March 6th Update on Patch Status

[dslyecxi 23]

Well, i might be wrong then..i probably missed that VON poll. But well, my assumptions are not based on "thin air". I based my post on what the clan that i am part of things about it, about how a big part of our regulars thinks about it, and about how a big part of IC community thinks about it. If i sum up, that is close to 250 ppl. So i might be as wrong as you are now.

I can only assume that you and the people you refer to simply do not understand what VON allows for compared to TS. Out of the entirety of ShackTac, I can't think of anyone in our group who hasn't found VON to add a fantastic additional level of communication to our gaming. I think any other groups that even attempt to be a fraction as organized will benefit similarly from what VON brings to the table. For public servers in particular it allows for a great ease-of-use, allowing for simple, logical communication without having to worry about connecting to a Teamspeak server. The "direct speaking" mode is something that simply cannot be matched by Teamspeak, no matter how badly you wish it could be.

The nice thing, though, is that I don't have to really sell it to you - it's been developed, and you can either use it or not. No loss to me if you choose it ignore it, but every gain to me when ShackTac employs it. We've had some amazing sessions already using it, not to mention taking advantage of it to have experiences that are not possible with TS-only - the perfect example being our paratrooper missions.

I must say, the thought of the entire IC-ArmA group purportedly not being able to see the benefit of VON is surprising. I guess there's a level of fluid comms-related teamwork that the group is not interested in pursuing. Pity. I wonder if other tournament groups like ToW are more in tune with what VON allows? You do speak for almost all of IC-ArmA, correct? One must assume so when someone says that a "big part" of a 250-person group has a single opinion on one matter. Unless "big part", in fact, turns out to not be so big as you're vaguely implying...

[PuFu 4600]

Well, i might be wrong then..i probably missed that VON poll. But well, my assumptions are not based on "thin air". I based my post on what the clan that i am part of things about it, about how a big part of our regulars thinks about it, and about how a big part of IC community thinks about it. If i sum up, that is close to 250 ppl. So i might be as wrong as you are now.

I can only assume that you and the people you refer to simply do not understand what VON allows for compared to TS. Out of the entirety of ShackTac, I can't think of anyone in our group who hasn't found VON to add a fantastic additional level of communication to our gaming. I think any other groups that even attempt to be a fraction as organized will benefit similarly from what VON brings to the table. For public servers in particular it allows for a great ease-of-use, allowing for simple, logical communication without having to worry about connecting to a Teamspeak server. The "direct speaking" mode is something that simply cannot be matched by Teamspeak, no matter how badly you wish it could be.

The nice thing, though, is that I don't have to really sell it to you - it's been developed, and you can either use it or not. No loss to me if you choose it ignore it, but every gain to me when ShackTac employs it. We've had some amazing sessions already using it, not to mention taking advantage of it to have experiences that are not possible with TS-only - the perfect example being our paratrooper missions.

I must say, the thought of the entire IC-ArmA group purportedly not being able to see the benefit of VON is surprising. I guess there's a level of fluid comms-related teamwork that the group is not interested in pursuing. Pity. I wonder if other tournament groups like ToW are more in tune with what VON allows?

I did not say that VON will not be used if it will be there and it will work. I also agree that it could indeed bring the ease of use to the public, without the need of TS. Some features are not matched by TS, like the Direct Speaking. But what i have seen so far, did not impressed me. I am not arguing with its use, i am arguing with its priority - as far as i remember i said "it is not a priority for the community (and i meant for the community that i am part of) - it is a BIS priority. In my opinion and in those that i quoted there are more important things to be fixed. But yet again, the groups that i am talking about are using TS, have access to it and have developed their comms accordingly.

Regarding the IC-Arma, i feel that it's hard, and not only for them, to be fully aware of how this can enhance the comms, at it never really worked so far ( 1.09 was tested, because of it's limited capability to work with 50+ players, the lack of linux dedicated server and the poor implementation of VON, it has been denyed untill a proper patch would be released).

