| Forum Index > General Games |
|
TelecoM
United States10710 Posts
On August 28 2015 12:13 LegalLord wrote: I'm not really as worried about who will play in the tournament as about who will be there to watch it  .I'd like to win some easy $$ if theres not many competitors, Is the game fairly balanced at all or does any race favored? | ||
|
HewTheTitan
Canada331 Posts
Imagine huk, crank, destiny, kane showing up for fun and potential profit. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
TelecoM
United States10710 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
All races are playable competitively, if that's what you want to know. | ||
|
Technique
Netherlands1542 Posts
It was before already (with the exception of some early goo shenanigans), but there were hardly any decent beta players. Most of the good players played Humans... which resulted in humans getting nerfed on all fronts several patches in row. So yeah, if you want to win that tournament, play Beta. That's just based on the patch notes though... haven't played GG in a good while, since it's not that fun really... units move so slow and are rather bland, and they keep nerfing unit speeds as well.  | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20326 Posts
On July 11 2015 09:59 HewTheTitan wrote: Selfish question Cyro: can you explain the solution to this tick rate problem to me? I'm a software engineering student, it hasn't come up but I'd like to start understanding things like this. I googled tick rate but couldn't find anything specific along these lines  Sorry i didn't see this post for months It's just a quirk of the engine style used. Two options for example would be using a different engine style like Planetary Annihilation did (i have not seen how that worked out for them) OR if you want to/have to use this engine style, it's critically important to look at the calculations you're doing on every tick and how long it takes for any given CPU. If you have 100fps on an i5 2500k but 20x per second there's a frame that takes 50ms (1/20'th of a second) whenever you have input or you're scrolling the map etc, it's going to feel like you're playing at 20fps, not 100fps because you have those frames so often which take 1/20'th of a second. A solid, stable 40ish FPS is preferred to 100fps which feels like 20fps because of very uneven frametime distribution. Sc2 engine is similar, here's a few pics from it: Game paused in a replay, looking at a base where drones were mining: game simulation is not done when the game is paused, so there are no slow frames and the frametime consistency is very solid ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VuCOq5F.png) Game unpaused in the same place with sped up gameplay, i benchmarked this because it looked particularly stuttery and weird and me and friend looking at shared replay immediately identified it - it's way worse than sc2 usually is: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/BFDPzqu.png) Some regular gameplay: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/HjGJLIS.png) SC2 has a tick rate of ~22hz @ faster, Grey Goo has ~20hz. SC2's engine is problematic, but it's much better. The main difference is the amount of CPU time spent on each tick - when that tick happens every 1/20'th of a second, sc2 spends longer than usual to make the next frame but it gets it done fairly fast. Motion and input is slightly disrupted and it's visible, but it's not completely game breaking to me - it's just annoying. When Grey Goo has to do a simulation tick, it freezes for far longer (and that happens earlier in the game too) which makes it much more obvious and problematic. They're probably being less efficient with the work being done every time one of those ticks is reached or doing way more work - one example that i identified for that was the harvester counts. When i was playing, i could build extractors all over the map and then it would generate a huge trail of workers running expansive pathfinding simulation among other stuff in order to deliver the resources to you. As a result of that, if you build a bunch of extractors, game performance would heavily degrade to a small fraction of what it was at before. If we ran sc2 the same, got both players to 200/200 supply and then added 200 workers each for them, the engine would perform badly too! This behavior could be bypassed by having the resources given to you without spawning 30 worker drones (or coming up with some other solution) but every CPU was overwhelmed well beyond the point where the engine was fun to use and interact with for me at any stage of the game. I reread my last post, i guess that's repeating a lot of info - but there's not much else to it. The engine is just doing some really heavy stuff on the ticks that i can't entirely identify - if you start an sc2 1v1 game on my CPU, the slowest frames will take about 5 milliseconds (~200fps). If i started a Grey Goo game, immediately right from the start of the game, the "tick frames" would take about 20-25 milliseconds (~50-40fps), which is 1/4 to 1/5'th of the performance of sc2. Average FPS wasn't that much lower - but it's the slowest frames that really matter, especially if they're as frequent as 20 times per second. Both games would degrade in performace as more and more units entered the game and there was more stuff to simulate, as these engines do. I'm probably getting a new CPU within about 3 weeks (binned 6700k+ddr4 - hopefully ~4.8ghz) and at that time i'l be somewhat interested in doing sc2 engine comparisons, particularly for RAM and stuff like 2ghz vs 4ghz on CPU to look at frametime distribution, time taken on slow vs fast frames then. I'l likely make a thread on tech section if anyone is interested in looking at those results | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17486 Posts
On September 01 2015 01:49 Cyro wrote:if you start an sc2 1v1 game on my CPU, the slowest frames will take about 5 milliseconds (~200fps). If i started a Grey Goo game, immediately right from the start of the game, the "tick frames" would take about 20-25 milliseconds (~50-40fps), which is 1/4 to 1/5'th of the performance of sc2. thanks for this detailed info. | ||
|
TMG26
Portugal2017 Posts
| ||
|
HaRuHi
1220 Posts
On August 28 2015 12:52 GGzerG wrote: I'd like to win some easy $$ if theres not many competitors, Is the game fairly balanced at all or does any race favored? Goo is OP, try to dodge Bikerush in bracket, good luck | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
GG is broken at core design. | ||
|
Swift118
United Kingdom335 Posts
On October 16 2015 04:37 -Archangel- wrote: Free MP weekend is what AoA could use. GG is broken at core design. What AoA could do with is a tombstone. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On October 17 2015 15:42 LegalLord wrote: AoA seems to have settled at a higher level than GG's average points, but it doesn't really look like it's thriving either. Reviews are pretty middling and it didn't really live up to the hype that people gave it here. Had a lot of the same problems as GG but it had the advantage of not being $50 on release. Actually AoA has different problems than GG. AoA has no tutorial coupled with a more complex game than both GG and SC2 , also has worse UI than both GG and SC2. It didn't help that SP campaign was not as good as previous C&C games. Unlike GG, AoA did release without big performance problems (but they still had too many crashes at release), it had proper server side MP and it released with replays and observer features (although both very basic). It also has 3v3, 4v4 and bigger maps. Balance in AoA was less broken at release than in GG. GG had broken walls that ruined gameplay from day1, AoA had nothing similar. GG had better marketing from day 1 and still has. | ||
|
TaShadan
Germany1980 Posts
 | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On October 17 2015 20:35 TaShadan wrote: Unfortunately both games were a disappointment for me I am still waiting for AoA do finish their patching and enhancing process before I decide that. GG devs already did that and game is still a failure in base design. | ||
|
TMG26
Portugal2017 Posts
Too bad I don't have Windows on my devices right now... Hope that it gets a bit of growth, Before this weekend it was growing a bit, if it gets a stable 100 concurrent i will most likely buy it. | ||
|
TelecoM
United States10710 Posts
On October 18 2015 00:33 TMG26 wrote: GG has a lot of players right now thanks to the free weekend. Too bad I don't have Windows on my devices right now... Hope that it gets a bit of growth, Before this weekend it was growing a bit, if it gets a stable 100 concurrent i will most likely buy it. 100 concurrent users is a lot? -.-? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
Escore
INu's Battles
Classic vs ByuN
SHIN vs ByuN
OSC
Big Brain Bouts
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
RSL Revival
Classic vs GgMaChine
Rogue vs Maru
WardiTV Invitational
IPSL
Ret vs Art_Of_Turtle
Radley vs TBD
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VeHa0Gi.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/OTRor5g.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/uPLQAXA.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/iN0KkID.png)
