oldbear

In a game based on the use of the compass and the map for orientation, it could be interesting to have a survey map. Of course, it would be a useful asset to orient himself and organize the actions of his camp. The Everon map created by the "topography" code from Operation Flashpoint Arma:ColdWar Assault is completely useless. It is always possible to make your own map from assembled screenshots, that's what I did! It's useful, but it's of poor quality.😕 This is why, in any case, I think that distributing a map in the form of a .pdf file would be a minimum, a printed map would be perfect.

Hi ! The basic rule with Arma3 is that performance is directly related to the efficiency and frequency of operation of the processor on a core or two. Here and now, in my opinion the best candidate for the job on the Intel side is the i5-13600K for an obvious reason, it's 5.10 GHz Turbo Max ! We know nothing about Arma4 hardware requirements, but looking at what's going on with Reforger, it is possible to think that alongside a high-performance processor, a high-level graphics card will be needed.

For Arma3, nothing has changed, more than the overall efficiency, regardless of brand, the processor with the highest boost frequency on a core is the best. Today, the Core i7-13700K like the Ryzen 7 7700X both show a maximum frequency of 5.4 GHz in Turbo/Boost, they have an L3 cache memory of 30 MB and 32 MB respectively. In conclusion, they are at the same level of performance for Arma 3. For Arma 4, we know nothing... On the other hand, by observing the evolution with Enfusion in Arma Reforger, we can say that on the one hand this trend will continue for the processor despite the finally open possibilities of modern multithreading, but that moreover the performance of the graphics card should be decisive

@Yyo Hello! Ok, I never encountered this kind of problem, but we will try to find a way out. First, let's get back to basics. - disable all external applications supposed to improve, optimize the operation of the processor, the graphics card, the PC in general. I am thinking in particular of the tools delivered with the motherboards. Disable monitoring apps as well.The goal is to eliminate the causes of conflicts between Windows, Steam and Arma. - disable the Arma 3 profile created in the NVidia control panel. Video settings should only be made from within the game itself. - in the BIOS go back to the basic settings. - in Steam, verify the integrity of the game data -https://help.steampowered.com/en/faqs/view/0C48-FCBD-DA71-93EB - in the Arma launcher restore default parameters, unload all DLC, unload all Mods. The game alone must then be launched without any other application, browser, or social media. So tell us how it goes ...

Hi! As an OFP veteran and still an armavangelist, I ask the question, "what is it really necessary to have as hardware to not only run the game but also to be able to enjoy it?" The Minimum and Recommended specifications were published when Arma Reforger was released: Minimum PC requirements - CPU : Intel Core i5-4460 / AMD FX-4300 - RAM : 8 GB RAM - GPU : NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 or similar - DX 12 mandatory Recommended PC requirements - CPU : Intel Core i7-6700 or AMD equivalent - RAM : 16 GB RAM - GPU : NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti or AMD equivalent - DX 12 mandatory - OS Windows 10 64-bit I would like to open here the discussion on what is absolutely necessary as hardware to play, and what are the advantages and disadvantages of different settings.

I can show you the current stage of my work in progress ... I will not share my WIP map because as you can see, ATM it's a rather crude attempt with a lot of missing parts and wrong scale. It's enough to communicate with my team, or to situate myself when I'm bug hunting, but it's far too far from the quality I expect from a real topographic map. Moreover, this is the map of a terrain under BI copyright and I do not wish to be in conflict with its provisions.

Based on my own tests of Arma Reforger, I can say that the official Minimum configuration seems to be at the right level. A minimum configuration based on a Ryzen 3 1300X, roughly at the level of the i5-4460 associated with an RX 6400 close to the GTX 1650 reference, allows playing at more than 35 FPS in High and around 50 FPS in Medium in SP in Game Master mode. On the other hand, to be able to play a graphics card at the level of the GTX 1650 is mandatory. Regardless of the processor, a less efficient graphics card will give a low FPS level associated with stuttering. Personally, because I am an OFP veteran, the most surprising thing is the inversion of the hierarchy between the CPU and the GPU. From this point of view, Arma Reforger has become a game like other current games. What bothers me most about the game is that it's hard to get rid of the blur. I understand the technical constraint for the display of distant objects, but I would like to have an image with better sharpness nearby. So I'm looking for settings that oppose the "bokeh" tendency of the game display.

