Eda Mrcoch
-
Content Count
380 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Medals
Posts posted by Eda Mrcoch
-
-
Obviously clearing the videocards' memory works great. Is there anyway to force the game to do this on the fly while in-game?
Try the flush "cheat" - http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/ArmA:_Cheats.
-
Sorry if this is a re-run but I tried searching.When playing campaign, saving the game takes pretty much 3 mins 30 secs for me. Is this normal? It's frikkin annoying.
Whoa... I've never got over 30 secs or so, even in the last mission when it crashed on out of memory while loading.
Which mission is it? How big your save file is (Documents\ArmA 2\Saved\ca\missions\campaign\...) ?
-
with the exception of one which lives in the same city as I and curiously have the same ISP as I.Well I am not in any way networking expert but that sure smells like some NAT traversal problems. Does the friend connect to your public IP address like the rest of the guys or some other IP, possibly on ISP's intranet ?
BTW, my connection to the internet is the following:I connect to the Internet thru a Cable modem. Connected to that modem I have a wireless router. Connected to the Router I have my PC connected thru wireless and another PC connected thru LAN and sometimes I also connect my laptop thru wireless. I also have DMZ enable pointing to my PC (that has ArmA2 installed) in the router.
I did some tests, trying to connect my PC to the Router thru LAN with the exact same results (connecting failed). Then I decided to connect my PC directly to the cable modem and after that I could sucessfully connect to the servers/internet games which I wasn't able to connect before (when having the PC connected to the router). But since I have 2 PCs (3 with my laptop) which I want to connect to the internet thru my internet connection I need the router, so connecting directly to the modem is NOT an option!
Again, I beg for help in this one!
So the way I see it:
Your PC over the router -> router over the modem to ISP's network -> friend on the same network * OK
Your PC over the router -> router over the modem to ISP's network -> ISP's gateway to Internet -> other guys on 'net * NOT OK
Your PC directly over the modem to ISP's network -> ISP's gateway to Internet -> other guys * OK
If that is how it is, then the game has problem getting over more than X hops which is kind of weird and is way over my limited knowledge in networking. The traceroute would help if you can compare the one from the outer net to the one from your friend's who can connect. I may be speaking total bullshit here so please take me with pinch of salt.
-
There's still a huge issue with the AI in the campaign following orders correctly. An example of this is, when I (the player) decides to drive the humvee; I order everyone inside. Then, the Sniper, Whatever his name is, does not want to come inside the vehicle. Even though there's a seat open in the back. I sort of understand that he's the designated driver, but it's a bit more realistic in a sense of what's going to happen, that a player wants to actually play as the driver. It's really frustrating and makes the single player almost unplayable at the moment.This might happen for two reasons:
1) If you order them to embark before you've taken driver's seat, Two assumed he will be the driver so he cannot complete your order.
Solution: either wait until you're on the driver's seat or repeat the command for Two, or use complex command to order all of them to get in as cargo in the first place: 4 ->vehicle name -> "cargo"/"in back" (can't recall how is it in EN version)
2) Two is actually stuck somewhere which happens a lot even with supposed centimeter precision AI. Main culprits are the Warfare collections/camps (or in case of Rodriguez the helicopter tail fins :p).
Solution: Try to order the guy to move somewhere at the first place, preferably opposite of the obstruction he is stuck on, or if you can, get the vehicle so close he can get iin.
-
o wow, i had 15/20 FPS with everything on very high now i have 30/40 while raining :eek: i love you!Out of curiosity, do you have any mouse/kb lag? 8 frames prerendered on 30 fps - if I understand nature of the tweak correctly - is more than 250ms delay which should be noticeable.
-
I am still not clear on the VRAM thingy. Isn't it supposed to be in bytes ? I got 1073741824 from autodetection and that divided by 1024^2 gets me 1024MB (which is right).
Either way half of the people in this thread have it completely wrong.
-
Basically the "#1" guy is also a member of the group. The group can be given orders and #1 can't order #1 around so you have a state were #1 is not "in formation" but he is leading.I believe this also creates problem when you are ordering all of your team to enter or leave vehicle that is not part of your group (i.e. Maddox's chopper in campaign). The other group's AI do not have the leader in it's "wait for all these guys to finish embarking/disembarking" list since he do not have the order so the vehicle leaves without you or you're stuck onboard when the rest of the team left.
-
Is there a possibility to re-open the Czech forums in some form?
They are still here but I cannot see them from the main page.
