Kyrub,
I did not use Animate Dead or Call lightning at all.
I did not use Animate Dead or Call lightning at all.
|
MoM bugs reports (to do list)
|
|
Regarding Dosbox:
Thank you for the idea. Overall it helped. I found the following: 1. It is best to find a CPU usage just below 100% for single or below 50% for dual CPU. Being equal to max also causes performance problems. Try to watch the CPU usage for about 30 seconds and it should be constantly under, but close to max. 2. CPU usage sky rockets during diplomacy and spell casting. On my computer I had 130,000 cycles first, but only 90,000 during diplomacy. Since we usually spend little time doing diplomacy and spell casting I recommend a bit below the higher setting for continuous play. You can also hear the music breaking up when CPU usage is maxed out, so scale back a bit in this case. 3. Turning music off from settings did not appear to help more. I did not try to install with no sound option though. 4. Overall comparison with my old HP: I do not know yet, but appear to be close now. I will do further testing. Thanks. To Kyrub: For debugging the crash: I occasionally also get âVortex.lbx [entry 0] has been corruptedâ message.
v1.40h
Bug: Haste on items works strangely. When viewing the hero, the haste icon is not darkened like what usually happens with item-imbued enchantments, and it gives the hero an outline/shimmer a non-item enchantment usually gives. The AI sees this as a non-item enchantment and tries to dispel it in combat a lot. The game will even say "Haste dispelled" occasionally, but the enchantment is not actually dispelled if you look at the hero.
1. I performed testing of MoM speed with the recommended âoptimalâ Dosbox settings on my Vista (with DosBox), XP (with DosBox), and Win98 without Dosbox. My conclusion is that XP gives about +5% time penalty and Vista gives about +10% penalty on the top of the Win98 speed.
2. More importantly, in Vista I was not able to go above 14% CPU usage due to whatever OS restrictions. It displayed available CPU resources at 86% and refused to give more than 14% to Dosbox. Only 2 processors. 3. On the highest level of importance, I would like to report my bad experience with the user interface on both XP and Vista, with large 25 â 27 inch monitors. Although the mouse works perfectly for other applications including other games, for MoM it takes far more efforts to control, especially clicking the bottom right âOKâ button on the city screen is just too difficult and makes my hand hurt after about 30 clicks. On old 15â monitor with Win98 (without Dosbox) this problem is much less noticeable. I think that this should be the priority within user interface improvements. I hope that the root cause is the 320x200 resolution and not DosBox or other reasons. I did not test XP or Vista with small monitor. If someone is interested in testing UI further then get an old computer with old OS and a small monitor and play MoM then repeat the same moves on the same monitor with a new computer and OS. Play both computers at least 5 times, the more the better (the exact same moves over and over again). Time yourself and try to maximize your own speed on both computers. Do not make up your mind one way or the other before or during data collection, I want clean data. Do not try to make one comp beat the other. Send me time results and I will tell you if the findings are significant. I timed myself on predefined specific sequence of actions, mostly city clicks, each taking about 1:45 minutes so my results are quantified. I havenât done statistical ANOVA yet, but I think that my findings are close to be significant at the 0.05 level. WhiteMage Wrote:3. On the highest level of importance, I would like to report my bad experience with the user interface on both XP and Vista, with large 25 – 27 inch monitors. Although the mouse works perfectly for other applications including other games, for MoM it takes far more efforts to control, especially clicking the bottom right “OK” button on the city screen is just too difficult and makes my hand hurt after about 30 clicks. On old 15” monitor with Win98 (without Dosbox) this problem is much less noticeable. I think that this should be the priority within user interface improvements. I hope that the root cause is the 320x200 resolution and not DosBox or other reasons. I did not test XP or Vista with small monitor.Odd. If I understood correctly the 320x200 resolution looks too pixelated and ugly on 25-27 inch monitors? If this is the case, I'd recommend rendering mode of HQ2X, HQ3X or HQ4X in DOSBox. It should make buttons, texts et cetera far better looking without blur. By default DOSBox scales resolution with Nearest Neighbour scaling, which is well ... limited. If you are using front-end such as D-Fend Reloaded, the rendering options can be found by clicking the game properties. Personally I prefer windowed mode. But it sounds like your mouse movements are slow? EDIT: Oh wait, so with such high resolution DOSBox works too slow now that it is limited under 20% CPU. Vista 64-bit? Cant help much with Vista issues since I got W7 now. b0rsuk Wrote:4. Something is seriously wrong with Dispel/Disenchant spells ! It seems that a similar problem touches (apart from Invulnerability) the possession on a unit. That must be pretty annoying if true. Did anybody ever tried to dispel a possessed unit, with a success? kyrub Wrote:It seems that a similar problem touches (apart from Invulnerability) the possession on a unit. That must be pretty annoying if true. Did anybody ever tried to dispel a possessed unit, with a success? I only remember that I tried a number of times with Dispel Magic True without success. I had another type of problem with Guardian Wind, that is, dispelling works, but the unit still has missiles immunity. It sort of made me give up on Dispel Magic type of spells.
--I like ILSe
|
