Hi all!I'm working on a complex scenery with thousand of High Voltage towers and telephone poles. First I used objects from FS2004 Library Objects, but the fps was too low. Now I use self gmax designed objects. I get better fps, but anyway there are too low. My objects are designed with gmax using LOD method. I also tested a sample object (a gmax cube) without LOD definitions tweaked by MDLTweaker using a low view distance. But the fps is always too low!!!I verified that the low fps are caused by the number of objects placed in the scenery, independently if they are visible or not. The best example is this: if I use 1000 gmax cubes with a very low visible distance, the fps are the same if I don't apply visible restrictions to these objects. W H Y ????????There is an alternative method to get better performances with gmax objects? There is another program to design objects with much better performances?Thanx, Aqui

Hi Aqui.What you discovered is true. Visible or not, the number of polygons will be the greatest factor in reducing FPS. The objects, textures, and positions are all still in memory, and must be accounted for in the sim. Using different LODs may actually increase the memory load, as the total number of polygons would rise.I have not tested this, but it may be worth a try.Arno's website has the discussion and files to kill the shadow of objects... that will save some FPS. There is also a discussion of limiting the distance of objects... not LOD, but actual refpoint distance.Also, if the objects are made using colors, rather than textures, it may help.And, the crashbox could be removed from the objects, as well.Dick

Hi Dick,thank you for the answer. About the refpoint distance, I have already tested it using MDLTweaker. But the fps is the same of a visible object.What is "crashbox" ?AQUI

Hi Aqui.If you use MDLCommander to allow the options of MakeMDL, then you should be able to deselect Crash option. This stops the creation of the crashbox.Dick

Hi Aqui,How did you place all those objects? Maybe that code can be optimized further as well.

>Hi Aqui.>>If you use MDLCommander to allow the options of MakeMDL, then>you should be able to deselect Crash option. This stops the>creation of the crashbox.>>DickWhat is the crashbox?

>Hi Aqui,>>How did you place all those objects? Maybe that code can be>optimized further as well.Hi Arno!I place the objects by a XML file like this:<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?> ......

The code that checks if your plane has hit your object and should thus crash.

OK, so each object has it's own SceneryObject command. Not much you can do to optimize that further I guess.

I'll try to disable crashbox.Thank you!

I think I will design telephone poles with two methods:1) For low performance PCs the Telephone poles will be custom houses with flat roof, 0.2 x 0.2 metres base and 7 metres height. I can place 595 poles per 25kmq2) For high end PCs the Telephone poles will be gmax objects.Thank you.RegardsAqui

>Hi Aqui.>>If you use MDLCommander to allow the options of MakeMDL, then>you should be able to deselect Crash option. This stops the>creation of the crashbox.>>DickThe fps is too low also with crashbox disabled.

Better yet make the "houses" three sided and reduce the polys even more.

How can I create a three sided "house"? Pheraps with a MultiSidedBuilding with three buildingSides? In this case, if I enable smoothing, the fps goes down or not?ThanxAQUI

Hi Arno,DickI also have this problem with my project. I don't think that the number of polygons is the cause because using a simple model or a more complex model has no effect.I have tried substituting all my models with a non textured simple plane (as low poly as you can get) and still the FPS plummits. My theory is that it is the sheer number of objects that FS must keep track of position that brings the FPS down.Do you think this can be cured by upgrading cpu/memory or is it more likely an FS9 issue that cannot be solved by throwing new hardware at it?I think that this is a very important problem to discuss and if possible solve.Vincent