For this kind of community, other aspects have a priority over VON. I am surprise that this is so hard to understand. One of the problems is the high number of players and the limited BIS support. I know for example that logs and statistics were sent to BIS, showing that it's possible to achieve allmost-lag free games with twice of what it's written on the box, but the replays were hardly interested in this kind of free beta test for a feature game.

As a conclusion, I think no one is against VON, not even me, or its future usage, but most of us would have preferred the team (probably limited in numbers) to focus first on other aspects of this game that needs to be addressed.

[dslyecxi 23]

Quote[/b] ] i said "it is not a priority for the community (and i meant for the community that i am part of)

The community you are a part of != "The Community". An aspect of it, yes, but referring to it as "the community" is misleading unless you clarify it like you just did (which you did not do previously).

Quote[/b] ] i am talking about are using TS, have access to it and have developed their comms accordingly.

We use TS and have used it since OFP. We've been operating at platoon strength for awhile and have set up appropriate comms (as detailed in our TTP, which many others have based off of). VON has a very significant place even with good TS structure.

Quote[/b] ]Regarding the IC-Arma, i feel that it's hard, and not only for them, to be fully aware of how this can enhance the comms, at it never really worked so far

It doesn't take in-game usage to figure out how the VON applies. Knowledge of how the Direct Speaking function works is sufficient to figure out how at least one major aspect of VON can be harnessed for communication/coordination purposes. If you need clarification on this, let me know. We've been running VON at platoon strength for awhile now and are quite familiar with how it operates and what it brings.

Quote[/b] ]One of the problems is the high number of players and the limited BIS support. I know for example that logs and statistics were sent to BIS, showing that it's possible to achieve allmost-lag free games with twice of what it's written on the box, but the replays were hardly interested in this kind of free beta test for a feature game.

"Limited BIS support"? What are you wanting? You sent stuff in showing that you can play with more than the quoted (aka: supported) number of players. What were you expecting in return that you didn't get?

Quote[/b] ]As a conclusion, I think no one is against VON, not even me, or its future usage, but most of us would have preferred the team (probably limited in numbers) to focus first on other aspects of this game that needs to be addressed.

What would you rather see that isn't there, and is a reasonable development option for ArmA1? I'd be interested to hear your opinion of something that would approach the payoff of VON development insofar as the entire community is concerned.

[96D 0]

As a conclusion, I think no one is against VON, not even me, or its future usage, but most of us would have preferred the team (probably limited in numbers) to focus first on other aspects of this game that needs to be addressed.

And you think they aren't, that VON is to blame for the patch not being out yet? It's like you think BIS is holding off on developing this wonderful silver-bullet patch full of fixes and optimizations and fast cars and easy women and all your wildest dreams coming true just to work on VON functionality.

It may just seem to be a throwaway feature to you, but it's a major part of what BIS is trying to do with ArmA. Also, look at it another way: thanks to portability, much of the progress made in ArmA development will carry on into ArmA 2.

The bottom line is that VON is being given attention, and no amount of mentioning how little it benefits you personally will change that. You can either make use of a feature provided or keep on folding your arms and scowling at it.

[Inkompetent 0]

Also, since ArmA2 is becoming a multi-platform game where they don't use TeamSpeak I'm quite sure they are eager to get a working VON done. See it like this: The more we get done in ArmA, the more we get done in ArmA2.

The VON has do be done *some* time, so why not do it and bug-test it at PC since it is wanted and there anyway, rather than remove it (since it's broken) and then re-introduce it in ArmA2?

The only thing I think is sad with the next patch is that we don't get a full patch in between, since a new beta patch will keep splitting the community, and will keep us without a new Linux server even longer. Aside from that I can't see anything bad in the amount of work put into the next patch at all. It's not like it's small fixes in, but large things that requires a humongous amount of work to get working properly.

