Protegimus

Nice development tpM, looking forward to it!

Agreed With the addition that if under small arms fire, AI should aggressively return fire to suppress and usually when not under a human players command, seek an opportunity to withdraw and regroup. Line of sight was mentioned but this shouldn't be a requirement. AI have enough weapons that can be used to provide indirect fire, such as GL, frag, RPG/LAW and MG and they should be used more frequently in this manner. To avoid any misunderstanding, I was referring to when AI were putting in a deliberate attack using overwatch, or reacting to fire, i.e. they have a good idea of where the main threat lies. Currently in these situations the risk of AI shooting their own troops in the back is far higher than the possible risk of putting an enemy on their flank while advancing or retreating and this needs to change. What the formation is doesn't matter as much as making sure the advancing section isn't advancing in the arc of fire of the covering section - which is currently definitely the case. Ideally formations arent' cast in stone, so the section can fluidly adjust/peel to a more appropriate formation to counter any developing threat or ambush. Protegimus

Excellent performance is maintained in forest and builtup areas, with FPS rarely dipping below 35. LOD switching is almost imperceptable running from the ramdrive and I was able to increase object and texture detail to very high without the penalty in loading time usually experienced as players view pans and zooms around. Stability is unfortunately an issue though, with random CTD's experienced - might be 10 minutes, might be 110. Occasional crash on exit too, as maturin reported. Parameters -cpuCount=8 -exThreads=7 -maxmem=2047 but testing without parameters doesn't appear to matter. I see man and child soldier classes have their sensitivity raised to 3.75 in the hotfix.pbo - would be great to know what core change requires this, or what it is aimed at improving. Protegimus

I think they already did, here. Protegimus

Wolfstriked, if you have: CSM2_c_envsnd.pbo CSM2_s_envsnd.pbo in @CSM2\Addons then move them to @CSM2 directory to disable them. For me, sea is louder without CSM2 environment sounds than with. Protegimus

This clearly needs some thought, as consideration must be given to the circumstances when bounding overwatch is used. fabrizio_T gave very good recommendations, so I'll use them as a reference and try to expand: - When somebody is firing at us: If the fire is effective (i.e. people are being injured/dying) or anything but small arms, then don't fanny about making pretty formations - get behind any available cover as fast as possible and start returning fire if appropriate If just suppressive fire from small arms, then use short, quick bounds to counter or withdraw according to orders, with the caveat that if under control of a human player, take cover, return fire and only move to where the human player has ordered. If under suppressive fire from a heavy calibre weapon or any kind of artillery, then the priority should be to get in hard cover. - When we see an enemy (being not too far!): Maybe 600m or less, so that it will be only area suppression from small arms Longer bounds to be used, only when not under fire - When I order them "Danger" - When I order them "Take cover": If under fire, then as above. If not engaged then larger 15-20m, quicker bounds should be used, especially on open ground. When i lay down or crouch i wish my squaddies simply doing the same: perhaps this can be controlled to when the squaddies are within 20m of their section leader, avoiding the problem of having guys changing stance at inappropriate times or places. Another extremely important factor is that AI are currently using compact column formation during their bounds, presumably to avoid the hold up caused by them using concealment when moving in any other formation - this needs to change to a compact line formation as AI are killing each other when the rear covering party fires (the advancing front party is directly in their arc): ^ | ^ | ^ ^ | | and also because it makes them very vulnerable to enemy fire. Slow movement in urban, except when crossing open ground. There's probably more, please feel free to expand where necessary. Protegimus

Nephris1: There are one or two things that I'm thinking about, but they are mainly longer term additions. GiorgyGR: do you have a repro mission and does the same thing happen in ArmA 2 without Zeus AI? Re. off topic discussion - better to raise it on the bugtracker. Protegimus

First of all, thanks to Foxhound at Armaholic for the download mirror and thx to AnimalMother92 for getting the news out even before I did!. Glad you like it this time M1n1d0u! As you've been clamouring for the right M249 sound, can we consider that one nailed? :) When using ACEX_SM and CSM2 together, CSM2 doesn't override ACEX_SM vehicle weapon sounds, ref.: this post. You can move the following files: acex_sm_c_sound_wep_veh.pbo acex_sm_c_sound_wep_veh.pbo.acex_sm.bisign only the config file is required to be moved, but you may as well move: acex_sm_s_wep_veh.pbo acex_sm_s_wep_veh.pbo.acex_sm.bisign that contain the sounds out of your ACEX_SM\Addons directory (suggest to its parent) to disable it and experience only CSM2 sounds. For ACEX_SM sounds only, move the following files to the parent @CSM2 directory (from @CSM2\Addons): CSM2_c_wep_veh.pbo CSM2_c_wep_veh.pbo.CSM2.bisign CSM2_s_wep_veh.pbo CSM2_s_wep_veh.pbo.CSM2.bisign As CSM2 follows the BIS and ACE2 modular design it means it's easy to change the way things work to your personal preference, so I don't plan to make any changes in this respect. Protegimus