-
C2D E6400@3,2Ghz
4GB DDR2 RAM@800Mhz 4:4:4:11 CR 2T
P965 chipset board
ATI 4870 1GB stock overclock (Sapphire Toxic)
This is kinda shitty, but it seems that with 965 chipset you can go only so far (PCIe 1.1). Got some VPUrecovery crashes too.
Latency in DPC checker is under 10 microseconds mostly, 2-5 when not doing anything.
What interests me more is how the memory subsystem i.e. HDD->RAM->CPU & back affects things. Maybe there is possible to make some ArmA 2 benchmark run by empty persistent dedicated server with unified config file to leave graphics card out of equation, since as seen in results from ArmA Mark Mk.II it is somewhat impossible to force people to run on the same graphics settings to get consistent results.
I recall that RAM bandwidth/latency had a major effect for me when testing ArmA and good ol' OFp way back, more than the CPU or GPU performance itself.
-
I have firm belief that simulation can not be played competitively, since competition has to be fair.
You have to push back the realism - for me the reason for which I play the game.
I am not bashing the idea, it seems interesting, but it would require either very strong rules for the missionmaking which would "dumb down" the gameplay to make it fair or make it NOT a competition per se with points and the ladder.
Even if both teams play both maps on both sides, you can design your mission so you have advantages on either side if you know where to look (reductio ad absurdum: Blue side gets point every second if it camps near that one pine tree in sector AG27, Redfor two points every time they shot their ammocrate in respawn zone).
So you have to have some prescriptions for awarding points, authority that reviews every mission in detail and even then one squad would make helicopter mission since they are 100% TrackIr and specialize in air combat and the other guys would make sniperfest which they mastered and love -> End score 2:2
Also the "we don't want to play your mission, it is badly designed and boring" factor making a possibility for whinefest quite real.
-
http://www.doupe.cz/Doupecz....lt.aspx
This is kind of interesting. I am too lazy/busy to translate it and Google translation makes quite mess of it, so in short summary:
Add-in modules for civilian life, artillery etc.
FSM editor
One core dedicated to AI only
Some "Game2" dynamic & semi-dynamic elements
-
Best to delete just the old @ACE-Islands modfolder.The old uninstaller may delete ACE by mistake.
So I removed modfolder, Ace-islands uninstall.exe, \Dta\userconfig folder, Start menu entries and registry value in HKLM/Microsoft/Currentversion/Uninstall/. Should it be all? I kinda hate having any leftover files or settings caused by unorthodox "delete by force" uninstallation.
-
What about your mainboard? You didn't even mentioned it in your specs. I would try some BIOS fiddling (default values, fail-safe settings, worse RAM timing and everything related, new BIOS if nothing works) before blaming PSU.
-
players have been able to join non dedicated servers I've run from the same machine just fine - does this discount the NAT issue?Probably yes. Sorry, did not noticed that in the first post. Seems to be something else.
What about the log file, any errors in there?
If everything works okay, it should spit something like:<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">Dedicated host created
BattlEye server intialized (optional)
Host identity created
NAT negotiation completed
Arma version blah blah + port
-
ping result from command line says ping is successful (200 ms travel time)please explain what you mean bout using a webserver
200ms kind of suggests that NAT might be the case i.e. you are not pinging your own computer (the time would be in ones of miliseconds).
Read about NAT here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_address_translation
If it is your case, the NAT might be on your router (on which you need to forward the ports server use) or on the provider side - that would mean that you have not your own unique public IP so server hosting (game or not) is out of question for you. That is why I suggested to try something simple like a webserver.
NAT on the provider side roughly means that the provider is using one IP for more customers. If you request data (want to connect to web adress, join ArmA server etc), the NAT redirects the answer back to you as it knows it is the reply to request that came from you. But hosting is different, your port has to be open from the outside for incoming connections (you need to have unique external IP or there is port forwarding in case of NAT). Best thing would be to check if your internet connection is over the NAT or not and if yes then if it is possible to forward ports for ArmA to your machine.
Edit: I looked in the biki and it seems that ArmA can traverse NAT through Gamespy - http://community.bistudio.com/wiki....issues, but I've never needed to try that way
-
I can ping my real world IP from a command line prompt, and on first run of arma, th usual windows firewall block/unblock dialog came up - chose unblock!But do the pings themselves get to your machine? You might be behind a NAT. If you are hosting other games/services can people connect to you (you can try simple webserver for example)?
-
Sadly no - or rather there is no documented way, maybe someone knows but I looked for it already and found nothing.
I believe this was promised before release but didn't make it. You can change some things through description.ext and stringtable but that'll be all.
The other way - embedding missions into addon - works fine, so you might release the mission+extra content as one file, but it has to be put in addons.