Edit:

Just saw 96D said pretty much what I did, and that if anything says that making big, serious patches fixing critical stuff isn't bad (i.e. VON, out of memory crashes, etc)

[Noraf 0]

and we did get some interesting news over here today :

Quote[/b] ]Ondřej Španěl    :

What this brings to ArmA is that the internal file cache, which is sized  between 100 - 500 MB depending on how much RAM you have in your system (or depending on what -maxmem command line argument you use), is now using almost no virtual space at all. Those several hundreds MBs seem to be enough to keep the rest of the system happy. So far it seems to have fixed the infamous "Cannot allocate system memory surface" on almost all systems we have tested, without having to limit the memory used by the game.

Available to You in the Nearest Patch

This memory handling will be published in the upcoming 1.11 patch, and I hope you will like it as much as I do.

so, it seems like they got that fixed now ( not a big deal for me, never happened here,   but a hudge showstopper for others ), and if von gets better too, i say    

[Inkompetent 0]

Yay! That's fantastic news! I crash because of that over and over and and over again, and I'll probably even be able to go over "Medium" texture resolution now, with my 640MB graphics card that I can't use to even half it's memory capacity at thew current moment! (which kind'a made me very sad, but better late than never!

[mattxr 9]

Yeah im am quite scared with the new beta being a beta.. we will have 1.08 users, 1.09 users, 1.11 users.. maybe dont call it a better and things will look up.. Most of us using 1.09 cant bare to go back to 1.08 without loads of problems but i think people who switched to 1.09 will move up to 1.11 but the people still on 1.08 i don't no what they will do and its them who have most of the players..

Well lets only hope the 1.08ins switch with the new patch.. or there will still be few players with the new patch in scale to whats playing 1.08

[maddogx 13]

Yeah im am quite scared with the new beta being a beta.. we will have 1.08 users, 1.09 users, 1.11 users.. maybe dont call it a better and things will look up.. Most of us using 1.09 cant bare to go back to 1.08 without loads of problems but i think people who switched to 1.09 will move up to 1.11 but the people still on 1.08 i don't no what they will do and its them who have most of the players..

Well lets only hope the 1.08ins switch with the new patch.. or there will still be few players with the new patch in scale to whats playing 1.08

I like to think of the upcoming beta more as a release candidate than a beta. I'm also pretty sure all current users of 1.09b will switch to 1.11b, while an uncertain amount of 1.08 users might consider it too, if it does not contain any major bugs.

Then you're left with the people who never install anything that has the word "beta" in it, who will stick to 1.08. All in all, I believe the current divide will shift more toward the newest beta version until the patch is finally released.

[Inkompetent 0]

I don't think the issue with people sticking with 1.08 is only an issue about people reluctant switching to stuff that works better than what they use but with a "Beta"-label on it, but that it also is about servers.

Many servers runs on Linux, and with no Linux server being released for 1.09b they can't switch. Thus, the people that wants to play on those servers don't switch either, and we're left with a big chunk of 1.08-people.

[whisper 0]

I don't think the issue with people sticking with 1.08 is only an issue about people reluctant switching to stuff that works better than what they use but with a "Beta"-label on it, but that it also is about servers.

Many servers runs on Linux, and with no Linux server being released for 1.09b they can't switch. Thus, the people that wants to play on those servers don't switch either, and we're left with a big chunk of 1.08-people.

QFE.

The linux should not be left behind

After all, it has to be beta tested as well

[binkster 0]

What is weird is that if I have 2 sticks of ram side by side the incorrect way, ArmA will play fine. But if I put my 2 sticks in the correct way in every other slot (i guess dual channel) then arma will freeze after about 20min of play. Hope fully I will be able to run my sticks the correct way after this patch.

[rstratton 0]

What is weird is that if I have 2 sticks of ram side by side the incorrect way, ArmA will play fine. But if I put my 2 sticks in the correct way in every other slot (i guess dual channel) then arma will freeze after about 20min of play. Hope fully I will be able to run my sticks the correct way after this patch.

odd

[SlipperyJim 0]

A poll was done by such a poster, thinking that there was no community interest in VON. The results of the poll were OVERWHELMINGLY supportive of VON being fixed, when obviously he had hoped to prove that there was not any community interest.

