laggy

Tried ArmAII now... it's excellent and everything I hoped for... thanks BIS!!! This is your true masterpiece. Only suggestions: -More enterable buildings, quite few right now and that's limiting. -Optimized performance on dual cores and Vista. Laggy

Far from an expert on this stuff, but your GPU is only 256MB. I would guess this is the problem. Your CPU, RAM and OS is the same or better than mine and I find ArmA2 playable.

Depends on how you define "good" ;) I got score 2536 and I consider my ArmAII to be "playable" but far from perfect. Some people would probably disagree with me and say it really sucks. Also remember that ArmAII will most likely run better and better after each patch (ArmA1 did) and my system is above recommended specs. I have faith :p

@TexasJR ArmAIIMark test: Hope that helps. ---------- Post added at 12:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:01 AM ---------- Don't know if your CPU is dual, but if not... I would say :( My C2D 3.0 GHz is my bottleneck. Future patches might help though... maybe... but a multi core seems very necessary.

What GPU ? Quite important in this matter...

All on HIGH except PP on LOW Score: 2309 Seems like the graphics settings don't really matter that much. Is this game only about CPU?

Intel Core 2 Duo E6850, 3.0 GHz 3.00 GB RAM NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX (182.50 drivers) Windows Vista Home Premium 32 bit German version. Patch 1.01 No mods or tricks (no blurr, maxmem etc.) Graphics settings only set in option menu. 1680*1050 Texture Detail - Normal Anisotropic Filtering - Normal Terrain Detail - Normal Objects Detail - Normal Shadow Detail - Normal PostProcess Effects- Low Score: 2536 Pretty much like I expected... playable :) Laggy

Dell XPS 420 Windows Vista Home Premium 32 bit Intel Core 2 Duo E6850, 3.0 GHz 3.00 GB RAM NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX (182.50 drivers) Installed the game tonight German version. Patch 1.01 No mods or tricks (no blurr, maxmem etc.) Graphics settings only set in option menu. VD 2000+ Fill rate 100% Everything on Normal except: Shadow detail - High PP - Low AF - Low Haven't tried ArmA Mark yet, but it seems to run OK. - Not as detailed as I can run ArmA1 (all on very high) but still overall nicer looking. - Campaigns first couple of missions are very playable as well as the SP missions I've tried. - Textures loading slow sometimes, just like ArmA1. - Editor test: Total of 8 groups fighting (3 infantry and 1 armored/side) + 1 player in Chernogorsk is playable but quite laggy. - 4 hours of testing and NO CRASH so far, more stable than ArmA1... Kind of what I expected and will probably be better after some tweaking, don't understand why so many are panicking about the performance, a few more patches and VOILA!!! Laggy

Dell XPS 420 Windows Vista Home Premium 32 bit Intel Core 2 Duo E6850, 3.0 GHz 3.00 GB RAM NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX (768 MB dedicated, 2000 MB+ shared, with latest drivers) Anyone able to predict this rigs performance with ArmA2? It is slightly above recommended specs on all fronts :rolleyes: Laggy

Hello, Don't have the game yet, but I'm anxious to know if the description.ext works the same as in ArmA1. Heard rumors that it doesn't. Does anyone know? Laggy

Thanks, Could you maybe post some info on sounds an pics when you have solved it? That is kind of the most important usage of .ext I think. Cheers

Hello all, I'm trying to make use of the laserTarget objects in a mission. I have very little information on what they actually are, how I should use them and if they are useful at all i editing. 1- What is the difference between i.e a "LaserTargetWBase " and a "LaserTargetW" ? 2- Do I only need one or both ? 3- When created by createVehicle, what is their status in terms of being "dangerous" so enemies actually fire at it ? 4- Do they work like other objects, meaning they are automatically created above ground and in non-collision positions ? 5- Has anyone used this type of object with any luck, in for i.e an Air Support function ? My targets are usually completely ignored by the AI. It only works sometimes and just if NO other enemies are around. Grateful for any help, spent days crying already. Laggy

Hello all, I have enjoyed many years of OFP and Arma by now, both as a player and mission designer. What I wonder is why BIS (afaik) never has concidered to make a game similar to OFP/ArmA in terms of engine/concept, but in a completly different time setting. I would run to the store to buy a medieval or renaissance "ArmA" where you could experience huge battles and sieges from a 1:st person perspective. Games like Medieval Total War are never really immersive enough, just tactical and strategic. Medieval times is a classic and popular subject and probably less demanding on your PC, due to the low firing rates of the weapons. Designing a function for hand to hand combat and horses is basically the only thing that's needed to make it work. Maybe I'm the only one wishing for this, but I just had to bring it up since I've been wondering for quite a while. Laggy