-
That's good to know. In that case, maybe BI should be packaging that 300 MB or so as part of the Linux server DL? It would add quite a bit to the size of the DL that they host, but it would also make it a LOT cleaner install.Just tested it. If anyone wonders, these are the files that need to be updated (some are new) on linux dedicated from vanilla 1.08. There might be more of them on QG installations.
Of course you will also need the new binary, battleye should update itself. The beta folder is now useless.
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">\mpmissions\mp1-20_sector-control.porto.pbo
\mpmissions\mp15sectorcontrol.sara.pbo
\addons\usmcd.pbo.bi.bisign
\addons\warfare.pbo
\addons\warfare.pbo.bi.bisign
\dta\bin.pbo
\dta\bin.pbo.bi.bisign
\addons\usmcd.pbo
\addons\ui.pbo
\addons\ui.pbo.bi.bisign
\addons\saralite.pbo
\addons\saralite.pbo.bi.bisign
\addons\cti_buildings.pbo.bi.bisign
\addons\hotfix.pbo
\addons\hotfix.pbo.bi.bisign
\addons\language.pbo
\addons\language.pbo.bi.bisign
\addons\missions.pbo
\addons\missions.pbo.bi.bisign
\addons\cti_buildings.pbo
\addons\a10.pbo
\addons\a10.pbo.bi.bisign
-
It requires all data from 1.14 public version.When I copied my ArmA directory from my PC to my server to get my 1.12 beta server up, I had to copy over 5 GB. That takes quite a while to do over a shared DSL line. Are you sure all data is required? Surely there's stuff in a client install that never gets used on a server. Isn't there a list someplace of exactly what is needed?
TIA
You do not need Campaigns & Missions directory and the root content (executables, dlls etc).
But why reupload the whole thing, if you can just copy it from your old 1.08/1.12 instalation and then overwrite only updated files?
It is about 300megs - I have yet to upload and test the thing. Rsyncing the differences would probably make this even faster.
-
PeerGuardian running? It blocked all my gamespy traffic, had to allow that IPs. It used also 27901 UDP for ign/gamespy today IIRC, but that gave me problems only with connecting to our server, browser was fine.
-
Got NAT negotiation failed errors. It worked yesterday.
Today I even managed to run it with battlEye, but after a short while I got the error and it has not been working since then (BattlEye disabled again).
Segfault errors
Weird - it works now, although FPS go to crap
-
http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/saveStatus
Not sure if it works in ArmA the same as in OFp. IIRC Sinews of War MP save method in Flashpoint was based on this, though it was not used to export data from the game.
The objects.sav is probably rapified (binarized) like all other save files but that should not be a big problem.
-
Well, I don't have a remote thermal sensor at your GTX so until you post your temperatures idle and under load (preferably before the crash - use nTune or other software for logging these) no one can answer you. I would also suggest to underclock the graphics card to lower the general temperature and see if the crashes persist.
-
All key actions seem to have a type of raw code associated with it, in the ArmaProfile file. I wonder is there one for this action, that i could manually change in this profile!!Thanks
That are DirectInput scan codes AFAIK. For keyboard it is simple - http://www.gamespp.com/directx/directInputKeyboardScanCodes.html (in hexadecimal).
For mouse it is probably more complicated (for me - I don't know anything about directInput). I just quickly tried to swap codes (keyDefaultAction[] be shooting) in there and it kinda worked, but there seems to be two codes for a mouse button (one for clicking and one for holding) which are a byte apart. So I would guess that codes would be :
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">
65538 click right
65538+127 = 65665 hold right
65536 click left
65663 hold left
Did not tested that, though.
Beta Patching Testing Forums: Usage Guidelines.
in ARMA 2 & OA - BETA PATCH TESTING
Posted
By using both the .exe and the -beta mod you can try out the tweaks in the data but it can also make your savegames or edited missions unusable for other versions.
You are not out of the danger even if you use only the .exe - for example BIS might change the format of saved files - so remember: You are using beta at your own risk.
Also I have a plea to BIS for more detailed changelog. This was always a minor gripe with official patches but if you want the community to do good reporting then it should be clear what we should test in the first place.
Now for some §18 infraction: :p
I think there should be new (perhaps autogenerated with changelog on top) thread for every build, it is getting awfully crowded in the sticky one. The old build's thread should be closed by the time the new one appears. Allowing individual threads about issues here would make this subforum a clumsy replacement for existing CIT. Now there would be the tracker, troubleshooting forum, the big betapatch thread and also lots of issue threads here that might not even be related to betas itself - an awfull mess for developers and the moderating team. Maybe some dev should shine a little light on how they prefer this to be organized.