Cossack8559 can you post the configuration in which you are using CSM2 (standalone, or with ACE2, etc.) To my knowledge there has been no issue with Ka-52 since the initial release of version 1.04 when I re-wrote the configs back on the 7th March, but I will test again. Is there any possibility you have an old config file file on your system (Bohemia Interactive\ArmA 2\Addons ?), or that it is interaction with another mod? Protegimus

CSM2 version 1.04i is on its way, features: Improved: 500lb bomb explosion sounds Added: additional bullet cracks, MG firing variations Improved: soundFly & bulletFly levels, run footsteps on concrete Hopefully it will be available soon. Protegimus

ok, M249 is tamed (slightly). In the pages running up to this, you were all baying for a real M249 sound - now you've got it, together with all its brutality you don't like it? For all those posting youtube references do me a favour and play them in the background while you fire the M249 in game, then tell me how what we have isn't right? I've been tempted to reduce the volume on a number of occassions, but each time after I test fired it I just couldn't bring myself to do it, lol. Anyway, AnimalMother92 is right - ultimately it is causing more sound clipping than is desirable so the deed is finally done. I'm looking to improve the G3 and other new ACE weapon sounds as requested, any pointers quality sources would be appreciated. Protegimus

Build 70951 is running really well, much smoother than 70313 - 70709 and some much appreciated fixes to boot - nice work BIS. Audio rendering appears to have improved wrt number of simultaneous sounds played since 70313. This is especially noticeable in benchmark 2 where there's plenty going on. Played a good selection of missions over a six hour stint without a glitch. Couple of key points to clarify the information regarding hyper-threading and core i7 CPU's: the problem with ArmA 2 performance only applies to Win7 (Vista). For Windows XP performance is actually better with all cores and yperthreading enabled, np with overheating limiting overclocking potential either. Second, -cpuCount=4 is only a mechanism to limit the number of CPUs/cores available to ArmA, it has no influence on which core (physical or virtual) the thread is scheduled to run, i.e. it's not the application that dictates which CPU the software runs on, it's the scheduler in the O/S. The only way you are going to do that is through processor affinity, or disabling cores in the BIOS. start /affinity, or for XP Sysinternal's psexec's -a flag can set processor affinity (and priority) so that's the way to get optimal performance with -cpuCount. Protegimus

You need to provide more information if you want support. The mod works fine and without errors, config, mods and system details required to understand the problem. Protegimus

Thanks to Foxhound @ Armaholic, Marko112 & Sickboy for the mirrors. BlackLord: no change to the Javelin - config or another sound mod in the mix? Cyclone83: thanks for that mate, made me laugh. Protegimus

nettrucker: thanks for testing further and thanks for posting back. Don't know if this might help, but if you are using the BIS medic module the problem may lie with how it is being initialised. I understand you only need to link the leader of your force once to the module for it to be active for everyone on your side and the same for OpFor if you want them to be able to use it. You could also try posting in the mission section too for help in resolving it. Birdseye: correction, zeu_cfg_core_ai_sensors module removes the radar from vehicles that don't have them available. Move the zeu_cfg_core_ai_sensors.pbo from @zcommon\Addons to @zcommon directory to disable it. Protegimus

I would check again nettrucker with only ACE 2 & Zeus AI loaded as I seriously doubt that Zeus is the cause of this. Details of how you're testing this would be useful. Protegimus

CSM2 version: 1.04h is available via the Yoma Addon Sync repository. As always, backup your existing version before you update! The Auto config URL is: http://www.computerrepair.uk.net/updater/ArmA2-repo.7z Changes are as follows: Improved: AK107 single fire trailoff & automatic fire now uses burst fire sound Improved: AK47 single fire trailoff Added: M4 single fire trailoff variation Added: M2 trailoff variations Fixed: no M2 reload sound Fixed: no C4 explosion sound Improved: re-prioritised artillery sounds to utilise the additional sounds added in 1.04g release Steakslim: I heavily modified the gear rattle (clunkety clunk) and footsteps (walking on grass sounded like you were splashing through water), so no; they are not vanilla. Chammy: will you send me the AK74 sample you used in the first video/urban mod - I think it can fit really well. Protegimus

