Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

22 Excellent

About HaseDesTodes

  • Rank
    Lance Corporal

Recent Profile Visitors

166 profile views
  1. Arma 3 Third-Party DLC Pitch Discussion

    i guess that pretty much depends on the mod/addon. imo, every new asset that fits into the Arma 2035 setting could be distributed to everyone, while total conversion like stuff, be opt-in mods. but i guess i wrote that a couple of times before, so writing it again probably won't change anything. we will just have to see how BIS will handle this, when the time comes.
  2. General Discussion (dev branch)

    i guess keeping it this way (the way oukej said they will work) is the best way then. close to realistic, intuitive (bombs always act the same, regardless of target selected or not) and -very important- already/almost finished, if oukej didn't lie about that :) . do those advanced bombs "glide" like dumb bombs would or do they have increased gliding qualities? because that would be imo the ideal way bombs in Arma could act. afaik in stable, you can drop bombs on targets further away, when you have the laser as sensor target, because the bomb will steer towards the target from the beginning. so the bomb has a more flat trajectory. idk, how realistic this is, but i could imagine this to be possible (even though, without extra wings, bombs should loose some speed this way) now if the bombs dropped at laser targets, headed towards the position, of the target at the moment of the launch and then LOAL, it would be a nice compromise between range extension and realism. it would be even better to randomize the position the bomb is headed towards a bit so you get 10-20m spread. heck then it could be even enabled for selected sensor targets, without 100% precision on static targets. and if i extend this concept, vehicles with radar could even calculate a lead for moving targets
  3. General Discussion (dev branch)

    yes, target had to be spotted by visual sensor, i didn't heat it up, so it couldn't be thermal. what i mean't was, that even though the bombs shouldn't be able to lock-on anything but laser targets, that bomb did. the ai noticed that it had been locked and pops smoke. @oukej so i understand this now this way: regardless of if a target is selected by the vehicle sensors or not, bombs will always drop like a dumb bomb then use LOAL. would it be possible, to make bombs dropped on a selected LASER target, to have it locked from the beginning?
  4. General Discussion (dev branch)

    looks like they fixed it already wanted to make a video, and it now both work the same way look what happens when you drop a bomb with the vehicle selected by the sensors only (no laser used) the AI even uses smoke, so there is some kind of weapon lock involved (you might not see notice it at first, i later drop the remaining 3 bombs, and they all hit the target as well) edit: logistical issues day, but for some reason, my client did 2 updates today
  5. you can switch between firemodes by pressing the "change firemode" (standard f) key and you have to be on dev branch for now
  6. General Discussion (dev branch)

    i did some (more) testing. the bomb will lock on the laser that is closest to the point of impact (CCIP). this might change, haven't tested (and should be hard to get reproducible results) this with moving targets/lasers, so with the target selection Monkey has described it could change. some more things, as blufor, i (same for my bomb with LOAL) was able to get locks on BLU and IND targets, as long as IND was an ally, so i would say you can lock on all friendly laser targets. i was not able to see IR strobes on my vehicles sensors and in the targeting camera (marked as x, like the other targets), but my bombs were able to lock themselves on them. so they might cause some confusion for bombs. when i dropped the bombs with the laser targets selected in my vehicle's sensors, the bombs would not auto home in on the target area. but when i did the same with the vehicle selected it did.
  7. i found a similar issue to the overshooting one. i don't know if it's new, but: when using PCML in straight mode, at 500m in VR (targeted from the side) it hits the ground around ca. 130m before the target (Gorgon) it hits the ground around ca. 200m before the target (Quad Bike) overfly mode works fine. there might be more targets that cause this issue, i will report back if i find more. i tested all (hope i missed none) basic versions of the ground vehicles (transport covered for trucks, unarmed for cars) and i found the same issue with Prowler, MB 4WD, Cart, Hatchback I also noticed, some damage anomalies (eg. SUV didnt take any (noticable) damage in straight flight), but i guess damage will be worked on later.
  8. General Discussion (dev branch)

    not exactly sure what point (of time) you mean, but i assume you mean the point, at which you drop the bomb. as already said by Strike and Monkey a very important reason is, to make sure the enemy has less time to react, but an other important thing for me, is that you can drop bombs from ranges/altitudes, that do not allow your vehicle sensors to pick up the targets, so locking is not possible. e.g. when i was testing, i dropped a bomb from 5000m altitude from around 9000m (laser) distance (insert trigonometric calculation for real distance here :) ).with CCIP and great view distances, it's at least possible to get the bomb close enough to find the laser target while you stay far away from enemy aa systems.
  9. General Discussion (dev branch)

