Deadfast

Deadfast's Third Person View Adjust the third person camera for infantry to your liking MP Compatible: Yes, client side Signed: Yes, presets only, key here Bored of the standard third person view you get for infantry by default? Would you rather have it over-the-shoulder style? Or perhaps even top-down view if you're feeling nostalgic? :D No problem, you can adjust the camera position to whatever you desire! And unlike the previous ARMA 2 version, this one has a working crosshair as well! There are several presets available, all of which are signed. You can use those online on servers that accept the DFS key. If you can't find one that you fancy you can create your own camera offset, though that one will not be signed. But you can always post it here alongside a screenshot and if it doesn't hurt fair play I might sign it and include it in the next release :) Download: @Armaholic.eu [*]Offsets:

Everything :P. It might have a snappy look but everything else about it is worse than Mantis. The worst offender is the "advanced" search. One would expect it to return some other information than the task title. One would also expect a way to sort the results (such as by date created). Heck, as far as I can tell there isn't a single table in this thing. How can you have an issue tracker without tables?

The new bug tracker system is quite frankly terrible. Somehow Phabricator manages to be even worse than Mantis, a feat I thought impossible.

Deadfast's FPS Counter Don't like Fraps? No problem! MP Compatible: Yes, client side Signed: Yes, server key included or for download here Ever wanted to see what your FPS is in the game without using Fraps? Now you have the option to! :) This little addon displays (well, after you turn it on using a button in the ESC pause menu ;) ) your FPS using the integrated game's FPS function (diag_fps). On top of that you have the option to change some of its settings in an external config file (read the readme!). Download: Version 0.1.1; 5.94kB ZIP Mirror @Armaholic.com Mirror @Armed Assault Info Mirror #1 [*]Version 0.1.0; 4.51kB Mirror @Armaholic.com Mirror #1

Yes, in fact it did. I can guarantee you this is exactly how it worked in Arma 1 and 2. I am reasonably sure this is how it was in OFP too.

Did you check that the control is found correctly? I suspect the findDisplay may be failing to find the display. It's best to use the display reference contained in onLoad's _this.

I'd still do a sync every now and then, just to be safe.

This seems like a very weird way to do a countdown BTW. Why not just count down seconds and then convert this number to minutes and seconds when you need to display it?

Certainly, depends on how much data you are sending though. Once per second sounds definitely far too often. Does the countdown really need to be so accurate? Why not just have each client count down on its own, with occasional synchronization from the server?

Try setFuelCargo.

Might I suggest everyone calms down and stops throwing insults around? If you experience any performance issues please provide as much details as you can (i.e. your specs, your settings, in which situations, what was your FPS before, etc.) so that the developers can reproduce and fix the issue. If you do not experience any performance issues, that's great, just remember that just because it works for you, doesn't mean it will work the same for everybody else. Programming games for PC is hard, a solution that works perfectly for one range of graphics cards may not work so well for a different range.

I meant which data :).

Interesting, what exactly were you testing this with?

I find it difficult to believe since the handling of the code's return value will likely outweigh the benefit gained by not having the _forEachIndex variable. Besides, for a small array this is just premature optimization.

Why would you use count instead of forEach? { _x say3D "alarm"; } forEach [lp1, lp2, lp3, lp4, lp5, lp6];

I never said your CPU needs replacing. Yes, I did say the source of the low FPS is the CPU, as in the game is CPU-bound. I then said that the game needs to be optimized to address this fact.

Keep in mind that the application's bit-ness has nothing to do with threading at all. The one critical problem with a 32bit application is that it can only address (keep track of) up to 4GB of memory. Arma gets around this limitation by only loading the content it really needs into memory ("streaming"). This is of course bottlenecked by the speed at which data can be read from the hard drive, hence why SSD is recommended (it can load data much faster than a regular magnetic drive). Without an SSD you may notice the game briefly freezes every once in a while as you travel through the terrain since new assets are being loaded. A 64bit exe could pretty much do away with this problem as you could load assets from a wider radius around the camera. What a 64bit exe will not fix, however, is your average FPS. If you are standing still and yet your FPS is low then problem is elsewhere. If there aren't a lot of AI moving around then the graphics card is the problem. If you do have a lot of AI or stuff happening in general then the problem is the CPU, an area where Arma could certainly do with some optimization, both by using better parallelism and by making the code more efficient. Would it be possible to make Arma a 64bit application? Certainly, VBS has done it and it originates from the same engine. Would it help? Probably not much.

You really don't need to use mission root and you really should not either. It'll come back to haunt you as soon as you try running it anywhere else but your PC. Just use a relative path, when resolving it Arma looks in the following places: Current mission directory PBOs Current working directory

Wherever you copied the base classes from (in post #5) it is wrong. Try changing... class RscStructuredText { access = 0; idc = -1; type = CT_STATIC; style = ST_CENTER; linespacing = 1; colorBackground[] = {0,0,0,0}; colorText[] = {1,1,1,1}; text = ""; shadow = 2; font = "PuristaLight"; SizeEx = 0.04; fixedWidth = 0; x = 0; y = 0; h = 0; w = 0; }; ...to... class RscStructuredText { idc = -1; type = CT_STRUCTURED_TEXT; style = ST_LEFT; colorBackground[] = { 1, 1, 1, 1 }; x = 0.1; y = 0.1; w = 0.3; h = 0.1; size = 0.018; text = ""; class Attributes { font = "TahomaB"; color = "#000000"; align = "center"; valign = "middle"; shadow = false; shadowColor = "#ff0000"; size = "1"; }; };

Locking the thread per MarkCode82's request.

No, you couldn't, that's a script error. if ({_vehicle isKindOf _x} count _uav > 0) then ... ...would work. But as others have suggested I'd strongly recommend using isKindOf instead.

Please use your existing thread. Closing.

Since Arma 2 the script can be interrupted on any instruction. In case of your example that would be the assignment, the subtractions and the addition. You don't. This isn't information exposed to the script.

Glad I could help :).

From my moderator's panel I can see two interest fields in your profile. I have cleared the second one ("Raw Bones, Accordion Anne Butterfield, Ich bin da noch mal hin. Ein Reisebericht vom Jakobsweg Withn"), please let me know if that helps.