Your conclusions about this poll are extremely opinionated and most likely completely wrong. A forum poll only reflects the hardcore crowd that visits this forum. In no way was it scientific and in no way can you think it reflects all of Arma's players. The majority of people who play Arma NEVER visit this forum.

Only 190 people responded to the poll. It is safe to say that more than 190 copies of Arma were sold. From the hardcore crowd that DO visit this forum over 30% of the people said they don't care about Arma's VON. What are the real numbers when you take into account all of Arma's players and not just the fanatics that visit this forum? Most gamers are casual players that have no interest in reading or visiting forums.

[W0lle 1050]

Whatever you read from the poll results, BIS works on further improvements on it until it is working as intended.

No ranting and no poll can stop that. And if the majority of servers still using teamspeak and not the improvements VON offers, well that's their fault then I would say.

[SlipperyJim 0]

No ranting and no poll can stop that.

W0lle, who ever said they should stop work on the patch?! Amazing how you can twist this into such a negative characterization.

There is only one thing I have been critical about BIS and Arma and that is how freaking long it is taking them to get the patch out the door so that the massive security hole is closed that allows kids to run client-side scripts.

Is it so bad to say something like this? One year to patch the biggest security hole I have ever seen since I started multiplayer gaming.

I called Dslyecxi a fanboy not to simply insult him but because the term actually applied. He attacks anyone even mildly critical of how BIS is handling this patch. His dedication to the game is admirable but are we less of a fan of the game because we complain that the patch is taking too long?

I love Arma but it is pretty useless to have a multi-player game that is abandoned because everyone has moved on. Perhaps we should not buy Arma 2 and just wait until Arma 3 is released and has more fixes applied??

[dslyecxi 23]

I called Dslyecxi a fanboy not to simply insult him but because the term actually applied. He attacks anyone even mildly critical of how BIS is handling this patch. His dedication to the game is admirable but are we less of a fan of the game because we complain that the patch is taking too long?

Thank you kindly for misrepresenting my comments so completely.

[W0lle 1050]

No ranting and no poll can stop that.

W0lle, who ever said they should stop work on the patch?! Amazing how you can twist this into such a negative characterization.

No one said that (here), and it wasn't my intention to point at someone.

However there were a few posts in the past saying that BIS should abandon that VON which actually no one is using and focus on other things to fix instead.

We all would like to see the patch released tomorrow. It's been a long time since the last patch release, but on the other hand:

If BIS release the next patch in a hurry to please a few and it contains major bugs then exactly these group of people is the first to cry and scream.

It takes time and a lot of testing to make sure the next patch is a milestone, but once it will be released I hope a lot of people will be satisfied then.

[norrin 9]

There is only one thing I have been critical about BIS and Arma and that is how freaking long it is taking them to get the patch out the door so that the massive security hole is closed that allows kids to run client-side scripts.

Is it so bad to say something like this? One year to patch the biggest security hole I have ever seen since I started multiplayer gaming.

I've only just starting reading this discussion and I understand why you're saying this and the problems it can cause in the wrong hands but surely client sided scripting is one of the most powerful features of ArmA.

Its my understanding that it not only reduces server load by distributing processor workload onto the client's PCs but it also allows individual client specific functions to be run that would be inefficient to run on the server and that are not needed by other players.

Without this bug half the scripting I do would not be possible.

[Mr_Tea 0]

No one said that (here), and it wasn't my intention to point at someone.

However there were a few posts in the past saying that BIS should abandon that VON which actually no one is using and focus on other things to fix instead.

We all would like to see the patch released tomorrow. It's been a long time since the last patch release, but on the other hand:

If BIS release the next patch in a hurry to please a few and it contains major bugs then exactly these group of people is the first to cry and scream.

It takes time and a lot of testing to make sure the next patch is a milestone, but once it will be released I hope a lot of people will be satisfied then.

If someone complains about bugs introduced by an beta-patch, he should not use it.

Sure BIS can work forever on the next patch, but they give us beta-patches and not only final ones.

In don`t need a milestone, a few yards will do it for the moment.

