guyguy1

Hey all, I seem to have a problem understanding something. I have 2 notebooks: Notebook 1 Core 2 Duo 2.00 GHz GeForce Go7950GTX 120GB Hard Drive 2 GB RAM VISTA Notebook 2 Core Duo 2.16 GHz GeForce Go7950GTX 140GB hard drive 2 GB RAM VISTA Supposedly, Core 2 Duo should be superior to Core Duo, but on the Core Duo system I get absolutely NO lag when looking at forests/bushes and with shader detail on HIGH, resolution on 1920X1200, and all other things set to high. On my Core 2 Duo system, I get extreme lag when looking at even a bush on lower settings. Can anyone help me figure out how the heck I get my Core 2 Duo system to perform as well as the Core Duo system? I'm pretty sure its either because the Core Duo CPU is somehow faster than the Core 2 Duo CPU, or the hard drive? Thanks. The architecture of Core2 Duo is supposed to be superior to Core Duo, but I found that my Core Duo T2600 is 150 dollars more expensive than my other Core 2 Duo T7200 CPU. Does the price back up the performance here, or is this some sort of pricing glitch on the behalf of Intel Corp.?

we caught a cheater in our server and kicked/banned him, but he used the PlayerID program from tkc and got in and caused carnage again, so banning people doesn'twork

yes, unfortunately we need better anticheat. i was just playing a couple min ago and the same guy, "Rambo", came in and started calling in artillery on everyone, then froze the server screen until it went black and said "All your base are belong to us". the server was then shut down

he goes to many servers and does this. i am just a player who happens to see him a lot. he is NOT an admin, from what i can see. he can go to any server and do whaqtever he wants

Some of his abilities: Disable Admin Power Modify Scores Kill anyone at will Kill everyone at the same time Artillery spam coming out of nowhere Freeze the server Make the server screen go black, and say "All Your Base are Belong to Us" Admins cannot boot him He can boot admins He can boot anyone he can also leave the server and have these powers, which is very strange PLEASE BIS do something this is making gameplay impossible. he goes around to a lot of Edit: i do NOT have his PlayerID. everyone was too busy screaming at him in the server that nobody got his ID. UPDATE******* his alternate screen name is Rambo and i told the server about him while he was in-game he made my ArmA crash

BIS, there is a fellow named Marek Spanel who goes to servers and disables admin powers, freezes the server, kills everyone at will, and basically runs the server. he has god powers. please do something to stop this madness. this is not a joke. Edit: I do not mean he is Marek Spanel. I mean his screen name is Marek Spanel.

Arma Singleplayer campaign is a mess, unengaging, nothing compared to OFP campaign. ArmA damage values for soldiers and vehicles are getting to the point where they arent realstic. Example: tiny little 9 mm round killing a soldier wearing a Level IV mil-spec ballistic plate inside his body armor(designed gto stop SVD dragonov bullets), which can already stop the 9mm easily. Arma Performance isn't optimized as much as i hoped. Absoluely no dual/quad core support and foilage is terribly draining of the fps. other than that, good game!

In ArmA, indiv. body parts have recieve a certain amount of damage. This was also in OFP. Â What I'm asking for is something that I've wanted to see in OFP for years... and for good reason too. The idea of gaining endurance and speed is at most..controversial. I think that they shojld stay the same because at best, a soldier will get more tired as combat goes on (realize i am talking about the campaign as a whole). Developers please read if you are taking this suggestion seriously: Current U.S. standard body armor is Interceptor, developed in the 1990's. It is a kevlaqr vest and can hold up to 4 plates. The Marine Corps has just signed a deal to produce MTV's to replace the Interceptor. Modular Tactical Vest is basically the same thing as interceptor, utilizing 4 plates and a kevlar jacket, but has a soft armor addition to the lower back area. The US army has released an industrywide request for a NEW body armor. The vest itself will be made of kevlar like the current armor, and will have 4 plates like the current U.S. body armor, but it will feature a new type of ballistic plate- the XSAPI. Current plate is the ESAPI, designed to defeat the level IV bullets. the XSAPI will push the ballistic protection to a new level, and is aimed at defeating level V rounds- bullets found in the IV category that are travelling at over 3500 feet per second up to about 5000 feet per second. Curently, the armor companies are trying to create an armor and submit the design to the army for testing. So stay tuned. Wouldn't wanna see the troops in Game2 wearing armor from the last century (literally).

Due to the growing number of users upgrading to Vista and buying dual/quad core processors, it would be crazy to release Game2 in 2008/2009 with only single core support. Also, by then, a lot of peoplw will have Vista. As the numbers of users grow, I believe Game2 should be optimized for multicore processors and Vista to squeeze out the best performance possible. Pros: More cores means more processes. That can unlock some visual goodies such as DAMAGE DECALS instead of the traditional damage texture. Also, more processing power could support a variety of other things that Game2 should be built upon (say...real-time campaign going on while the player is playing? I dunno, just some ideas). Hopefully, it is revolutionary. Cons: More work for BIS

Does anybody know where to allocate more RAM to the ArmA game? I remember reading somewhere in these forums that there was a certain file or whatever that controls the amount of RAM the game can use and you simply have to change the number to change the number of RAM it uses. I have comfirmed the fact that there is something controlling the amount of RAM the game uses; my RAM meter constantly stalls at 51% when playing ArmA. Thanks

isn't there a place in the arma settings or w.e where you can change the amount of RAM the game can use? The default wasn't too high. i remember seeing something like that being talked about around here but I don't know where to find it..

It does run on vista, but there are some apps that take up cpu, ram, and video card memory. i just want to get the best performance because i already got the vista machine. no turning back now.

Hey guys, I just got a new notebook today. Core 2 Duo @2GHz, nvidia Go 7950 GTX, 2 GB RAM. Windows VISTA. I started up the ArmA demo and played it (US Demo). To my dissapointment, the only settings i could get good fps on was at 1024x786 with everthing on high besides AA and PostProcess. Viewdistance was at 1600. Any higher resolution/texture detail would lag up the game. My friend has a windows XP laptop the same settings as mine and he can play it on higher resolutions without any lag. Is there any way to optimize windows vista so that ArmA will perform better? I know that there is a way you can allocate more RAM for the game and a way to stop vista from eating up so much memory. But how? Any help would be GREATLY appreciated. Edit: I have not installed ANY drivers of any sort. I just started using the machine out of the box. Also, I find that when it is idle on the desktop, ram usage is 25% and cpu usage is 16%. So theres evidence that SOMETHING is eating up performance. Once again my spcs are Nvidia Go 7950 GTX Core 2 Duo 2.00 ghz 2 GB ram 7200 rpm 160gb hard drive I also got a laptop cooler so if anyone knows how to overclock could you tell me? Thanks again

as lojng as they can integrate multiplayer from all the arma expansin and regular arma, i will be happy. I hate finding servers pockmarked with 5 or 6 ppl when therye should be dozens. no fun at all

No Shit my comptuer cnanot even support arma