rmroman

Anyone seen this? Any advice how to handle this? BattlEye blocks loading Steam files - all from "Program Files (x64)": GameOverlayRenderer.dll x64launcher.exe GameOverlayRenderer64.dll steamclient64.dll tier0_s64.dll vstdlib_s64.dll steam.exe Game is unable to launch and crashes at startup with an exit code 0x00000035 There's no AV SW installed, no mods, mo cheats. I played ARMA just 9 hours ago and it was able to start. There were no changes afterwards - I just turned off the rig yesterday and turned it on again this morning. BattlEye works just fine with non-Steam games and Steam works fine without BattlEye. Overall the conflicts started about 7-10 days ago - then BattlEye blocked just x64launcher.exe yet the game was able to start. Now it blocks all of Steam and there's no way to play. Peculiarities of the rig I use: Win7 SP1, no SP-2 and SHA-2 installed - cannot do that as it conflicts with the motherboard.

Solved. For those who runs into the same trouble: it seems the reason was BattlEye was failing to update itself (for an unknown reason). What helped is: Renaming BE executable in "Program Files (x86)/Common Files/BattlEye" to something weird to force BE to re-download itself (exe, not the service). Running Steam as Administrator. Launching ARMA from Steam library - pressing Play there - rather than a using a Steam-handled shortcut on Desktop. Too lazy to test now yet I strongly suspect p. 1 shall suffice.

If one goes to either Saint-George Airport or Aeroport de Tanoa BEFORE meeting Arthur then not all objects meant to be spawned are actually spawned and this leads to some funny situations. E.g. a Tigris at Aeroport de Tanoa is not crewed and can be taken over, there are no infantry at Saint-George Airport except for Kamysh and HMG crew and the latter can be headshot with ease thus having an HMG early in the game "for free". It seems the problem is that for the first mission - meet Arthur - a civilian is used as the protagonist and this leads to Old Man Sectors modules whose owner is set to East not to spawn infantry that is not part of the crew. Sectors with ownership set to None work just fine as well as those "faulty" air sectors but in latter missions where a proper BLUFOR protagonist is used.

I'm trying to understand what's the best way to make AI gunships spot enemy infantry on the ground so playing with a simple setup of a team of two Blackfoots flying directly to lone enemy survivor from afar, overflying, making a U-turn and overflying him again. The survivor initially stands still in an open field though he sometimes goes prone later on upon detecting incoming helos. I've made well over 50 tests by now tweaking some parameters from time to time and I'm getting kind of illogical results. Namely: Reducing speed negatively affects gunship's ability to spot enemy. Reducing flying height has adverse effect as well. "Sweet spot" for infantry detection is at least tens and up to a couple hundred meters behind the helicopter - it overflies the enemy and only spots it some time after. It's possible to make a gunship detect enemy infantry in the forward hemisphere but one needs to dial up helo crew skill level to 100%. Even at 80% gunship crew will never see the enemy. Should the gunship miss the enemy after overflying ordering the helo to make a U-turn few hundred meters past the enemy sometimes helps. A strip of land where one can realistically expect detection is just tens of meters to either side of the helicopter (in 2D terms). Placing a soldier mere 100m to the left or to the right of the helo path (again in 2D) guarantees the latter will never spot him. Making a return pass over the same terrain makes no sense. A gunship will either detect the enemy at the first pass or it'll never see him. I know infantry detection from gunships is a contentious topic so I'm not trying to criticize. Just may be someone else has done similar experiments and has knowledge to share. I'm primarily interested in how plain-vanilla AI behaves - I know reveal/dotarget/dofire hard-scripting and setskill.

If Alamut RPG and AT rounds are left at the crates when leaving the base you one won't find them when one comes back. Few other weapons and ammo I tested are not affected. Alamut HE rounds are not affected. What crate an Alamut is left in does not matter. Specifics of my setup - I managed to scrounge Titan launcher at the previous missions. So there're two launchers at the base. May be that creates the problem. A somewhat similar bug used to be in the 1.5xx Arma 3 - if 6.5 LMG and 6.5 rifle suppressors were left at the base - one of them would disappear.

1. 20th OMSBR is not quite a run of the mill unit. 2. I'm talking exactly about regular TOE not a once in a life time event. Even modern Russian SpecOps use another weapon as a part of standard TOE. 3. VSS is not suitable for a DM or sniper role. It was constructed up to very special requirements that it brilliantly fulfills. But they are way far from the regular army sniper role. So here come low VSS production numbers, ammo cost and its meager annual production as well.

1. It might be lost in time but HESCO bastions were originally created for construction not for military applications. The picture here is about construction I believe. 2. Corvinus, would you mind providing some URLs about HESCO bastions used by Russian military in any significant numbers?

Nope. They use concrete slabs and sacks stuffed with sand. Like here: http://lenta-kazan.ru/uploads/posts/2014-05/1400252003_34_main.jpg

1. VSS is not part of a standard TOE. Effective range is too low, ammo is too rare and expensive, requires too much training to use. SVD is used. 2. Your forgot RPG and GP underbarrel GL. 3. SVDS is used with airborne troops exclusively. Weighs more - no point unless absolutely necessary. 4. Application of the high tech stuff you mentioned vary from strictly mil show to "once in a life time". But you forgot thermal and image enhancing scopes - elite troops have them in numbers.

I'd correct quick passes vs hovers. Quick passes are for CAS. Gunships were originally designed for an AT warfare so the intention was for ATGMs to be launched to long distance from a hover. It implies a European theater like warfare. Fixed continuous lines of contact, long distance shooting, low MANPAD threat. Besides there's no way to target original SACLOS missiles on the move. And even for modern ATGMs if the helo paints the target all by itself (Hellfire) or guides the missile (Russian Vikhr or Ataka) then it flies a more or less straight path if not hovers.

Lots of flares within a short time is a pure air show stunt. Both Russian and American gunships usually shoot two flares every few seconds when in danger.

Though Mi-24 (current export designation Mi-35) has an 8 person troop compartment it is not used as a transport in real combat situations. Troop compartment was designed in as a theoretical exercise with Russian forces having no prior combat experience in gunships. In reality Mi-24 is used as a "pure" gunship and Mi-8/Mi-17 as a medium transport helo. Mi-24 turned to be underpowered for hot and/or high altitude missions plus it's too valuable as a CAS/escort asset to risk a landing. Mi-24 transport compartment was used in three situations: 1. Base to base relocation/transport. 2. Immediate rescue whereas a buddy helo would extract a downed crew. 3. A stock of arms plus a technician to reload at a quick "pit-stop" near AO.