A.C.E. Advanced Combat Environment Public Release!

[action man 0]

ArmA lags like hell with A.C.E. 1.01 when i place only one soldier on Rahmdi.

Thats not normal. I tested the same without A.C.E and the problem is gone.

A.C.E. 1.01 is unplayable because of the lag i get, before i updated it there was no problem performance wise.

So long guys, i´m out of here.

Me to am out of here! Shame it's good,and the rest of your mods increase FPS. You need to streamline this one big time(Improve scripts ect). Good luck

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Quote[/b] ]I tested remove the weapon sway PBO and boy was that a relief.

Obvious 'cheat' warning. In general I'm not too keen on the current values, but the firefight we had today was some of the most intense stuff I have ever witnessed.

Back on track though. We need some kind of ACE check to detect players that has disabled ACE pbos defined by a list the mission maker (editable by server admin using dePbo) puts in the mission. A mission designer/server admin could determine that *this* component is optional, but *that* component is required. If I'm admining our coop server, I want to be able to kick "cheaters" if I see that they have disabled an ACE component that *I* feel brings balance to the game. EqualMod obviously doesn't work here with optional components.

Better yet, an autokick function for these players with information on what ACE components needs to be running on their client, if at all possible.

[Robalo 465]

The big performance killer I found is the cartridges addon.

I tried to adjust it in the config like this:

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">// Enable ejected casings staying on ground

class ACE_FX_CARTRIDGES_E

{

enabled = 1; // change to 0 to disable

max_cartridges = 300; // max. amount of cartridges on map

max_distance = 0; // max. distance until cartridges become deleted by FIFO

max_lifetime = 300; // lifetime of cartridges in seconds

min_FPS = 40; // min. FPs when cartridges become deleted

};

but it was unplayable.

I had to disable it to be able to play. This might help boost performance:

In ..\Arma\Dta\ACE\ace_clientside_config.hpp:

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">// Enable ejected casings staying on ground

class ACE_FX_CARTRIDGES_E

{

enabled = 0; // change to 0 to disable

...

Core 2 Duo 2.13Ghz, 4 GB RAM, Ati 4850 1GB

This happened with both ACE betas.

Edit. Should mention I'm testing with a moderate mission, about 30 vs. 30 infantry, 5 vs. 5 vehicles and a couple helicopters each side.

[bhaz 0]

Weird reading about all these performance issues people are having, I haven't had any problems with either ACE version, using the 1.15 beta. I mainly play Domination on public servers with around 15-25 people and I'm usually on there for 2-3 hours at a time.

So far I haven't crashed (once, but it was my fault trying -maxmem at 1.5GB), haven't headbugged or seen the so-called facemelting, or had any problems with the wound system. My FPS usually sits around 30-40, ~15 when looking over huge towns at 4k viewdistance, and I don't really consider my PC specs (in sig) to be that good, considering ArmA only runs on one core. All this is on a fresh installation of ArmA, patched from 1.05 > 08 > 09 > 14 > 1.15beta with ACE ontop, using no other addons. Settings are all at Very High, but I sometimes throw antialiasing down to Normal to save FPS in extreme detail areas, I'm using NVidia 181.20 drivers. Looks like they just released 181.22 a few hours ago aswell.

My arma.RPT (never been cleared) seems pretty clean, with only one error constantly displayed:

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">Object::AnimatePoint ca\misc\hiddenpath_5.p3d - KeepHeight: Function is quite slow

edit: btw, massive thanks to the ACE team for the work put into this release

[sweofp 0]

I get lag as hell too, didn´t have that in 1.0, otherwise this is a great mod. But right now it´s unplayble. Also when I use helis they don´t fire? Any ideas on this?

Z

[Panda-PL- 0]

I haven't had any problems with either ACE version, using the 1.15 beta.

I see momentary slowdown when deploying weapon, but this is nothing weird since it needs to spawn some detector models.

I do not see difference between the two releases personally. I have a low end PC. IU did not change the shells settings, they don't seem to make a difference for me.

Only problem I face is the medical system sometimes acts weird.

I have no idea what is going on, what do you guys consider low fps? I have a low end machine and run with lower settings, if there was a scripting error I suppose I would notice the lag instantly.

BTW: weapon support rocks. The only way to set up defense.

You can use building corners and trees for supporting weapon, just aim straight at them and deploiy, you can then peek out while staying supported.

[mr.g-c 6]

Quote[/b] ]However, it would probably be useful if there was an assigned person from the ACE team that monitored this thread and provided info here and also recorded bugs reported here perhaps.

Some of the ACE Alpha testers aswell as Devs take that Job and post stuff mentioned here in the bugtracker.

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]Quote (Mr_Tea @ Jan. 20 2009,14:42)

ArmA lags like hell with A.C.E. 1.01 when i place only one soldier on Rahmdi.

Thats not normal. I tested the same without A.C.E and the problem is gone.

A.C.E. 1.01 is unplayable because of the lag i get, before i updated it there was no problem performance wise.

