind Pilot	posted 03-03- 05:37 PM Heheh... double clickin' again. Anyways, good research! [This message has been edited by Whirlwind (edited 03-03-2000).] IP: Logged
STef Pilot	posted 03-03- 05:50 PM Whirl, ok, but what would happen if you set up a flight of 4 planes belonging to a squadron. As far as I know, you can not mix planes. Dynamic model changes include in program's code would avoid such troubles. ------------------ P/O STef Editor http://stephan.bondier.free.fr/gazette.html IP: Logged
Spanky the Mad Dog Pilot	posted 03-03- 06:18 PM Spanky here.. I think we should play with the Bombers and maybe make a new version of each for AI formations. AND adjust the LODS switchins The switching distances are breaking the rules set out in the creator book that came with the demo. They all switch at the same point. right now the lanc was switching most parts from 1st to 2nd level LOD at 40000 ALL of the parts were doing that. That bogs the computer Right out of the Multigen Creator, The desktop tutor (which is a great book even if you don't use the program) "When you have several models with multiple LODs, set the switching distance appropriately so the realtime program does not have to swap LODs for more one model at a time. A "spike" of computational activity can slow performance while the swapping occurs" I think the distance that the highest detail LODS should switch in so you can see the plane from the inside in hi level and when you are REALLY CLOSE. Like maybe a couple plane lengths. Thats if the 2nd level lods look half decent which some do. STef thats exactly what i suggested in my post about these issues Also another idea which MH said was feasible. Was to have the game dynamicaly switch graphics options up and down to try and keep a consistant 20FPS which would be like sliding the object detail and texture sliders on the fly during the game. They both should be explored futher. Its just good game design. IP: Logged
Hawker Pilot	posted 03-03- 08:07 PM but really how bad does ur modified 17 look razor? maybe post as an option for people to try and see how it affects there systems i can make a couple missions to test it in i would love to try it and see it and see how much difference it makes. IP: Logged
Tailslide Pilot	posted 03-04- 02:14 AM SV, quite awhile if you're the one flying the bomber in formation.. I've been playing with cranking down the 'object detail' levels even though I have a pretty good system and it's not too bad.. TS [This message has been edited by Tailslide (edited 03-04-2000).] IP: Logged
JT Pilot	posted 03-04- 05:54 PM >I think the distance that the highest detail LODS should switch in so you can see the plane from the inside in hi level and when you are REALLY CLOSE. Like maybe a couple plane lengths. This is the way I've done the P-47. The highest detail LODs switchin only at like 40 to 60 feet away... the premise being that you're almost never that close to more than one plane at any given time. So far, this strategy seems to work well. With 9 p47s in the air, I'm getting framerates in the 50s.... and this is in D3d. Glide will be even better. The only disadvantage to working this way is that you have to make more LODs and you have to be very careful how you make the 2nd and 3rd level LODs, so that the switch isn't glaringly obvious... it's basically a lot of work, but I think it's worth it. Even so, you still have to keep the highest level LODs reasonable since the game uses those for collision detection. From what I've been told, the game basically checks every polygon of the highest level LODs for bullet hits. You can, however, have it skip certain LODs, from what I understand, using the obNoCollide property. IP: Logged

All times are CT (US)	next newest topic \| next oldest topic
Administrative Options: Close Topic \| Archive/Move \| Delete Topic
	Hop to:

Contact Us | Fighter Squadron Information Center