[shinRaiden 0]

I called Dslyecxi a fanboy not to simply insult him but because the term actually applied. He attacks anyone even mildly critical of how BIS is handling this patch. His dedication to the game is admirable but are we less of a fan of the game because we complain that the patch is taking too long?

Thank you kindly for misrepresenting my comments so completely.

As this thread is spiraling into the oblivion of becoming a slap-fight over whining about subjects of which the posters have absolutely no basis in reality over, I hereby add my cheese to the spilled whine and exercise my tenured prerogative to have an exclusive monopoly on being annoyed with Dslyexci for strictly private reasons which must not be named here. All in jest, things are going reasonably swimmingly.

The facts of public knowledge are these :

1 - BIS is continuing to support ArmA, and is still working on 'a' patch for ArmA. It could reasonablely be argued that the scope and scale of the engine re-work in the patch are substantially more than what was projected, although observed impact may be less to those unfamiliar with development cycles.

2 - Testing of said mystical patch is being conducted by a swarm of allegedly sycophantic minions who according to internet legends sold their souls to nibble at the crumbs of Prague's table. It is publicly obvious that selected members of the ShackTac organization and other community members are among this group of alleged 'traitors' who insult the zombies by not sharing the premature spoils.

Therefore, we can with utmost certainly and with infallible self-confidence discern that Dsylexci (among others who have no life outside of the dark caves they cower in) either are trying to buy favors of the patronage of BIS, or they have an unquenchable confidence in whatever tasty nugget they claim to have privileges to. Their reputations, and other trivial and mundane things, hang in the balance dependent on the reception of the future patch BIS has publicly committed to.

A seasoned troll among n00blings would well recognize that the rewards of heaping hot coals upon the heads of a certain fallacy is fair more rewarding, and safer for one's own reputation, than taking the gamble to with malice return a STFU amidst the banter of t3h intardnets. A measure of prudence is highly advisable to avoid future pillorying when the impatient insults of the inane are exposed as the self-abusing and narcissistic absurdities that they are.

[Rocco 0]

No ranting and no poll can stop that.

W0lle, who ever said they should stop work on the patch?! Amazing how you can twist this into such a negative characterization.

No one said that (here), and it wasn't my intention to point at someone.

However there were a few posts in the past saying that BIS should abandon that VON which actually no one is using and focus on other things to fix instead.

We all would like to see the patch released tomorrow. It's been a long time since the last patch release, but on the other hand:

If BIS release the next patch in a hurry to please a few and it contains major bugs then exactly these group of people is the first to cry and scream.

It takes time and a lot of testing to make sure the next patch is a milestone, but once it will be released I hope a lot of people will be satisfied then.

or noone will play arma by then...

[mattxr 9]

This has gone way off-topic now..

Oki we know the patch 1.11 is imminent and for the VON people BIS stated

Quote[/b] ]"It took much longer than we wanted, but finally I am happy to report the work we did on VON and anti-cheat, which was the most difficult part, was successful and we will soon be closing the patch."

End of all rabble this thread can be shutdown to stop the massive flame war.

[Maddmatt 1]

There is only one thing I have been critical about BIS and Arma and that is how freaking long it is taking them to get the patch out the door so that the massive security hole is closed that allows kids to run client-side scripts.

Signature checking and other ways of dealing with that have been available for ages.

No amount of security systems are going to help the people that don't actually use them.

Or join a group instead of using public servers.

I'm pretty sure I mentioned that as a response to a PM from you.

[sickboy 13]

There is only one thing I have been critical about BIS and Arma and that is how freaking long it is taking them to get the patch out the door so that the massive security hole is closed that allows kids to run client-side scripts.

Signature checking and other ways of dealing with that have been available for ages.

No amount of security systems are going to help the people that don't actually use them.

Or join a group instead of using public servers.

I'm pretty sure I mentioned that as a response to a PM from you.

But to my opinion this is also partially information flow related.

Sure, ppl dont look or search properly, but this kind of information should be much more apparant/visible or available to members.

The problem is that these features were included later in the development process, so you automaticly get ppl who don't know about it etc.

At least, thats my pov