There are two reasons for this. 1. A number of problems were logged in the change log regarding bugs when system memory > 4GB, e.g.: [59924] Fixed: More 32b overflows caused by 8 GB RAM + large VRAM There are entries for 6GB too, so don't discount it because the example I gave quotes 8GB. 2. Ensure the problem isn't with your RAM Purely for reference and benefit of others in the community, how about posting some information about your results. Just ignore the advice if you don't like it. Vista and 7 may have been out for some time, but ArmA 2 was built on 32bit, then patched to work on the Vista platform. If you ran that 10 year old O/S, you wouldn't be crippling your core i7 by disabling hyperthreading - maximising the performance of the system where ArmA 2 needs it most, the processor. You have 6GB RAM and that is totally irrelevant. ArmA 2 is a 32bit application so can address only 2GB. Anything else is for the system, a ramdrive, etc. I have 12GB RAM, 3.6GB for XP/applications and 9GB for ramdrive - not much waste there, eh? Protegimus

Alex, I alway put that down to 'deafness' from concussion rather than a bug. Is it definitely not by design? Protegimus

Trees appear to have lower detail LOD's until you are closer to them - maybe this explains the performance difference some are seeing with vegetation. Performance with 70709 in Electro is down on 70256, but better than 70313 and flickering shadows are back on buildings. Runway lights no longer explode when you shoot them (don't ask). MavericK96: Have you tested with only 4GB RAM? - rule out bugs with > 4GB RAM, DIMM failure You have two GTX 280s, are you using SLI? XP 32bit!? and yeah, my system spec. is quite similar to yours yet I have reduced settings in comparison for optimal performance. I understand the higher view distance as you talk about flying, but you can probably still reduce it without impact, ref.: http://dev-heaven.net/wiki/proper-projects/PROPER_projects#Object-drawing-distance-tweak and gain performance/stability. Protegimus

meade95: yes, Zeus AI doesn't change the editor behaviour ray243: give us more information about your test and your expectations

It's certainly worth testing with/without ACE2 to see where the problem lies. Zeus AI have inherently better shooting accuracy than with ACE2 alone, but it is tempered with a more usual level of weapon sway for the AI. When using ACE2 there are a host of other factors to take into account, especially what appears to be a greater level of dispersion than is accurate. Protegimus

Go ahead and use the update as you wish, but please don't mirror this for general download as I'm not finished working on the h release. Also, it's only received limited testing at this point. Protegimus

This subject has come up quite a bit during recent discussion and I also think an element of weapon sway should be part of ArmA II. To this end, I've made a simple addon that simulates a level of weapon sway that can be overcome by skill of the shooter without becoming a distraction. As mentioned in the readme, it is balanced in favour of gameplay due to the way weapon sway is simulated. Just grab the following files: ARMA II Zeu_Weaponsway_readme.txt zeu_c_anims_weaponsway.pbo zeu_c_anims_weaponsway.pbo.ZEU.bisign from the Yoma Addon Sync repository. The Auto config URL is: http://www.computerrepair.uk.net/updater/ArmA2-repo.7z Thanks to Inkompetent, Armaholic & ArmedAssault.info, download mirrors: Armaholic Mirror: http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=10461 ArmedAssault.info Mirror: DOWNLOAD - Weapons Sway (v.1.0) - [8 KB] from ArmedAssault.info FILEPLANET mirror: http://www.filefront.com/16377613/zcommon_weaponsway_v1.rar/ Further instructions are included in the readme. In the longer term, I hope BIS improve the animations and effects to more accurately portray this. Feedback and mirrors appreciated. Hopefully we can develop this to an accepted standard for the game. Protegimus

Less in 70256-70313 than with earlier betas. Most benefit loading textures, but using the Ramdrive offers a greater overall improvement and lessens the effectiveness of -maxmem. Testing with/without -maxmem is the easiest way to observe any difference. You've mentioned before that you see no improvement which is fair enough, others might and it's free performance if you've XP and 3-4GB RAM in your system. The details are listed here in the ArmA 2 I/O analysis results thread. lol, everyone's an expert, eh MavericK96? Bottom line is it's what works for you. It's well documented that ArmA II gives better performance running on XP 32bit, I'd try that rather than fanny about with RAM optimisations. 7's jewellery comes at a price soldier... Protegimus -- After extensive testing, build 70256 offers consistently better performance for me - less stutter than 70313, especially when turning the player. I'd love to know the changes between these two versions, as it was intimated that it was a bugfix for -ExThreads=0