guyguy1

One thing about ArmA which really concerned me was the damage models. I thought that since the game takes place in a modern time frame, the damage models would be revised to simulate body armor. Unfortunately, it has not been done so yet (And IMO I think that this should be patched in ArmA, not left to modders to revise). In ArmA, one shot from a pistol/mp5 to the torso instantly kills the player. Sometimes if you're lucky, it's 2 shots. There's something wrong with that, because when military standard body armor with rifle round-defeating plates is being worn by a physically fit and adrenaline-pumped soldier, there is no way that one or two shots from a 9 mm will bring the soldier down and keep in combat ineffective/badly wounded (or for that matter, one rifle round to plate carrying areas). Here is my idea for Game2 (and hopefully a patch for ArmA). One game that has extroardinarily realistic damage models is Ghost Recon (original, island thunder, desert siege, jungle storm). The system worked by creating hit zones for certain parts of the soldier's body. Then, there was an automatic 10 % chance that one shot would incapacitate the player (in every hit zone). Based on the endurance level of the player, and the multipliers in the different hit zones (For example, the head had a 9x multiplier so there was a 90% chance that shrapnel/1 shot from any weapon would kill the player), the player could take 2-9 (Endurance level 1-8) hits. This is extremely realistic, and offers much greater depth into the possibilities of the game. Because a hitpoint system such as that in OFP and ArmA is basically creating a clone army (physically), it limits the potential for the game because every man/woman in the game had the exact same HP. In battle, soldiers often die from 1-2 hits. However IRL, many a times, a soldier can take many shots and still be alive. The strokes of luck encountered by soldiers, as well as physicall differences, create variety in the ways that different people can sustain injuries and survive or die. The Damage multiplier system in conjunction with the 10% auto incapacitation and endurance stats in Ghost Recon create a sense of total realism (in some ways, more realistic than OFP/ARMA) because I know that placing two shots to each man of a 6 man squad wil not kill each man (I hope you understand what I mean). The multipliers and 10% auto incapacitation formula compensates for the rare occurances in which soldiers survive rounds to the head, as well as for the times that soldiers survive several hits to the limbs/body/etc. In my opinion, a damage model system for Game2 which is similar to that of Ghost Recon's (which is more realistic than OFP's and ArmA's) would revolutionize Game2's possibilities, depth, and obviously, realism). I really hope that an overhaul in the damage model system for soldiers is completed, because in combat, behind the guns and artillery shells and bullets are the soldiers, and to inaccurately simulate the soldier is almost the same as to inaccurately simulate combat. here is a link to look at which describes the G.Recon system Incredibly Realistic EDIT: Please, don't PM me and call me a GR worshipper. I sincerely believe that the damage models in ghost recon are far more realistic than of those in Arma and OFP. I just want Game2 to be a great game. OFP/ArmA's scale and environment's realism are unmatched. The soldiers are also very realistically depicted. But for Game2, I think that by incorporating this type of damage system and AI i mentioned above, itwould really add another dimension to the game's playability and realism. By replacing the old damage model system with this newer, more realistic and dynamic system, and by replacing the dreaded damage texture with damage decals, Game2's realism will be upped to a whole new level.

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.?

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.

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

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

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).

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

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.

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

USSRsniper, if enemy has AP rounds, it is ok as long as it level IV . Dragon Skin now comes in level V, which doesn't have a NIJ classification yet because Dragon Skin is the only armor that can defeat level V rounds. Basically, the US government told Pinnacle Armor (maker of Dragon Skin) to keep the level V bullet speeds secret. I do not know the nature of these rounds except that they are super-armor piercing. here is a vid showing these... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKnfHhRl7U0 For your info, As yoiu know, Dragon Skin uses small discs that overlap to create a type of scale mail (like fish scales that overlap). In the video, you can see the scales sticking out of the front in a square pouch. That is not the only option. They made the scale coverage 10x12 inches just for testing purposes because making the entire vest level V bulletproof would be a waste of money. Testing protocols in US require rounds to be fired into a 10x12 area, so 10x12 pouch shown would be perfect. A soldier could easily purchase a dragon skin level V vest that covers the ENTIRE chest/back/sides with these scales. However, it's more realistic to buy a level III dragon skin because everyone in iraq uses AK's. level V would be for a war against like...Europe..or maybe USSRsniper hehe. Problem is our damn beaurocratic military and government purchases inferior body armor for our troops and makes them die and bleed in it, and then doesn't let them buy Dragon Skin to preserve their sweetheart moneysaving contracts. The army also sabotaged Dragon Skin testing when they subjected it to unusual conditions and incompetent testing staff (led by, you guessed it, the FOLKS WHO WORK FOR THE MANUFACTURER of Interceptor Body armor). Note: the narrater says the rounds were travelling just under a mile per second. Now, we know that the rifle they were shooting was the m14 7.62 rifle. 1 mile per second is 5280 feet per second. I do not think level V armor should be in ArmA. Would be too hard to accurately simulate because the government won't let the bullet speeds of level V bullets to be shown to public, AND the standard soldier/marine in US army can't wear dragon skin cuz those damn beaurocrats and corrupt generals wont let them. So, stick with Interceptor. If BI needs help, I can give it to them. I am an experienced ballistics expert/body armor tester for a decade. Now, for comparison level IV rounds are about 2850 feet per second on AVERAGE, none faster than 3200 feet per second. remember, level IV rounds are the AP sniper rifle like the SVD. Just under 1 mile per second is about high 4000's to low 5000's feet per second. that is a CRAZY jump from level IV to V. edit: from my experience as a ballistics expert, Russian standards were no greater than 27mm of trauma. they might have changed it now, but under 10mm is extremely unlikely unless they want their troops tugging on 50 pounds vests.

