Steel Beasts Dynamic Terrain Will Come After New Terrain Engine

[Rinix]

http://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/11032-anti-tank-ditch/?do=findComment&comment=163870

Why not place dragon teeth, really. This is crazy.

Heck, you could also use some of those concrete "Bremer walls". If you use half height, defenders can still shoot over them. Abusing emplacements for this is bad for the frame rate, bad for future compatibility of such scenarios, etc.

I understand that there is a need for excavated obstacles, and you'll get them, once that the new terrain engine has been successfully implemented. Once that it is there we'll start working on dynamic terrain, and that would include the ability to dig trenches of any size.

[Hafer]

Looking forward for the new terrain engine. But how long do we have to wait? I mean at 2015 i thought it would come out in the first half of 2016. Now its delayed for Q1 2017. I'm getting older and older....

PS. 4 verification questions to post here? ;-)))

[Red2112]

Looking forward for the new terrain engine. But how long do we have to wait? I mean at 2015 i thought it would come out in the first half of 2016. Now its delayed for Q1 2017. I'm getting older and older....

PS. 4 verification questions to post here? ;-)))

In a recent letter from Ssnake (included replacement USB stick), he states to expect new terrain handling in March 2017.

[Asid]

PS. 4 verification questions to post here? ;-)))

Hi Hafer

The anti spam measures are in place to prevent any spam or b.s posts. As you can see from our forum that with other measures, it is effective.

It is hoped that people do not artificially increase their post count by bumping random posts.

Regards

[Longknife]

It is hoped that people do not artificially increase their post count by bumping random posts.

Bump...

[Asid]

It is hoped that people do not artificially increase their post count by bumping random posts.

Bump...

[Rinix]

Looking forward for the new terrain engine. But how long do we have to wait? I mean at 2015 i thought it would come out in the first half of 2016. Now its delayed for Q1 2017. I'm getting older and older....

PS. 4 verification questions to post here? ;-)))

In a recent letter from Ssnake (included replacement USB stick), he states to expect new terrain handling in March 2017.

Judging by the , we will see the new terrain engine in January 2017.

[Rinix]

http://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/11128-did-i-just-screw-up/?do=findComment&comment=165530

No. It's the second half of the 4.0 update which had originally been planned to be included right from the start. Unfortunately that didn't work out, so we had a bit of a "hair on fire" moment between May and August, released 4.0 without the new terrain engine, and coming quarter we'll offer a free update that will then (finally) bring the transition to high res terrain.

Note that the terrain will actually not change that much. The existing maps are based on 50...30m grids, typically, and while we will convert them and add some jitter on top to make it look better, the underlying data don't change. This is a good thing because "compatibility" with older scenarios, and because "manageable file sizes"
Then why the change in the first place?
Because the New Terrain is an enabler for future feature updates. Without it we couldn't even think of tackling the tasks ahead. It's like replacing the plumbing in your home. When you're done, you still have the same lines for water supply and sewage, except that the new ones (hopefully) stop leaking. And we add some connectors for future plumbing work to expand the system, so to speak.

[Rinix]

http://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/11112-sb-pro-pe-4010-released/?do=findComment&comment=165922
I didn't post this for a while because I was trying to decipher if Ssnake meant we're getting the new terrain engine 3 months from now, or if we're getting the new terrain engine next month and a series of performance-improving patches after that:

We are working on improvements, but they will only be released in the next update along with the new terrain. The latest improvements were considered "too experimental" for a public release (we really want to run things by the beta testers first). Like I mentioned on other occasions, this is a long-term task in a way. 4.0. isn't suffering from one specific performance issue, we're bleeding from a thousand papercuts. So we will continue to work on improvements, where most changes will only yield maybe a 10th of a frame per second, as long as we can't identify a specific bottleneck. But of course, a hundred changes here and there bring the framerate up by 10 in that context - and that of course will be noticeable again. Your problem is, I cannot guarantee how fast that will happen, but maybe you wait three more months and try out the next update before committing to a new computer.

[Asid]

Interesting.

eSim should take their time and release when it is stable. There are a lot of unanswered questions concerning the terrain and the affect it will have on our systems. Not to mention mp games. There are a lot of L.O.S. calculations going on.

Thanks for posting this Rinix

[Rinix]

I just ran some rough calculations based on Ssnake's description of how HGT files will be replaced. Take them with a grain of salt:

While I'm at it. Embedding map data in scenario files was a convenient (if wasteful) feature, but it can no longer maintained. We tried, but we had to come to accept the fact that this old, round peg simply won't fit the new square hole, no matter how hard we hammered on it. As a consequence: HGT files need to be converted to LNT. A future upgrade will also bring HNT files to complement LNTs, but initially we don't need them, and that's a good thing, because HNT files can become monstrously huge. Also, for each LNT there's also the need to generate an MMM file (more on that further below).
...
But LNT files are much bigger than their old HGT counterparts, and what's more, each needs a "min max map" (MMM file) which is both large in size and computationally intensive (converting the 1.5 MByte Hannover-Weserbergland height map takes about 39 minutes raw computing time, plus another seven minutes for the navmesh, resulting in about 75 MByte for the LNT, 125 MByte for the MMM; the TER file remains unchanged at about 35 MByte). Fortunately an MMM file (and the navmesh) need to be generated only once for each TER file; there will be no need for a separate navmesh in every scenario file.

