bring back hourly tick rates for patch 1.4

[Saica-Fox]

stupid to remove them. game loses what made it different from eu4
- per-day ticks - terrible (war is less tactical and depends more on amount of forces) which means u dont need to reinforce or really have time battle is over so fast. so its just bigger stack wins

[GuastardoDellaRadica]

Originally posted by Saica-Fox:

so its just bigger stack wins

This is literally how battles have been working for a while, since the regular units nerf.

[KroganCharr]

I fundamentally disagree with the idea that hour ticks are sensible in a game that covers 500 years. I'd like for it to be possible to finish a campaign before I die of old age.

[Saica-Fox]

Originally posted by KroganCharr:

I fundamentally disagree with the idea that hour ticks are sensible in a game that covers 500 years. I'd like for it to be possible to finish a campaign before I die of old age.

that why u have 4 speeds to play with if ur playing on slow speed thats ur fault

[KroganCharr]

Originally posted by Saica-Fox:

Originally posted by KroganCharr:

I fundamentally disagree with the idea that hour ticks are sensible in a game that covers 500 years. I'd like for it to be possible to finish a campaign before I die of old age.

that why u have 4 speeds to play with if ur playing on slow speed thats ur fault

Paradox themselves have confirmed that hourly ticks slow the game down regardless of what speed you pick.

[eaerion]

Originally posted by KroganCharr:

Originally posted by Saica-Fox:

that why u have 4 speeds to play with if ur playing on slow speed thats ur fault

Paradox themselves have confirmed that hourly ticks slow the game down regardless of what speed you pick.

Removal of hourly ticks improved performance by about 10-15% - so the same period of ingame time shortened from 10 to 9 minutes of inlife time. Much more impact on game speed in this patch was caused by parallelization and rewriting algorithms with bad computional complexity. You are one of people confusing pacing and time granulation/density with performance.

Details: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/tinto-talks-123-1-4-performance-and-campaign-timeline.1941000/#post-31499332

[KroganCharr]

Originally posted by eaerion:

Originally posted by KroganCharr:

Paradox themselves have confirmed that hourly ticks slow the game down regardless of what speed you pick.

Removal of hourly ticks improved performance by about 10-15% - so the same period of ingame time shortened from 10 to 9 minutes of inlife time. Much more impact on game speed in this patch was caused by parallelization and rewriting algorithms with bad computional complexity. You are one of people confusing pacing and time granulation/density with performance.

Details: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/tinto-talks-123-1-4-performance-and-campaign-timeline.1941000/#post-31499332

In other words, it turned a 200 hour campaign into a 170-180 hour campaign. Very much relevant.

It doesn't make a lot of sense to compute time savings in 10 minute intervals for a game that typically takes hundreds of hours per campaign. And I would wager the performance impact is even bigger for people with weaker CPUs.

[eaerion]

Originally posted by KroganCharr:

Originally posted by eaerion:

Removal of hourly ticks improved performance by about 10-15% - so the same period of ingame time shortened from 10 to 9 minutes of inlife time. Much more impact on game speed in this patch was caused by parallelization and rewriting algorithms with bad computional complexity. You are one of people confusing pacing and time granulation/density with performance.

Details: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/tinto-talks-123-1-4-performance-and-campaign-timeline.1941000/#post-31499332

In other words, it turned a 200 hour campaign into a 170-180 hour campaign. Very much relevant.

It doesn't make a lot of sense to compute time savings in 10 minute intervals for a game that typically takes hundreds of hours per campaign. And I would wager the performance impact is even bigger for people with weaker CPUs.

You're missing my point completely. You are overextending an impact which removal of hourly ticks has in this patch. Other improvements are responsible for like majority of the speed-up.

So they already reduced campaign by let's say 50h by optimization and parallelization without any gameplay downgrade and then another 10h by removing hourly ticks. (numbers are not precise and are ignoring pause. Some of your 200h is on pause I guess).

Also about what makes sense and what doesn't:
"in observer mode it took me 2minutes 45 seconds to go until jan 1339 on 1.3, currently it takes 47 seconds in the latest internal 1.4" - quote from Tinto talk. So I guess even shorter periods are ok.

Also:

"For the examples like this exceptionally impressive stat, along with some of the in office anecdotes, the systems are rather high end. So while everyone here is very excited about performance in 1.4, we want you to take this excitement with a grain of salt. Rest assured though, we are always aiming to optimize systems at min spec and above." - so the impact is WORSE for weaker CPU.

Read the link I gave you first cause you're embarassing yourself, mate.

[Alma_Negra]

yes get rid of daily ticks plz

[Matze3]

I don't know how many here already tried 1.4 but for me getting rid of hourly ticks made levies completely useless and even professional armies struggle to reinforce in time. So most battle end when the first line retreated. Maybe 1-2 units reinforced the frontline, but nothing more. Everything else will just retreat. Even in the second age.

Why bother sending an army of 20k into battle, when only 3-4 k max will fight and 16k will retreat because they can't reinforce in time?

[Saica-Fox]

Originally posted by Matze3:

I don't know how many here already tried 1.4 but for me getting rid of hourly ticks made levies completely useless and even professional armies struggle to reinforce in time. So most battle end when the first line retreated. Maybe 1-2 units reinforced the frontline, but nothing more. Everything else will just retreat. Even in the second age.

Why bother sending an army of 20k into battle, when only 3-4 k max will fight and 16k will retreat because they can't reinforce in time?

thats the issue all the tick haters dont understand battles are horrible now cuz they dont last so u cant reinforce in time

[Saica-Fox]

Originally posted by Alma_Negra:

yes get rid of daily ticks plz

true

[rickerts]

Yeah, not a fan of the daily tick. I know hourly made the game longer but heck, its a 500 year game. it SHOULD feel long. Battles are not great in daily ticks. Its just meh.

[eaerion]

I noticed one more thing. I was able to beat bigger armies containing weaker units by fleeing in a "perfect moment" and repeating the battle after several days. Now I cannot pick that "perfect moment" cause a single tick is too impactful. I'm not sure if I expressed myself correctly.

[Krozan]

Originally posted by GuastardoDellaRadica:

Originally posted by Saica-Fox:

so its just bigger stack wins

This is literally how battles have been working for a while, since the regular units nerf.

Army composition and the reinforced units that have been prioritized since version 1.2, along with a few other modifiers.

But then again, that’s what happens when you don’t actually play the game and just spend your time hating on it ;).

[mathalamus]

no, they slow the game down for no reason. they should never have added hourly ticks in the first place.