    just tested the LOAD a bit and it looks really nice. you can now drop bombs from extreme distances into the target area, and it will hit the target. BUT i also tested without the laser, and you can still drop bombs on static targets with 100% accuracy. can we expect this to change to a more balanced method?
  10. if only this was true... drivers can sometimes be stupid i think, if it's actually a driver issues it should be similar to this one (https://feedback.bistudio.com/T121965) (DayZ SA) so the things to test would be: 1. in Nvidia control panel, set the global setting to use high performance GPU. if you get better fps now, revert it to what you had before and 2. manually add the Arma3_x64.exe and set the GPU to the dedicated GPU if 1. doesn't work you might still try 2. in the case no one here can help you you should file a ticket in the feedback tracker. feedback.bistudio.com
  11. CPU, GPU, PSU, HDD, SSD are all good. RAM: i guess if you get your PC built you can't specify if more than that, so it will have to do. there are some variants of that memory i saw, that are not listed on the QVL, so it's not ensured to be fully compatible. nevertheless it should cause no troubles, as the builders should be smart enough to only use compatible parts in order to minimize compatibility issues = work for the customer support. If you had the choice you should (at least) go for 3600MHz modules. The price differences i found for modules listed on the QVL was like 10-15€. (there was even a discussion about RAM impact on the top of this/the last page: https://forums.bohemia.net/forums/topic/187603-will-my-pc-run-arma3-what-cpugpu-to-get-what-settings-what-system-specifications/?page=140 Cooling: 3 case fans are good. more interesting would be your CPU cooling. anyhow you might want to get some dust filters for all sucking fans (if not included). they should ensure that not to much dust gets into you case. you will still have to clean it from time to time as Gunter has mentioned already. especially the filters will need regular maintenance. otherwise the airflow can get significantly reduced. Monitor: I don't think a 100$ monitor would be a good long term investment. But since you already mentioned, that you want it only as a temporary solution, i'd say it might do the job. you should still expect pale colors, an unfirm case and generally a bad quality.
  12. from my experience arma often suffers providing stable/high fps. (it might be my i5 4770k that is getting old) the point with gsync and freesync is, that the image gets smoother, especially at low fps (or unstable frametimes). i have the impression, that since i use a 144Hz freesyn monitor, arma feels (a bit) less slugish (especially in CQB), and since i don't have a ultra fast GPU+CPU, i don't think the 144Hz made the difference. i guess i should experiment on how it feels with 60Hz+freesync and 144Hz+no sync it might not be necessary with the i7 8700k, i can't tell. under 300$? there is no G-Sync monitor i see below 350€. it's nVidia so you will have to pay extra money for that (but that aside, you can be quite sure every Gsync monitor is performing very well). if you plan to upgrade the monitor anyways there is no need to go for a gsync right now.
  13. About PSUs: The reasons for which i would go for (and for which i have) high efficiency PSUs are, 1. (obvious) saving power: Lets say your PC hardware demands 500W With a 1000W 80+ Bronze PSU (peak efficiency is 85% at 50% load=500W) your PSU will use 588W Now you have 88W wasted and transformed into heat. With a 1000W 80+ Platinum PSU (peak efficiency is 94% at 50% load) your PSU will use 532W that might only be a difference of 56W so not much for a moment. Let's assume you play 5h a day for a year (wishful thinking for a working person) and your PC needs those 500W when you do. That would be 0.056kW*5h*365= 99.68kWh (not sure about prices in the US, but i found a price of 0.12$/kWh). that would be a difference of around 12$ for a year of powergaming. now with a lifespan for a good PSU of about 10 years (i think my old one was about this age (maybe only 7 years, idk) and it still worked when i replaced it) you would have a difference of 120$ between a Bronze and a Platinum grade PSU. I have to admit, the numbers i gave you a (much) higher than what would be realistic for an average player, but it should make one thing clear: The long-term savings can turn out so high, that you should take them into consideration. 2. heat if we stick to the example from above you have a difference of 56W of produced heat inside your case. a slightly weaker CPU has a TDP of 65W, so the wasted power is almost as much as a CPU at full load. that heat will have to be transported out of the case or it will affect the other components. so it will usually mean either a higher noise level, or higher temperatures or even a bit of both. BTW: you said you were currently unable to build a PC. Why is that so, did you borrow your only screwdriver to a friend? because it shouldn't take much more than that. PSU max power: Core i7-8700k: 95W TDP GTX 1080: 180W TDP estimations: Mobo: 20W SSD+HDD: 20W RAM: 10W USB devices: max 30W (probably much less) other devices (fans, lights, etc.): 15W peak multipler (CPU,GPU,MoBo,RAM) : 1.2 