Big fights

[Phystus]

Attached is a screen shot from tonight's session. We're gaming out a battle, there's currently 155 creatures in the combat tracker (most of them NPC spellcasters).

Understandably, FG was getting a bit slow with that many casters in the CT. Has anybody tried more creatures than that?

~P

11321

[Blahness98]

I think I loaded the CT with 200+ non casters. It took a while, but it did load.. I wouldn't suggest it though.

[Ken L]

Good god. At that point you start using mass combat rules, or start hand-waving things with victory point conditions.

[JohnD]

Is this something that would be impacted by system specs?

[damned]

Good god. At that point you start using mass combat rules, or start hand-waving things with victory point conditions.

Hehehe - that size combat is not for me! Im with you!


Is this something that would be impacted by system specs?

Yes and also on the architecture of FG and probably of the XML database too.

[Phystus]

Good god. At that point you start using mass combat rules, or start hand-waving things with victory point conditions.

We actually are using mass combat rules! About 20 of those CT entries are really units of 100 troops each. This is the beginning of the first battle of a war. Tough monsters (there are 16 ogre magi, 16 fire giants, and 28 hill giants) and spellcasters get individual entries (as does each party member, of course), but the mooks come in lots of 100.

We did several playtests of the mass combat rules (we're running D&D 3.5, using these (https://olddungeonmaster.wordpress.com/2012/12/30/dd-wars-mass-combat-rules/) mass combat rules, plus a few house rules). What we found was that the side with more spellcasters will likely win if they're allowed to directly participate, so you end up with a preliminary battle between the mages, sort of like air power in modern warfare.

The whole thing would be a bookkeeping nightmare if we didn't have FG's effects to help keep track of everything. It should be pretty epic if FG holds up!

~P

[Phystus]

Is this something that would be impacted by system specs?

I suspect so. FG quit responding several times as I would load groups of casters into the CT, but it always came back eventually. As a result we only got through 1 round on Sunday, but now that all the combatants are loaded up I'm hoping it will go faster. I had Resource Monitor running too, and it showed FG using 1.6 GB of memory, so in theory at least I should be OK. I guess we'll see.

~P

[Trenloe]

I suspect so. FG quit responding several times as I would load groups of casters into the CT, but it always came back eventually.
This is the most intensive as FG copies the whole PC/NPC record into the combat tracker database, the larger the record the longer FG takes to do the copy. Spellcasters generally have very large database records.


I had Resource Monitor running too, and it showed FG using 1.6 GB of memory, so in theory at least I should be OK. I guess we'll see.
If you're running a 64-bit operating system you should be fine (as FG will work up to around 3.5GB of memory use). If you're running on a 32-bit system then you probably can't go much higher than 1.6/1.7GB without starting to experience issues.

[JohnD]

Attached is a screen shot from tonight's session. We're gaming out a battle, there's currently 155 creatures in the combat tracker (most of them NPC spellcasters).

Understandably, FG was getting a bit slow with that many casters in the CT. Has anybody tried more creatures than that?

~P

11321
Curious; what are those silhouetted circles on the right side of your desktop?

[Trenloe]

Curious; what are those silhouetted circles on the right side of your desktop?
They are minimized window. Right-click -> Minimize.

[Phystus]

They are minimized window. Right-click -> Minimize.

Exactly. Those are all NPC's - my players were running the friendly spell casters so I couldn't close them.

[Trenloe]

Those are all NPC's - my players were running the friendly spell casters so I couldn't close them.
Once you've closed them the players can double-click on the token on the map and the NPC sheet will open for them. You don't need to keep them all open on your side.

[Phystus]

We finally got together again, and you're right, everyone was able to open the NPC's by double-clicking.

They were also able to perform the CAST functions with spells, and apply the effects and damage from the spells. So that was great.

Only thing was, they couldn't actually mark the spells as cast (check them off). Any ideas?

~P

[Trenloe]

Only thing was, they couldn't actually mark the spells as cast (check them off). Any ideas?
Whereas the players can access the NPC records they can't change them - they're read only to the players. Only the GM can make changes to NPC records.

[Phystus]

Bummer. So I guess I'll have to keep all the NPC records open after all. Thanks!

[Trenloe]

Bummer. So I guess I'll have to keep all the NPC records open after all.
Keeping the NPC records open won't change the access that the players have - it will still be read only for all but the GM. You, the GM, can open the records tied to the combat tracker (either from the combat tracker or by double-clicking on the token) and make changes to the record if you wish, but the players can't make changes to these records.

[Phystus]

I understood your point about player's access the first time you said it. But if I have to update the NPC every time they cast a spell (basically every round since that's what they're there for) then I may as well keep them minimized on the desktop.

[Tuatara]

Oh man, that many in a combat tracker.

How long was each round?!

[Phystus]

About an hour to an hour and a quarter per round. It would go a bit quicker but a couple of my players haven't grasped the concept of deciding what to do during someone else's turn. There has been some attrition so it should start to speed up a little.

Maybe I should target the slowpokes first? :D