Sword of the Stars II: Enhanced Edition

Sword of the Stars II: Enhanced Edition

View Stats:
Redfive Dec 26, 2012 @ 8:12pm
This thing runs like a dog..
core i7 2670QM 2.2ghz
8 GB ram
Geforce GT555M 4 GB

The title screen is a slide show. Yes I have everything on high, but how in the world can my rig not handle this game on full graphics? Is this a know issue?

RAGE runs like butter with everything on high and quite honestly I don't have the interest or patience to go hunting for a solution if one exists.

Is everyone just dealing with it this way?
< >
Showing 1-15 of 31 comments
Dereknor Dec 26, 2012 @ 11:04pm 
Sots is using its own engine and it never have been very effective. I still remember when Sots 1 came out with the first version of the Engine. All people needed to buy the fastest PCs just to run the game ;) It got more effective over the years, but the MARS-Engine is just not a very fast one and can slow down any PC, no matter how fast it is.
I think you should just not turn everything on high. I think the game might need some more patches untill the engine runs more efficient.

But maybe there is another problem? It shouldnt be a slide show on such a PC.
Honorable_D Dec 26, 2012 @ 11:59pm 
Game runs fine for me on a HD 5850 and a I7 2600k. Only get noticable framerate loss when massive amounts of point defense fire, drones, battle riders and hordes of weapon projectiles enter into the mix.

If it matters, the game loves processor more than anything and your 2.2 ghz seems rather horrid. My I7 is @ 4.8 ghz.
Joseph Dec 27, 2012 @ 6:40am 
i7 2630 2.0ghz 8gb GT550m runs fine for me.
Unhinged Dec 27, 2012 @ 10:05am 
Stupid question but is the drivers upto date?
Redfive Dec 27, 2012 @ 6:18pm 
I updated the video driver about 2 wks ago
Shadow Dec 28, 2012 @ 11:41am 
I run on three different types of computers:
1. AMD 9950 BE quad core (2.6ghz) with 4gig Memory (DDR2 - 800Mhz) and an HD 4670 1Gig. Works flawlessly. Windows 7 Pro 64x
2. i5-2430M dual core (2.4ghz turbo 3.1ghz) with 8 gig Mem (DDR3 - 1333MHz) and a GT550M w/1gig mem (DDR3), works flawlessly and better then the first system. Windows 7 Home 64x
3. i7-3630QM quad core (2.4ghz turbo 3.4ghz) with 8gig Mem (DDR3-1666MHz) and a GT660M w/2gig mem (DDR5), works flawlessly and better then previous two systems. Windows 8 Pro 64x

I'd say something wrong with your rig, either something in background is messing something up, or driver issues etc.

I see you listed a mobile processor, so I take it is a laptop like my last two rigs. Are you sure the game is running on a dedicated graphics and not the integrated intel graphics? HUGE difference in performance between the two.
Last edited by Shadow; Dec 28, 2012 @ 11:44am
Redfive Dec 29, 2012 @ 12:53pm 
Interesting, how would I check if it was running off integrated or the card? I just run it like it came out of the box.
Brosif Stalin Dec 29, 2012 @ 6:46pm 
Redfive - may I suggest you to find out whenever it's your CPU or GPU affecting this?

To check this, all you have to do is download FRAPS and enable FPS meter. Then go to main menu of SotS2 and monitor the FPS while you're monitoring the combat itself.

If your FPS drops when the camera isn't focusing directly into anything (such as a big ship blocking most of the background screen or focusing a missile closely), then it's your GPU. Elsewise, it's your CPU.

If this still seems confusing (or results seem confusing), try instead disabling / enabling ambient occlusion and monitor the FPS in the main menu again. This time, if you get increased FPS when it's disabled or decreased when it's enabled, it's a sign of your GPU. Elsewise, it's CPU.

The reason why you can monitor it from the main menu is because the combat in the background is actually scripted event in-game, instead of a video show.

That all being said - your CPU is a terrible option to run SotS2. I have a 4ghz Phenom II X6 1100t and it's not enough to handle smoothly the largest battles. Your processor will get bottlenecked very soon nevertheless. Especially in larger maps. And in combat with lots of drones or battleriders.

I could give a long analogy of why it's happening, but just trust my word when I tell you that there's really nothing devs can do about it. Only the most expensive processors are capable of running this game fairly well, for now.
Redfive Dec 29, 2012 @ 8:20pm 
Thanks for the response..not going to mess with it..since it was only $5. I'm a little miffed that I can't run a 4x game for♥♥♥♥♥♥when Borderlands 2, RAGE, etc. look perfectly fine with everything on high.
Brosif Stalin Dec 29, 2012 @ 9:04pm 
Borderlands 2 or RAGE are games that are mostly heavy on your GPU. There's very little that a processor is needed for. Such as calculating the AI, possible physics (for example, shoot acid in stairs and see how it goes down).

SotS2 is much more complicated than that. Let me tell you for example the difference between a projectile in SotS2 and a projectile in most FPS games.But in this case, Borderlands 2 to be specific.

In Borderlands 2, projectile is shot from a weapon, some of them have no velocity and instead hit their destination instantly (thus no calculation done). Missiles and few other weapons are different - their bullets actually have velocity that isn't instant. This requires some processor power.

Then they hit a target. The bullet goes through small amount of calculations to calculate the damage it actually does. As an example, each projectile probably checks whenever the target is slagged or not, except for slag weapons themselves.

In Sword Of The Stars 2, a projectile first gets shot from a weapon. It has it's own velocity (and I think they are all identical, not entirely sure, but I doubt that the velocity of the ship affects projectile velocity at all).