Hello all, I have enjoyed many years of OFP and Arma by now, both as a player and mission designer. What I wonder is why BIS (afaik) never has concidered to make a game similar to OFP/ArmA in terms of engine/concept, but in a completly different time setting. I would run to the store to buy a medieval or renaissance "ArmA" where you could experience huge battles and sieges from a 1:st person perspective. Games like Medieval Total War are never really immersive enough, just tactical and strategic. Medieval times is a classic and popular subject and probably less demanding on your PC, due to the low firing rates of the weapons. Designing a function for hand to hand combat and horses is basically the only thing that's needed to make it work. Maybe I'm the only one wishing for this, but I just had to bring it up since I've been wondering for quite a while. Laggy

"Mount and Blade" was the right idea, but not visual enough I'm afraid. My personal opinion. Don't understand how that would differ from the massive amount of standard animations (not playmoves or switchmoves for cutscenes) in ArmA. Isn't there tons of different ones already that are actually used in any mission/fight by the "default game engine"? Multiple dying variations, standing, crouching, going prone, running, aiming, entering vehicles, throwing grenades, using RPG/M136 etc. Thousands of units is maybe asking to much, but 100+ within view distance is already possible and working well in ArmA. Laggy

"Mount and Blade" was the right idea, but not visual enough I'm afraid. My personal opinion. Don't understand how that would differ from the massive amount of standard animations (not playmoves or switchmoves for cutscenes) in ArmA. Isn't there tons of different ones already that are actually used in any mission/fight by the "default game engine"? Multiple dying variations, standing, crouching, going prone, running, aiming, entering vehicles, throwing grenades, using RPG/M136 etc. Thousands of units is maybe asking to much, but 100+ within view distance is already possible and working well in ArmA. Laggy

Tried to look for a change log for 1.14 but couldn't find it. Was Porto included in 1.14 as well? Cheers

To be able to technically test your MP missions I read that you can create a dedicated server on your computer, then start ArmA normally and connect to your own dedicated server through the MP menu. That way you run an independant server and independent client on one machine. I can't make it work, ArmA crashes as soon as I click on Multiplayer. This is how I do and how have been told I should do: 1. I start the Arma.exe desktop shortcut with this: Target : "C:\Program Files\Bohemia Interactive\ArmA\arma.exe" -server Start in: "C:\Program files\Bohemia Interactive\ArmA" A new window appears with this text: 16:06:18 Dedicated host created. 16:06:19 Host identity created. (I uninstalled BattlEye on advice from a knowledgable dedicated server person) 2. I start ArmA in normal player mode and click Multiplayer... CTD. Message reads: ArmA has stopped working and will be shut down. 3. If I instead start as player, click on Multiplayer and then AltTab to desktop and create a server... The server crashes, but ArmA is still running. If I then quickly AltTab back to ArmAs MP game menu I can sometimes see a fading image of my server in the list. What am I missing here? Do I have to install some special server function? Is it Windows Vista? Could it be CPU overload? Can you start the server on the other core? How? ArmA otherwise runs great on my machine: Dell XPS 420 Intel Core 2 Duo 3.00 GHz 3Gb RAM Nvidia 8800GTX (768Mb) Windows Vista 32 Can someone help me? Laggy

Thanks all, Cheers

You are awesome... It didn't crash. Thank you so much! Do you know how to do the server config stuff, with passwords and things? Laggy

Still crashes, Ive tried: ArmA.exe arma_server.exe -server -config=server.cfg Nothing works

I'm talking about a Dedicated server, not a Hosted server. Cheers

No 1 is solved, It seems that other people have also found that the QG installation spreads a little bit here and there. Not just in the mod folder. See: http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....t=75741 Unfortunate since it becomes harder to know if you are designing addon free missions.

Hi all, I always install the game with default settings, meaning I don't mess around with custom folders or such. Still very weird things are going on with how ArmA and QG works for me. 1. Even when I start 1.14 without QG I still have access to the Island Porto, which is a QG addon. When I look in my ArmA original addons folder (not within DBE1 folder) I see a couple of DBE1 pbo's which I definitely didn't put there. Should they be there? 2. When I save my MP missions through the editor "export to MP missions" they don't turn up anywhere. The only way I can play my MP missions is by copying the folder in user missions and paste them in the MP folder. 3. In Vista you don't have a folder called "Program Files" and ArmA instead gets automatically installed in "Program" folder. How much of a problem can that cause? Cheers Laggy

Thx again! Thought I had done something weird without knowing it. Laggy