USSR sniper, level IV armor is classified by the NIJ (the standard for ballistics in the U.S.) as being able to stop a 7.62X63mm at 2800 feet per second. Your standard AK-47 7.62x39mm is only level III bullet. the SVD dragunov round is a level IV 7.62x54R at 2850 feet per second. In simpler terms, you can charge at the enemy with a Dragon Skin and survive as long as they're shooting you in the chest/sides/back with a level IV round (level IV rounds are almost impossible to encounter in Iraq unless its an SVD. standard iraqi insurgent weapon is AK-47, which is a level III round). You can also charge with a standard issue Interceptor Body Armor, but you'll have to wish for luck for the bullets to strike the plates and not the kevlar portion of the vest. The advantage with Dragon Skin is being able to take more hits, less trauma to the body (this is crucial), and flexibility. It's the world's first flexible rifle-defeating armor system that meets level IV requirements. Don't believe me? 9 US generals in afghanistan wear it, as well as a few in iraq. US generals' bodyguards wear it U.S. Secret Service personnel wear it Elite US special forces and foreign special forces wear it US department of Energy officials wear it i'm not going to describe the stink up we have here in the US between the army and the manufacturer of Dragon Skin because this thread is about ArmA. I will tell you guys, however, that Dragon Skin is better than Interceptor and the Army is lying about their Interceptor body armor being the "best in the world". The designer of Interceptor even admits that his armor is outdated and inferior to Dragon Skin. The plates used by the Interceptor Vest can defeat at least ONE level IV round. So, answering your question, Interceptor (the armor in ArmA that US soldiers wear) CAN defeat 7.62 rounds if hit in the plate. As for Dragon Skin, yes it can, and it can stop level IV bullets much better than interceptor. Please read the info from the link I provided. No body armor stops .50 caliber. I'm assuming you were smart enough to know that and was just joking. edit: I'm going on vacation. restating the same facts over and over is getting extremely annoying. you can believe what you want about body armor; you may very well be wrong if you don't agree with me. I apologize if I sound like an asshole, but I am really passionate about this body armor issue because I am aware of the treason our military (U.S.) is committing to its soldiers by not providing the best body armor so that they can save some money and contracts. All of my friends are also aware of this and we have written to our congressman and now, they have publicly launched an investigation into Dragon Skin and the military's handling of it. NBC news did a report about Dragon Skin, and fouind it to be superior to interceptor. touchdown. WATCH THESE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMEIORtJ-DE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTrTrsJu3pk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKDWv...elated&search=

DreDay 44 mm is the NIJ limit there was a recent test  comparing Interceptor with Dragon Skin that was commissioned by NBC broadcasting over worries that the Army wasn't giving the troops the best armor. Dragon skin trauma never exceeded 30mm (in some cases, it was under 20 mm), while interceptor exceeded 40 mm a couple times and never was under 30 mm. 35mm will give you a big bruise, but you'll still be ok @ Balschoiw I understand it is pricey, but the U.S. army claims their armor is the best in the world. It just isn't (well, maybe it is for the price, who knows, but it aint better than Dragon Skin, period). Either theyre being intentionally misleading, or they're outright lying. Hey, if a dragon skin vest costs 5000 apiece, get a contract for 200,000 of these babies, and you could probably cut the individual unit cost to ~4000 apiece. T'would cost less than a billion, and since we're spending tens of billions per F-22 aircraft, I think we can afford life-saving equipment for cheaper. 42% of marines deaths caused by torso wounds in 2004 could have been prevented had they wore armor that covered more of the torso. DS covers almost the entire torso with rifle-stopping materials, is flexible, and defeats round after round with low-trauma. please refer to the link I provided in one of my earlier posts in this thread. that's all the info you'll ever need. is ther any way we can convince BIS to add body armor to ArmA? The guys are wearing Interceptor body armor (both the SLA and the US...which is strange), yet they're dying from 1 hit by a level III rifle round in the plate areas when they're wearing level IV plates. It's standard issue nowadays to have level IV plates with the interceptor, yet it seems to me that the vest they're wearing in ArmA is stuffed with cotton. edit: ah what the heck, here's the link again http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=99682 watch all them videos and read all the facts provided in the first post.