So long guys, i´m out of here.

Me to am out of here! Shame it's good,and the rest of your mods increase FPS. You need to streamline this one big time(Improve scripts ect). Good luck

Guys, something must be broken with either your ACE installation or Arma itself.

I advice you to reinstall ACE 1.01 completely with the Full 1.01 Version (to be found in the official Forums).

However i agree that 1.01 runs a tiny little bit slower than 1.0.

Quote[/b] ]The big performance killer I found is the cartridges addon.

I tried to adjust it in the config like this:

Code Sample

// Enable ejected casings staying on ground

class ACE_FX_CARTRIDGES_E

{

enabled = 1; // change to 0 to disable

max_cartridges = 300; // max. amount of cartridges on map

max_distance = 0; // max. distance until cartridges become deleted by FIFO

max_lifetime = 300; // lifetime of cartridges in seconds

min_FPS = 40; // min. FPs when cartridges become deleted

};

but it was unplayable.

I had to disable it to be able to play. This might help boost performance:

In ..\Arma\Dta\ACE\ace_clientside_config.hpp:

Code Sample

// Enable ejected casings staying on ground

class ACE_FX_CARTRIDGES_E

{

enabled = 0; // change to 0 to disable

...

Core 2 Duo 2.13Ghz, 4 GB RAM, Ati 4850 1GB

This happened with both ACE betas.

Edit. Should mention I'm testing with a moderate mission, about 30 vs. 30 infantry, 5 vs. 5 vehicles and a couple helicopters each side.

I don't think this is a performance Killer because:

1. The ejected casings are only displayed and rendered by the Engine when you are near between 0-15m

2. Just one simple lod, ultra-low poly, simple texture, etc.

In my Test during Alpha-Versions on Core2Quad 6600 @3.1 GHZ with low-end GF9600GT, i set it to 50.000 max casings, TTL to 3600 seconds.

Then i fired like ~25 M249 Magazines in a 15m circle, recorded FPS with Fraps before + after and it was only like 2-3 FPS difference.

[Rak 0]

I wouldn't call Core2Quad and 9600GT "low-end" though

[mr.g-c 6]

I wouldn't call Core2Quad and 9600GT "low-end" though

I only said this for the GF9600GT and in my world this 50-80€ Card is "lower-end".

Core2Quad Q6600 is already nearly 3 Years available and is very cheap (~150€) currently too, just to mention that.

So indeed no mid or even "high-end" stuff here.

"Mid-End" for me would be like Q9550, GTX 260 or older 8800GTS/GTX

"Higher-End" for me would be like Core i7 965, GF GTX280, etc...

[sparks50 0]

You are talking about two different ranges here it seems. A 9600gt is definitely not the lower range of Arma players hardware, But in terms of what you can buy new today, it is.

[MachineMadness 0]

The weapon sway/shake in 1.01 is a bit much. Tone it down, or better yet, go back to 1.00 values, because that felt great.

And for everyone with performance issues, I get better performance in ACE mod.

And my pc is only average.

[ck-claw 1]

And for everyone with performance issues, I get better performance in ACE mod.

And my pc is only average.

Funny you should say that

Cause i'm feeling the same too - just thought i was imagining it?

I am also on a 'shite' pc.

[twisted 128]

my performance in ACE is pretty good as well, at least as good as vanilla arma. my pc is medium good, but i need more ram.

[M.Andersson(SWE) 4]

Weeeeee

Playing EVO on my own server/pc...

Saw enemy soldier dragging wounded mate into cover.

I was a couple of hundred meters away so i thought,

what trhe heck are the doing...Looked rather suspicious

to me...

And then it came to me, Hes dragging his mate into cover...

AWSOME

[Robalo 465]

I don't think this is a performance Killer because:

1. The ejected casings are only displayed and rendered by the Engine when you are near between 0-15m

2. Just one simple lod, ultra-low poly, simple texture, etc.

In my Test during Alpha-Versions on Core2Quad 6600 @3.1 GHZ with low-end GF9600GT, i set it to 50.000 max casings, TTL to 3600 seconds.

Then i fired like ~25 M249 Magazines in a 15m circle, recorded FPS with Fraps before + after and it was only like 2-3 FPS difference.

My guess would be it's not GPU but a CPU issue, what's good for a 3 gig might be too much for my 2.13. The game pauses for a few seconds, then comes back for a couple seconds and again.. that would give like.. 0 FPS ? I will try to overclock and report back. I installed 1.01 by patch, guess I'll try a the full install too.

Thanks.

[delta99 34]

I have to say as well I'm not sure why others are seeing performance issues. I have NOT noticed ACE v1.00 or v1.01 slowing things down at all.

I'm on an extremely modest machine as well.

[ArmaVidz 0]

I wouldn't call Core2Quad and 9600GT "low-end" though

I have to disagree.