Ssnake's figures of 1.5 MB being replaced with 75 MB + 125 MB = 200 MB gives us an file size increase factor of 133.33, which is consistent with what Ssnake has said:

But you are on borrowed time. Once THAT the high resolution terrain comes (Q1/17) changes are inevitable - simply because high resolution terrain inflates file sizes. Not by a factor 500 as the resolution increase suggests, but still enough to make "map distribution via Assembly Hall" a non-starter, given that most people are on DSL connection with substantially slower upload than download speed, and that some people are still on dial-up connections.

When a combined map sizes exceeds 200 MByte, say, and you have 10 connected clients that are all unprepared, you'd need to squeeze 2 GByte through an 1MBit upload stream, which is a four-and-a-half hour process. So, clients will have to come prepared to a game session.

I suggest that you start training your co-players in the six months that you still have to change habits that will be highly disruptive to others in the future (which probably already are disruptive, just not in a crippling way).

The HGT/height maps folder in Steel Beasts 4.010 is currently 184 MB. 133.33 * 184 MB = 24,5327 MB = 24.5327 GB. The installer probably won't be as large as that. Speaking of installers, another piece of evidence pointing to Steel Beasts supersizing itself in the future comes from the fact that Ssnake has decided that he will likely resume DVD orders. DVDs range in capacity from 4.7 GB for a single-layer disc to 8.5 GB for a dual-layer disc.

I don't know if my calculations are correct, but it seems likely that Steel Beasts is going to increase its size by some amount.

[Asid]

Ssnake has decided that he will likely resume DVD orders[/url]. DVDs range in capacity from 4.7 GB for a single-layer disc to 8.5 GB for a dual-layer disc.

I don't know if my calculations are correct, but it seems likely that Steel Beasts is going to increase its size by some amount.

Why not put it on a USB drive?

Interesting calculations Rinix. Hopefully it will not kill frame rates when the new map is used.

[Rinix]

Why not put it on a USB drive?

Interesting calculations Rinix. Hopefully it will not kill frame rates when the new map is used.

Probably cost. Let's assume that the installer is 24 GB in total, and take all media prices from the US electronics retailer Newegg. A 32 GB USB 2.0 drive goes for a little as USD 4.99; its USB 3.0 equivalent goes for as little as USD 8.95. A 20-pack of Verbatim DVD+R DLs (dual-layer DVD discs) goes for USD 24.52, or 0.82 per disc. Since 24 GB would require 3 DVD+R DLs, the total price for them is USD 2.46. I can't find a USB drive on Newegg that can match that cost. And if one is willing to trust Smartbuy, one can get a 50-pack of DVD+R DLs for USD 21.60, or 0.43 per disc/1.29 for 3 discs.

If the installer size is 17 GB or less in total, then only 2 DVD+R DLs are needed. Let's not forget Blu-ray as an option. Even a 24 GB installer would fit on a single BD-R. Prices for 50-packs of BD-Rs are as low as USD 20.99. And there are BD-R DL (dual-layer Blu-ray discs) that can hold up to 50 GB each.

Then again, getting a third party involved will increase production cost per disc. Buying even basic disc duplicators would require an up-front investment of a few hundred USD, and would require eSim Games to do the duplication themselves. They may not have the manpower or time to do it themselves.

As for framerates, Ssnake's mech infantry trailer for Steel Beasts 4.0 didn't show major slowdowns in frame rate at 1080p and 60 FPS, though it did have microstutter. I'm not sure what his computer's specs are.

[Rinix]

Another thing that would point towards the SB installer being significantly larger is that Ssnake felt compelled to say this alongside his talk about how HGT files would be replaced:

No. I can't yet tell you how large, exactly, the 4.0 installation will be, or how large the download will be. Once that I have reliable data I will post them.

[Rinix]

As for framerates, Ssnake's mech infantry trailer for Steel Beasts 4.0 didn't show major slowdowns in frame rate at 1080p and 60 FPS, though it did have microstutter. I'm not sure what his computer's specs are.

I managed to find where Ssnake mentions his specs. He's running an unnamed Intel Core i7 at 3.5 GHz, and a GTX 980. The i7 has to be an i7-4770K, given that he was talking about having a new computer in July 2013, the i7-4770K had just been released, and it ran at 3.5 GHz at stock.