Either you started your career at the age of 5 or your profile needs some "tuning" man... Balschoiw, what the heck? Dragon Skin is the best body armor available today, it is state of the art. It stops the biggest baddest bullets short of .338 magnum/.50 caliber, and it is flexible and weighs roughly the same as an interceptor system of identical proportions. It takes dozens of hits from rifle rounds, and it is flexible. let me re-iterate. It is a FLEXIBLE rifle-defeating armor system. I think you should do YOUR homework. I have talked to returning servicemen who have defied the army ban on Dragon Skin, and theytell me that it weighs rougfhly the same (about 2 pounds over interceptor fully plated), yet is flexible and provides more area protection vs threats commonly faced in iraq. 42% of marines who died from isolated torso injuries died cuz they were wearing inferior equipment. Even a Dragon Skin SOV-2000 level III vest would have saved them. The people I have talked to wear the SOV-2000, cuz the Iraqi insurgents don't use heavy armor piercing incindiary rifles which would require a level IV Dragon Skin SOV-3000. If you want verification, I will gladly provide you their contact info and they will teach you why Dragon Skin is the silver bullet in terms of providing protection from small-arms in current combat situations faced by our troops today. However, before I provide you the info, you should go to youtube and view the Dragon Skin testing videos. their level III armor is that effective at stopping level III rounds (AK-47 standard issue bad guy weapon), and t heir level IV armor is just as effective at stopping level IV rounds. Arma Damage models are flawed, 9 mm and level III rifle round sshould not be penetrating soldiers plates and coming out the other side of the soldiers body (through yet another plate....)

yes, the NIJ standards are established by testing the armor from a range of 10 ft. Meaning, the bullets are fired from 10 ft of the armor, and the armor produces an acceptable trauma and stops the bullet. As an expert, I am dissapointed that BI did not implement more realistic damage system in ArmA. Oh well, still a really fun game! multiplayer rocks

Seeing as nobody around here has been a ballistics expert... NIJ ballistic standards are as follows Level I- .22 caliber lead 1200fps level II- 9mm 1400fps and all lesser threats level IIIA- 9mm 1600 fps, .44 magnum 1400 fps and all lesser threats level III- 7.62x39mm AK ball round, 2400 fps level IV- 7.62x54R Armor Piercing Incindiary 2800 fps (dragunov round). Current US army system is Interceptor Body Armor. Weighs 28 pounds without groin/shoudler pads anmd all 4 plates. Vest itself can stop 9mm but not .44 magnum so it cannot truly be called level IIIA. 4 plates, two in fonrt and two in the sides, level IV protection. YOU WILL NOT DIE IF YOU ARE HIT THERE WITH LEVEL IV ROUND IN THESE PLATES! These plates are tested to make sure that a certain amount of trauma is produced. Too much trauma, and the wearer will suffer crushed organs. If you're hit wearing these plates with a levle IV round or weaker, you will survive. It is not a myth to survive level IV rounds/armor piercing high caliber rounds if you are hit in the body armor. You will be bruised, but you will be able to fight. the E-SAPI level IV plates in the front, back, and sides that are fitted into the interceptor can take 2-3 hits before failing. The bigger plates (Front and back) can take 3-4 level IV shots with acceptable trauma, then usually on the 5th shot the trauma is unacceptable or the bullet goes through all the way. Better Body Armor is Dragon Skin, Flexible, Takes lots of punishment, level IV certified, covers 95% of your torso from rifle threats, and usually 40% less trauma. See link below for video testing and comparison against interceptor body armor. please refer to this link it is VERY insightful. http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=99682 edit: my view about body armor in Arma Why not do it? ArmA damage models are unrealistic as of right now. You shot some guy in the plate from ~50m out with an m4 or AK, and they die. That is not realistic at all.. My experience: I have worked as a ballistics researcher and tester. I have over 10 years of experience with ballistics. So, take me as a credible source

ArmA soldier damage models are crap. a bulletfrom an mp5 will kill a soldier one hit when you shoot him in the back while he wears kevlar and a level IV ballistic plate designed to stop an SVD dragunov armor piercing incindiary round. small arms do too much damage in ArmA. the only reason why people think its realistic is because theyve been playing too much cs. See my post in the Game2 Suggestion Forum on page 3 (New Damage Model System). That's what it should be like.

Intel P4 1.79GHz Nvidia GeForce2 Mx 400 1 GB RAM 27GB Hard Drive I can't run arma on this. Wait, does having a e6600 Core 2 Duo chip slow down gameplay because ArmA can only use 1 core? Also, where do you chance the Maxmem option for ram usage?

I love ArmA. the graphics and sound are great and engaging and the new features kick ass. Don't play single player though; the AI is dumb. Multiplayer on ArmA is so fun!