• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Status
Not open for further replies.

unmerged(225557)

Private
1 Badges
Sep 7, 2010
11
0
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
I'm playing as Italy and at later stages, after unification, when i have a big amount of units, the game start to choke. My PC is good, like 15k on 3DMark 06. It is just me or somebody else experiencing this issue?
 
This game is not build for modern computers though it's a new game, that's why. :/ I usually always have lag running Windows 7 64 bit. I loaned my friend a copy of Windows XP 32 bit and he doesn't experience lag, so no lag, means XP 32 bit...
 
1. The engine doesn't support multicore processors
2. For some reason Paradox decided to make it an extremely CPU-intensive game despite the above
3. Possible memory leaks

You'll just have to hope the 3rd is responsible for most of it; those can be fixed through patches.
 
We can only wait and hope Paradox can optimise Vicky like what they did for HoI3. Although, your descriptions sound really bad; I'm on a 4 year old machine and it doesn't feel like it gets that slow.
 
It gets rather laggy at 1848 for me.

Specs:
Phenom II 945 3.0Ghz Quad Core
OCZ Gold 4GB of DD2 ram.
Samsung F3 1TB 32MB(cache)
ATI 4830 (Worst part but...)
Windows 7 64bit.
 
Last edited:
A few things you can do to make it faster :

-Modify soldier pop promotion so at 40% military spending farmers will only promote to soldiers at the rate of 0.1%.

-Increase upkeep costs for military

-tag switch to UK and release most of their satellites so they build less xbox hueg doomstacks

-Change soldier to pop damage higher than 0.1 so casualties will affect army size.
 
Last edited:
And almost 5 years since the Clausewitz engine has begun its development. You can't just pop in multicore support afterwards.
 
Adding multi core support to an already existing code is extremely hard, so I wouldn't count on Clausewitz engine ever having multi core support.
Hopefully the next generation engine will.
 
Sam problem here. Since approximately 1900+, game freezes with every single click, be it selecting a unit or opening a tab.

System at
4cores, 2,83 Ghz each
4 gigs of ram
win xp 32
512 mb dedicated gpu

all games except hoi3 and vicky2 work brilliant.
 
This game is not build for modern computers though it's a new game, that's why. :/ I usually always have lag running Windows 7 64 bit. I loaned my friend a copy of Windows XP 32 bit and he doesn't experience lag, so no lag, means XP 32 bit...

From my experince, that is wrong. XP 32 bit or not, the game lags all the same. Sometimes exiting the game and entering again helps, but after 1900 things will get too slow anyway.

I got a computer that runs Crysis with everything on the maximum without any sort of lag, but curiously it lags badly when i play Victoria after 1880-1900 or when a lot of great powers are at war (for example, in my current game as germany it is 1855 and Russia, Austria, Germany, England, Ottoman Empire and France, plus a lot of minors, are all at war).

And almost 5 years since the Clausewitz engine has begun its development. You can't just pop in multicore support afterwards.

Than why not leave a totaly outclassed engine? A lot of enterprises dont even stick with the same engine for such a long duration of time.

CK2 is coming out and if that game is like CK1 when it was launched and if it does not support multicores, than it will lag even more than Victoria 2.
 
It's hard to justify using the same engine for 5 years when the engine can't even correctly use multi-core processors, which are used almost universally these days.

Paradox churns out games at breakneck speed, but some quality would be nice once in a while.
 
I agree there is lag but Vicky 2 is not dissimilar to other Paradox games. This sort of thing has always happened with Paradox games and is a semi-unavoidable problem with the proliferation of complexity as the game progresses. I have observed that there are a number of areas which reveal opportunity for improvement. The most obvious is very laggy operation when re-organising very large groups of brigades. This suggests that things may be improved by having the game focus more on armies than individual brigades but we will have to wait and see what the team can find to improve.
 
And almost 5 years since the Clausewitz engine has begun its development. You can't just pop in multicore support afterwards.

If the engine was designed in the era of multicore processors - it was - then it should support them, it would have been a sensible thing to build into the design.

Given that it does not support them, it is not fit for purpose, and it's unacceptable that Paradox have used it.

I'm probably doing better than most as my CPU is set to speed up a single core if that's all that's being used.

The silver lining is that "memory leak" which is a term I'm hesitant to throw around idly may be happening. If the game is a lot faster after a restart then it implies something may be going wrong that they can fix.
 
If the engine was designed in the era of multicore processors - it was - then it should support them, it would have been a sensible thing to build into the design.

It wasn't. Multicore processors did not become mainstream until substantially after the Clausewitz engine was developed.
 
2. For some reason Paradox decided to make it an extremely CPU-intensive game despite the above
.

They didn't "decide" it. The game is based on a lot of calculations (POP issues, ideology, promotions/demotions, battle odds, distance calculating etc.), so naturally it uses the CPU more than the graphics card.
 
It wasn't. Multicore processors did not become mainstream until substantially after the Clausewitz engine was developed.

That really depends on what you consider mainstream. At that point new mid to high end computers were dual core, I consider that to be mainstream. Designing an engine which was to be used going forward at that point should have allowed for multicore processors.
 
I think the main problem that Paradox have is that most of the work being done by the game isn't very compatible with multi-threading. To get good value from multiple cores the game has to break out substantial blocks of activity that can run completely independently of each other. Unfortunately, almost every algorithm in the game is interacting with the same core data structures and as soon as you start executing any significant level of resource locking you lose all the multi-core benefit. In a multi-core processor the execution of semaphore style instructions can be extremely expensive and it is easy to produce multi-threaded software that uses twice as much total CPU and executes slower than the multi-threaded version.

The consequence of all this is that you either have to have a game which has intrinsically multi-core compatible algorithms - lots of graphics focused games are - or it must be designed from the very first day to optimise multi-core operation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.