Currently on my computer i can only run starcraft 2 at the lowest graphics settings.
I am getting a new computer with a better video card that will most likely support higher settings.
My question is: What is the best mixture of graphics settings that will provide me with a nice visual with a low performance cost?
I am basically asking for which options have the best visual effect/performance ratio and where is a good point to draw the line on this ratio.
Also, I have read about tweaking SC2 graphics by manually editting the variables.txt file. Is this allowed by Blizzard & Battle.net and if so which options in here should be considered for altering?
Thanks
EDIT: Since this question seems to be based on the computer (I was looking for lowend, midend, highend options) Here is my machine:
CPU: Intel i5-2500K
GPU: ASUS Radeon HD 6850
RAM: 4GB DDR3 1600-MHz GSkill
HDD: 7200 RPM 1TB Drive
Feel free to direct your answers towards this machine (I dont know if this is considered high, mid, or low end)
Best Answer
I don't know about a comprehensive guide, but I have a few suggestions.
First, as background, every setting is going to be geared towards balancing two different (and diametrically opposed) optimizations--that of speed in calculation, and size in memory. For instance, your texture quality, and to a lesser extent, model quality, will have a large memory usage with relatively minimal processing imprints, whereas your physics, shadows, and reflections will be rough on the CPU/GPU but in some cases have absolutely microscopic memory footprint. I'll call this Speed vs Size.
Your Size-heavy settings are going to increase load times between levels and eat up RAM, which would slow down other processes, but we'll assume you're running SC2 by itself. Your Speed-heavy settings are going to affect your FPS the most, and also have the most wow-factor.
So with that in mind, whenever I have to turn my graphics down because I'm playing tug-of-war (I usually run on Extreme:D ) I default everything to medium and then turn texture quality to high, shaders to high, reflections off, particle effects to low, physics to low, and Model Detail to high. If you hover your mouse over each option it will detail out what it does, and you can usually tell whether it will be more of a Speed sacrifice or a Size sacrifice, and if it's not clear-cut it's a mix of the two.
I did a test to show the difference, this is a shot of a replay on ultra, and this is a shot with the above settings. I started the match with about 80 fps on ultra and about 130 on the frugal settings, and around this point (tons of marauders, roaches, marines, and carriers) I was running around 40-50 on ultra and around 60-70 on frugal. As you can see, there's not a whole lot of difference in the stills, but it was noticeable enough--you can see the lack of motion trails on the interceptors, for example, and some of the explosions weren't as spectacular.
You shouldn't have a problem with that machine, but if you do, you can try these settings as a starting point, or try setting the various Speed settings even lower. You probably won't have to put the texture or model quality lower, as in general that will just affect load times and not so much the calculations.