On my own main gaming rig [R5 5600X / RX 5700 /32 GB 3600 C16] Reforger gets ~40/60 FPS mainly on High with 3200 m Draw distance in 1080P. I'm looking for settings that decrease in-game blur, it seems much more difficult with Reforge than it was with Arma3. ATM testing those ... Nearby depth of field > No Depth of field Quality > None Foliage smoothing > Grass What I find worrying is that the GPU usage jumps to 100% as soon as the game is opened, the card heats up a lot in the 90°/100° range.

Hi, In my opinion, there is not much solution except to use the large "grass cutters" (10 m x 10 m). You can use a script such as this one ... grass cutters script by Sa-Matra

For my part, I tested the limits of the Minimum configuration. Since I don't have "10-year-old" processors like the i5-4460 (2014) or the FX-4300 (2012), I used a Ryzen 3 1300X, and for the graphics card, in the same area performance than the GTX 1650, the only one in my collection is a GTX 970. I tested the Ryzen 3 1300X/ GTX 970 / 16 GB 3200MHz C16 configuration at 1080p in Game Master gaming mode in SP on a circuit that I reproduced on each test, it gives… - Low: 60 FPS, clutters "mottled" display, building interior display flickers through windows - Medium: 40/50 FPS, display of textures and clutter acceptable, still windows lighting flickering. - High: 30/40 FPS, more beautiful but less smooth. GPU core and memory usage at 100%. - Ultra: 20/30 FPS, choppy display, 100% GPU core and memory usage. Lower CPU core frequencies. In my opinion, with a Minimum configuration, in 1080p, in SP, settings in Medium, the game is completely playable. Obviously, Enfusion shows a break in the distribution of roles between the CPU and the GPU. Unlike the previous Arma, completely CPU dependent, with Reforger, it's the graphics card that makes the difference. I checked this by mounting an RX 550 2 GB, I confirm that it is not playable even in Low at 15/20 FPS. A GTX 1650 level card is therefore mandatory, for the "AMD equivalent" one would have to test with an RX 570 and/or an RX 6400, a graphic card in the same performance zone, DX 12 compatible and having at least 4 GB of memory.

Hi! From what I have seen on my own tests, the GTX 970 is not bad, just at the minimum playable level. It needs to be confirmed by doing in-game tests, an R5 3600 / RX 6600 (XT) combination should give good results.

The functions allocated to drives A: and B: have varied since the early days of MS DOS, but traces of these changes persist in modern versions of the OS. In principle, although it is theoretically possible, I advise not to use the letters A and B to designate a system disk, C : remains by default the disk sought by Windows to install the system and certain proprietary software will only work on C : . In the case raised by Gunter Severloh, it would probably be necessary to know the mechanisms specific to Steam to have an idea of what is happening. It's entirely possible that Steam has excluded the use of drives A: and B: In my opinion, you might as well immediately place the Steam library for Arma Reforger on a disk identified by another letter.

@Pete Fox Speaking about i3, of course the i3-12100 has been launched Q1' 22 and i3-10100 launched Q2'20 is still in production. The i3-12100 can get performances at the i7 7700K / R5 3600X level.

I bought Arma Reforger because I'm an Arma fan and I like Beta testing and from what I've seen there's quite a bit to do.

Arma4 release date ? It will depend on the energy, time and patience you are going to put in Arma Reforger debugging. As there is a lot to do, not so ... soon ™.

@twisted What I understand is that Arma Reforger offers a different experience and probably a break from personal gaming experiences. We'll know the details today, and we can probably experiment very soon. At the same time, nothing will prevent you from continuing to play Arma3 the way you like.

