i've no definite proff, but it seems like the game got alot faster in evrything , building etc .... i'm not sure if it is just the more fluid time that pass or what..
- 4
- 1
there is... something faster in the beta...
- Thread starter Verx90
- Start date
-
We will be taking the forums down for scheduled maintenance on Tuesday, May 22nd 2023 at around 8:00 CDT / 13:00 UTC for up to an hour hour.
-
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.
I experienced this as well. It's tied to how some setups handled vsync. Running a one_year on 3.2 at the start of the game was 62 seconds for me. On 3.3 it dropped to 33 seconds. This seems to be very hardware-specific, anecdotally, it seems AMD setups benefit more than Intel setups.
- 9
Yeah I've noticed this too (pretty hard to miss actually), and I do have an AMD setup.
normal speed is now previous update fast speed and etc everything has been shifted.
I'm almost half-convinced they have a `sleep 100ms` in the main loop that they forgot to turn on for the open beta. I experienced the same speed up in the Galactic Community beta IIRC and it wasn't there in the final patch...
- 5
I always play on max speed and pause for every interaction... and i noticed the years flying by super duper quick. Not sure if that will translate to late game, but early game is a machine gun.
Interesting. Could be a quirk of compiler flag or release process differences between betas and proper releases.
Also AMD CPU/GPU and I noticed the same thing too. I had to double check I wasn't running on Fastest.
I really really hope they don't slow down max speed again, because, yeah, late game. Maybe a better option would be to have an even slower mode. I've played many a game where the players just give up and walk away after year 350 because it takes too long for a day to tick over, and that's a terribly un-satisfactory resolution to a game.
- 1
You are actualy playing to 2550?
That's insane, at least for me 2400 - 2450 would have me running out of anything to do anymore.
year 350, the game starts at year 200, so realy just year 150 since game starts. I'm really sorry for the confusion.
If you're going to use "year 350" to mean "2350", just write "2350". It's shorter and less confusing. When most people say "year 350" they mean "350 years after the start of the game", which is 2550.
- 6
- 1
The game runs faster? Especially if you set speed 5. However it could also be result of AI being lazy (less decisions in beta) or smaller setup 600 stars.
But i agree that there something good with performance.
Also technology is faster i think, as there is slower admin cap penalty, and you dont sink pops into buerocrats for no reason. For example i get Battleships consistent in y70 which wasnt the case before. Put more pops into research, initial penalty is minimal, also you can get Discovery/Prosperity tree sooner.
But i agree that there something good with performance.
Also technology is faster i think, as there is slower admin cap penalty, and you dont sink pops into buerocrats for no reason. For example i get Battleships consistent in y70 which wasnt the case before. Put more pops into research, initial penalty is minimal, also you can get Discovery/Prosperity tree sooner.
Last edited:
Nono, it's actually faster, I mean that speed 2 feels like speed 3, for around 5-10 or so years when you start the game. The AI work properly, they fleet management is still rubish but the AI economy and tech use is proper, at least with Grand admiral, scaling on.
- 1
Alright it's time for me to contribute, the game doesn't seem to run faster for me but I have nvidia not amd so maybe that's the reason?
Yeah they messed up the speed settings in stellaris. Playing on normal is more then fast enough now, It is about as fast as the old fastest. Geforce rtx 3090, intel core i9 3,6 ghz, corsair vengeance 3200 mhz 128 gb.
Maybe they make much better use of multitreading in this beta.
I do not think this would work very well in MP, unless the host set the speed to normal.
Maybe they make much better use of multitreading in this beta.
I do not think this would work very well in MP, unless the host set the speed to normal.
I'm running Intel CPU and Nvidia GPU. With the beta patch, Normal speed feels significantly faster, like the next notch or two up.
It feels like they just changed the speed settings. I have a fairly fast system, so I can't believe it was code optimization and my computer was struggling before. Especially when the speed increase is so noticeable at the start of a game, when the computer isn't crunching many numbers.
It feels like they just changed the speed settings. I have a fairly fast system, so I can't believe it was code optimization and my computer was struggling before. Especially when the speed increase is so noticeable at the start of a game, when the computer isn't crunching many numbers.
To be insanely clear, I have played a few games to year 2550, but that takes...20+ hours when on fastest, so not many. Usually, 2350 is about the late game, and everything after that is odd and strange. I'd really like to say that playing into the late late game with 20+ players is fun, but its only fun because we make our own fun...you run out of things to do and the empire is...well, a player who made emporer and doesn't drop the ball is very hard to kick out...
But all of these games depend on the game running as fast as possible. In multiplayer, we tend to stick to normal/fast, and will probably only need normal if the performance improvemnts persist. This is EXCELLENT!
THIS IS EXCELLENT BECAUSE, as I was trying to say, what makes most of the mp games I've played fall apart, is that players give up based on slow-downs. Now we're probably going to give up for another reason, and heck, that's a huge improvement.
On the other hand...for players who wanted to play the game on slowest, I think slowest being now faster is possibly a down-side...but I cannot agree with anyone who wants to revert to slower...the obvious answer is a speed of -3 to be added, and we keep performance gains?
But all of these games depend on the game running as fast as possible. In multiplayer, we tend to stick to normal/fast, and will probably only need normal if the performance improvemnts persist. This is EXCELLENT!
THIS IS EXCELLENT BECAUSE, as I was trying to say, what makes most of the mp games I've played fall apart, is that players give up based on slow-downs. Now we're probably going to give up for another reason, and heck, that's a huge improvement.
On the other hand...for players who wanted to play the game on slowest, I think slowest being now faster is possibly a down-side...but I cannot agree with anyone who wants to revert to slower...the obvious answer is a speed of -3 to be added, and we keep performance gains?