OC multiplier (CPU,GPU,MoBo,RAM): 1.3 total maximum power consumption: OC+Peak load: (95+180+20+10)*1.2*1.3+20+30+15= 541[W] OC, non peak: 461W normal max. power: 95+180+20+20+10+30+15= 370 [W] now. even with those REALLY high values+ multipliers you would not need more than 650W (so 1000W would be unreasonably high) even a 500W PSU should be sufficient, because (good) PSUs can provide more power for a moment, so peak consumptions don't cause a system crash/shutdown. on the other if you plan using more than one GPU in your system at some point; you will need a higher power PSU by that point. Monitors: 144Hz alone will make no significant difference for Arma3 because you will rarely (if at all) get enough fps to notice the smoother image. G-Sync: should make a much greater difference, because the image gets much smoother, especially at lower fps. display resolution: with the GPU you plan buying you should be able to go for higher resolutions than 1920x1080 (full HD), but if you dont have the money you could also turn up the rendering resolution to 150%. but as with the PSU, you should keep in mind, that a monitor will accompany you for many years, if you threat it well, so buying a worse one now, might mean that you will have to buy a new one in a few years, or live with an inferior model. i know money plays a great deal, but going for such a good PC and then getting a low-midrange monitior doesn't seem reasonable to me.
  14. the Ibuypoower Rig how the link has set it up for me: CPU: Intel® Core™ i7-8700K Processor (6x 3.70GHz/12MB L3 Cache) Mobo: MSI Z370-A PRO RAM: 16GB Major Brand Gaming Memory DDR4-3000 Memory upgrade to DDR4-3200 Memory +60$ GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 - 8GB updgrade to NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti EVGA GAMING 8GB +72$ or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 - 8GB (GDDR5X) (VR-Ready) +130$ Case: iBUYPOWER Element Gaming Case (Front & Side Glass Panel) SSD: 250GB WD Blue SSD upgrade to 500GB WD Blue SSD +41$ HDD: 1 TB Hard Drive -- 32MB Cache, 7200RPM, 6.0Gb/s PSU: 600W Standard 80 PLUS Bronze Processor Cooling: Asetek 550LC 120mm Liquid CPU Cooler i assume you are from the US: =1479$ (+tax?) with max upgrades: 1710$ with +RAM and +SSD +1070TI = 1652$ (+8% VAT ca. 1785$) why don't you build it yourself? CPU: Core i7-8700k 370€ MoBo: ASRock Z370 Pro4 110€ RAM: G.Skill Trident Z 16GB(F4-4133C19D-16GTZKW) 260€ GPU: for example MSI GeForce GTX 1070 Ti Armor 8G 500€ Case (depends much on personal taste, but for example this one: Sharkoon VG4-V (ca. 35€)) 30-50€ (or more if you want) SSD: Crucial MX500 500GB 130€ HDD: for example Seagate BarraCuda Compute 4TB 100€ PSU: for example Seasonic Focus Plus Platinum 750W ATX 2.4 (SSR-750PX) (80+ Platinum) 120€ (even 750W seems over the top for me with this setup, so no need to go for 1000W unless you want to use SLI) Processor Cooling for example (be sure to get one that works with your case): Water: Cooler Master MasterLiquid Lite 120 ca 50€ Air: 10-40€ for example: Cooler Master Hyper TX3 Evo ca. 20-25€ you could save on getting cheaper RAM, but even going for the slower (and i wouldn't go below 3200MHz) Kingston HyperX Predator (3200MHz) (HX432C16PB3K2/16) from the QVL it would only be 50€ (60$) =1675€ including taxes (prices from german shops) according to google that's 2051$ (i'm a bit shocked how strong the € got again) maybe the components are cheaper if you buy them in the US , i don't know about that. (they are for sure, if compare them with EU prices + shipping + US taxes) overall the ibuypower offer seems okay, but especially the PSU (only 80+ Bronze) and the RAM (could be faster, especially for Arma) don't seem to good to me
  15. do you already own that monitor? if not, i'd tell you not to buy it. simply because it's only full-hd and and the GTX1080 is (usually) able to provide good fps in WQHD (2560x1440) maybe even UWQHD (3440x1440). and besides, i'd advise to get G-Sync (or freesync for AMD users), because it makes the images run smother. if you already own the monitor, it's okay. you can upgrade later. i don't know if you would be willing to pay much more for RAM, but getting faster RAM should somewhat improve your PC's performance in Arma 3 (and other games). if you stick to the MoBo this RAM should get the best results (CMR16GX4M2F4000C19). It's listed on the memory QVL of the mobo, and therefore should be compatible even with 4000MHz Ram clock. when you decide to to follow Bear's objection and get a regular Mobo (ATX or even µATX), (what i'd advise to do, too btw) you should check the manufacturer's memory QVL for the right ram. SSD: 250GB can become to small, very quickly. if you have many mods, arma alone can use up more than 60GB, add windows an few other games and a reserve and you will hit the limits in no time. you don't have to go for a M2 SSD, but you should definitely get more space. the PSU is very good (80+ Titanium, fully modular, etc. ), but if you can afford, you might want to get one with the 80+ Platinum certificate. i think as long as you keep it for the next few setups (there are few reasons to change it anyways) you might save enough energy to break even in the long term. but please don't nail me on it, there are so many variables.