I'll try do some more video recordings since it gives a way to actually look back and see what was going on when I glitched. I determined one of the things is that, I click outside of the canvas when creating a shape of some sort, and would like it to stick there instead of then following me when I move my hand and click somewhere else, creating a point on the closest part of the canvas.
I look forward to seeing what the new release will be like and definitely understand you can't apply all the feedback immediately.
Dayum. I didn't even know it was possible to get a computer with 64gb RAM. You're obviously on the cutting edge and investing a serious amount of cash into your setup in that case (presumably as a publisher doing intense digital work it made sense and was a business expense?) and I doubt there's going to be many people here who can match your machine for power. I just got Windows 10 this year, and 16 gigs of RAM. You're definitely on the upper end of the bell curve, probably somewhere a bit below "Disney's rendering power" and "military computers".
I appreciate that the program uses a minimal amount of RAM while performing as powerfully as it does, and I believe many other average computer users will feel the same way. There are tons of people using laptops with 4-8gb because they never put their machine through rigorous artistic tasks who still might want to make a map, so putting its performance right in the realm of "average joe" makes a lot of sense to me. I can see why that would make it no good for your team though, and it looks like you do more of a 3D sort of art style so it makes sense why you'd want more RAM.
I wouldn't mind tapping into more of my RAM but I never had any moments where I felt the program was moving slower than I could think.
Edit: Ran it through a 20x30 map last night and definitely started seeing performance hangups at that size.