What's your cpu exactly? because seems that you are cpu bottlenecked. Dont bother to buy a new gpu, it will do no diference. I have a a i7 920 at 3,7ghz (quad core), 10GB ram, then upgraded a gtx580 to gtx1060, and there is absolutely no diference in the framerate. More than 30 players and bye performance, i play in low settings 1080p, lowering to 720p can help a little bit. And yes, its UE4, also have BF:armada who runs on same engine and have performance issues too. Meanwhile can play SW: Battlefront at ultra without problems.
this also brings up a point ive never fully understood. to me this project always seemed to be on two different legs in almost every aspect. it isnt mmo yet it is massive, it isnt a fps yet it is 3rdperson more shooter than rpg-ish like. etc. same with visuals: they wanna aim for large playerbattles yet also have stunning visual candy for their cosmetics etc. just in its sheer vision it doesnt make sense. the goals the game sets for itself or claims it does makes it look like a drunk driver that goes from left to right zigzagging over the road, where it will end is anyone's guess. my natural instinct or reaction would be: step on the brakes and lets reassses where the hell we are with this, and maybe cut some things out instead of throwing even more stuff into the chaos. balance is all over the place, whats next? entire new class. its just..chaos.
i5 4460 3.2ghz edit: keep in mind im not expecting to have smooth experiences when in harkus with both teams full. im reasonable in my expectations. this current hardware has run skirmishes smooth and thats not unreasonable to expect. that i cant run full fortress on high settings and 60fps is my own issue cos of my hardware.
Funny you should say that, because GW4 uses UE4, which shows what it's capable of. Would I still have bought EC on UE3 or Unity? Absolutely. Would I choose UE3 over UE4 for development? Nope. You're still missing out on so much potential.
Stop blaming the engine. I was playing the "new" Unreal Tournament made on the UE4 more than a year ago, it was in alpha and it ran perfectly fine with zero bugs, it's also the best looking game I've played, ever. SFV is also made on UE4 and it's stable. In the end it all boils down to how experienced and talented the devs are.
DW runs like shit. Dreadnought runs like shit. BFG armada runs like shit. Heavy Gear Assault runs like shit. UT4 actually runs like shit when you're playing on an actually finished map instead of placeholder stuff. Paragon runs like shit. What do all of those games have in common? On top of every one of those games having less going on screen than EC. I can run Doom at 1440p maxed out at over 100fps. Each of those games 70-80 at best, often dipping into the 40s. The engine has problems, and everyone developing with it is running into those problems.
Visuals. Uh... something about it being good for online shooters or something. Premade assets? Thats.. basically it really. Nothing really makes U4 a superior engine other than its basic lighting effects.
Have a look at the list of games made using Unreal Engine over the years and it may answer your question.
Intense convo, my specs are fx 8350 and r390, 16gb ram " not sure type but decent" and I get anywhere from 40-60 fps on most maps but fortresses. Most games hate amd but I don't think it's too bad granted I suspect the current engine version has its flaws which also causes issues. On bright side it's not worse than armas