@redarmy As a matter of principle, I don't like to refer to a leaked document, but this one looks authentic and what does it say? So, it's simple, either you wait for something to happen and it will be done when it's done, soon™, or you take part in a collective project. The project is to test Enfusion in-game and share feedback on the mechanics of an Enfusion-powered game while learning the new modding tools. It's up to you.

What the leaked "Marketing and Brand guide" document reveals is the nature of the Arma Reforger game that will be released. It's a game akin to Project Argo in design, limited and multi-player oriented with strengths and a support perspective that Argo didn't have. It's a possible gameplay sample of a future Arma, a possibility to test how Enfusion works and maybe make it evolve. The cross-platform aspect is essential, it must be remembered that Operation Flashpoint: Elite, the game on XBox has served as the basis for all the modding tools used by the community for 20 years! What does the "Situation" section say... ... Nothing more, nothing less. This document is not supposed to give precise technical indications on the game. We only have 2 days left to wait ... and even a little less now 😎

Now, having completely read the leaked document, we all know that on the one hand BI clearly situates Arma Reforger as a return to Arma's roots in the continuity of its choices and its values and as the necessary evolution of both the from the point of view of the game engine and the choice of platforms. For the details and not to invent / imagine elements that are not explicitly described in the document, the best is to wait for the 17th. We have been waiting for years, we can wait 3 more days ...

As I am not a fan of so-called "social media" but very interested in the evolution of the Enfusion game engine, I would like to know where I can subscribe to the Bohemia Newsletter as suggested in the FAQ about Enfusion.

For me, what is envisaged is not just a mere demo, but a working Demo, a Beta sandbox, to involve the community in the development of the future of the game. 😎

From my point of view, Arma 4 is not on the agenda, as has been said previously. On the other hand, the timing would be consistent to announce the public release of Enfusion Demo. I have still in mind an interview of Pavel Šafář, Project Lead, on 80.lv site : The Development Process Behind Bohemia Interactive's Enfusion Engine, a passage particularly caught my attention as an OFP veteran and still an armavangelist. Pavel Šafář : Our current plan is to release a game demo that will demonstrate the engine’s capabilities. I also assume that we’ll be supporting it throughout the year. I don’t mean just fixing any issues people will find. We expect people will start playing with our engine and editor, which will surely result in many things we’ll need to deal with, including issues, questions, and new features to document.

@WGP About "scene complexity", there is no magic, you have to explain what the parameter applies to. During "Autodetect" process , ArmA 3 scan your hardware and applies what has been configured as the "good" value considering the processor and the graphics card, setting a value for scene complexity. The results of the auto-detection are sometimes strange, it is for this reason that I propose to modify them with my "Method" by trying to better adapt to the CPU while maintaining the best visual quality. Scene Complexity is tied to the Texture/Object/Terrain settings, so lowering the values of these parameters will have the same effects in game. So lowering the "Scene Complexity" is lowering the visual quality of the game, and setting it to low value has the same effect as setting Texture/Object/Terrain to "Low".

@Frank1551 Welcome in our Armaverse. 100 FPS in Arma3 running a Ryzen 5 1600X is either a bad joke. You can get this figure using 500m view distance and Low. If you don't know the essential point of the functioning of Arma3, you must know that the game is totally dependent on the frequency and the power of the CPU especially on 1 core, knowing that now, 4 cores are necessary and that the game still takes advantage of 6 to 8 cores. GPU performance is secondary and as far as I'm concerned, I think for this game an RTX 3060 is an overkill. A GTX 1660 Ti is quite sufficient to benefit from good graphics quality. So, in getting 30 FPS in MP with a Ryzen 5 1600X is in line with what we can expect. There are not many ways to enhance a bit your FPS level. On the free side, lower a bit the "Global Visibility" parameter and to for a more complete approach, I suggest you read the Old Bear method ™ 😎 A more decisive solution, expensive that one, would be to use a more powerful processor on the same platform with adequate RAM.

I just got part of the answer, the one concerning the subscription to the Newsletter by receiving this email... ... but for the moment no news from Enfusion.