Core2Quad's and especially 9600GT's are about as minimal/low-end as any gamer should want to go. The price point on Q6600 Core2Quad's is silly -in ratio to performance. To understand where your video card ranks in the grand scheme of things Toms Hardware GPU Charts. At $133.00 CDN, a 9600GT is considered by "gamers" ultra-low-end. Typically, the average gamer makes purchases of GPU's at anywhere from $200.00 CDN to $350.00 CDN - with the higher than $350.00 range reserved for enthusiasts and extreme gamers.

However in my experience, with Armed Assault and my rig, is that running a Quad and also important: a motherboard with a great chipset is going to pay off the most. Couple these things with an extremely fast hard drive and you will notice the difference.

My rig is two years old, and the tech in it, is at least one year before I bought it. So it's basically three or four year old technology - hardley "gamers elite" yet I get very little slowdown, as you can see. Running ACE, Armed Assault actually feels smoother in FPS.

The only exception is Schmalfelden, I can't get that map to run worth beans; to which I still have to look into.

One thing is for sure, I appreciate the efforts to optimize the modification to run on lower-end PC's but surely, there is a point to where the optimization turns to minimalization which effects visuals.

[nastros 0]

if this has been asked apologies but has anyone made an Evolution style coop mission yet for this mod. If so it would be much appreciated if i could get a link for it.

[ck-claw 1]

I wouldn't call Core2Quad and 9600GT "low-end" though

I have to disagree.

Although i see what your saying Vidz.

I'd have to disagree,compared with what i'm running tis not 'low end'  by a long shot!  

Eventually conned my lot into using ACE-and must say thanks very must to the ACE guys.!

Its like all the best shit in one big nice lump!

[Maddmatt 1]

My guess would be it's not GPU but a CPU issue, what's good for a 3 gig might be too much for my 2.13. The game pauses for a few seconds, then comes back for a couple seconds and again.. that would give like.. 0 FPS ? I will try to overclock and report back. I installed 1.01 by patch, guess I'll try a the full install too.

Thanks.

Yea that sounds like a RAM issue. Try dropping texture detail, that should free up some RAM and hopefully stop the freezing.

To the other discussion: and I would also have to disagree on that quad core and 9600GT being low-end. Because what would that make my PC? A pile of shit?

Low end by what you would buy today, but it's not low end by what most people actually have. And with the recession I think even less people will be buying new hardware.

[Alex72 1]

I got FPS drops with 1.01 just to report on that. Im lagging now a bit. (1.00 was not laggy at all). But then again im playing on dual core 2.2ghz, 8800GTS, 2gb ram. Will get a new computer but what i remember from the ECS is that many disabled the improved AI because of FPS hits. With it "on", my computer could drop from 60-80FPS to 9FPS on rhamadi. It was sweet AI but unplayable for me when it kicked in. As when they notice me and started to "think".

Im guessing the improved AI and all stuff they do now in ACE  (dragging, helping their wounded) and more has an impact?

New computer soon though, gotta arm myself for ArmA2.

Regards

Alex

[Alex72 1]

Quote[/b] ]I tested remove the weapon sway PBO and boy was that a relief.

Obvious 'cheat' warning. In general I'm not too keen on the current values, but the firefight we had today was some of the most intense stuff I have ever witnessed.

Yes obviously Carl. Im playing with my friends that everyone disabled the sway.PBO. The sway in 1.01 is ridiculous (with all due respect) and we just cant use it. It is not cheating to go back to more realistic aim values. It is however stupid to make yourself shake like a hangover 80 year old.

EDIT: And i agree Carl. ACE should be able to check what parts are being activated so there can be no cheat.

Cheers,

Alex

[delta99 34]

72 @ Jan. 23 2009,19:01)]I got FPS drops with 1.01 just to report on that. Im lagging now a bit. (1.00 was not laggy at all). But then again im playing on dual core 2.2ghz, 8800GTS, 2gb ram. Will get a new computer but what i remember from the ECS is that many disabled the improved AI because of FPS hits. With it "on", my computer could drop from 60-80FPS to 9FPS on rhamadi. It was sweet AI but unplayable for me when it kicked in. As when they notice me and started to "think".

Im guessing the improved AI and all stuff they do now in ACE  (dragging, helping their wounded) and more has an impact?

New computer soon though, gotta arm myself for ArmA2.

Regards

Alex

WOW, people would rather remove improved AI rather than make other settings changes? Why even bother playing Arma then?

[Nikoteen 24]

I wonder why the ACE team removed in 1.01 the grenade explosion effect that were in 1.00 for vanilla instead.

Is it for performance purpose ? I never had a slowdown with the explosions.

Is there a way to bring it back or should I wait for 1.02 ?

Thanx

[Maddmatt 1]

I wonder why the ACE team removed in 1.01 the grenade explosion effect that were in 1.00 for vanilla instead.

Is it for performance purpose ? I never had a slowdown with the explosions.

Is there a way to bring it back or should I wait for 1.02 ?

Thanx

It was a mistake. Already fixed for the next version  

The smoke effect from smoke grenades was also optimised a bit, since it was pretty heavy on the FPS.