Then the projectile hits a ship. In here, the calculations begin. First the projectile checks for the mass of the ship. Depending on that and upon it's own impact force, the projectile may or may not deviate the ship a little or a lot from it's course. Or send it spinning, for example. Impactor type weapons are best example that has this effect. Also, Gravity Mines cause Gravity Wells where ships will be pulled in. This calculation is not necessarily true for every type of weapon - especially energy weapons such as beamers or lasers.

Okay, after that, there's a bunch of other calculations. Based on each weapons own damage pattern (there is no health points in this game apart from structure points), the projectile will go through several calculations. First it wants to know where it hit the ship. Then it wants to know how much armor the ship has in that section. Based on the amount of armor and it's armor piercing value, it shall or shall not do damage to the ship armor grid in a certain pattern . Once armor grid reaches to zero, the core (structure points) is exposed and any damage that goes through that point will essentially damage the cores systems of a ship.

There are also other calculations such as critical damage or weapon tracking that can be done.

As you can see, SotS2 calculations for just one projectile go way beyond FPS games scope... and there's also quite a few more bullets constantly running there. Then there are smaller ships such as drones which can add even more calculations (imagine having a fleet that consists of like 100 ships each firing projectiles). You can literally have thousands of projectiles running around at the same time.

So yeah, that's why your processor can't handle SotS2. It's got little to do with your graphics card, I'm afraid.

Oh and yes, just imagine the AI in that game, it's also very complicated. Not in combat though, but instead in strategic actions, which results into big turn times eventually in the game.
Last edited by Brosif Stalin; Dec 29, 2012 @ 9:05pm
Dereknor Dec 30, 2012 @ 1:26pm 
But its also a fact that the Mars-Engine has always been very ineffective compared to long developed engines. For example Supreme Commander.
It got a complex 3D world and sometimes tousands of units running around, each with its own animations, weapons and all projectiles and rockets are own objects. And still, I can run Supreme commander 10 times faster then Sots 2. But to be honest, I havent tried Supreme Commander with my newest PC yet, so it might be even more then 10 times faster ;) So the number of units, weapons and projectiles cant be the reason it is so slow sometimes. There are many more games with much more units, turrets and real calculated projectiles then Sots 2. I even saw little games made in flash or HTML5 that got hundreds of individual objects shooting around and interacting with each other on contact. So this really cant be the reason ;)

In my opinion, the Mars Engine is just not optimized. AS so many things in Sots 2, its still in development and I think it has never been totally finished. I still remember how much faster Sots 1 got after some month of developing, just because they optimized the Mars 1 engine and made the game like 10 times faster.

Another fact I just remember is, that physics are usually calculated by the GPU now too. Like velocity or impact on objects with mass.

Oh, another game I just remember is Total War. Many tousands of unique units, and there is soo much calculatec all the time. Compared with all these games that run so fast with so many more units and bullets and effects and calculations, it really cant be the reason why the Mars 2 engine is so slow. You really need a high end maschine to see 12 ships shooting each other, while you can easily let 10.000 unique units fight each other in another game ;)
Brosif Stalin Dec 30, 2012 @ 1:50pm 
You speak of optimization, yet you have no clue what it really means and how it's achieved. You speak of Total War, yet Shogun 2 is just as much of a PC hog as SotS2
And you speak of Supreme Commander, which does not come even close. It does not have a physics engine.

One could suggest that thou shouldn't speak at all.

Until you understand how code reacts wth processor, you won't understand why it's a PC hog. It's highly foolish to talk about optimization. It's not a magic word.
Last edited by Brosif Stalin; Dec 30, 2012 @ 1:51pm
[GGS]PureCruncher Dec 30, 2012 @ 2:16pm 
So let me get this straight. To play this game comfortably we all must buy top of the range computers with fancy processors. How is this going to increase their customer base/make it accessible to the wider masses. I can run most things on maximum but I have issues with this game.
I will openly admit that I don't know the finer workings of code etc. but if they want people to buy/enjoy this they need to reduce the time it takes to do things. If they don't do something with this, only the hardcore fan base will have the patience to play.
I really want to enjoy this and appreciate it for what it is worth but the turn times and other slow features kill the experience for me. There must be something that can be done.
Brosif Stalin Dec 30, 2012 @ 2:47pm 
Bit wild to say that it requires fancy processor, my Phenom II X6 1100t overclocked at 4ghz can run it fairly well. Fancy processor is if you want a flawless experience.

And turn times aren't that slow, honestly. If you play multiplayer (which is currently the best experience given the state of their AI), turn times is much less of a hassle.

It's mostly the combat in late-game that will get even my processor. However, once 12mb l3 cache processors get cheaper, there shouldn't be any problems to be honest. And SotS2 will be a very long lasting game, just like original SotS.

The slow turn times can possibly be optimized, but if you run small maps with 1 to 3 AI's, it shouldn't be a problem either. If you enjoy large maps with maximum amount of AI, well... what can you expect?

If you truly want a smooth experience, I suggest to head over to multiplayer. If client gets slow, there's always possibility to restart the game and client. (Also, it's best to play in arranged matches, not random).Combat can still get slow eventually, but it's still very playable. Just lower framerates.
Last edited by Brosif Stalin; Dec 30, 2012 @ 2:47pm
Brosif Stalin Dec 30, 2012 @ 3:00pm 
And despite me having some issues as well with the combat, I've netted over 700 hours of gameplay. Frankly, I can't quite imagine another game that has done the same for me. Especially the latest ones.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 31 comments
Per page: 15 30 50

Date Posted: Dec 26, 2012 @ 8:12pm
Posts: 31