Rommel

It took that long for 84 groups, at 10 units per group, so around 840 units... I had some things to do so... if you wanted some less detailed tests, I'm sure they could be done, I have not yet tried reaching the 144 group limit, and the effects that may have.

Because Sickboy asked me too :p, and I did promise it last time. But the conclusion is the same; however slightly more comical. Loving the upward trend . Its clearly just a data anomaly, as with all the low FPS spikes, they are simply because I didn't leave enough time for the unit deletion to catch up, or I had alt tabbed at some point (this test data took 56 minutes to complete). Groups Units Vehicles FPS(During) FPS(After) 2 11 0 55.56 55.56 3 21 0 31.25 55.82 4 31 0 12.35 55.82 5 41 0 22.22 55.82 6 51 0 16.39 55.82 7 61 0 12.35 56.82 8 71 0 55.56 55.82 9 81 0 20 58.82 10 91 0 43.48 55.56 11 101 0 45.45 55.56 12 111 0 55.56 52.63 13 121 0 55.56 55.56 14 131 0 45.45 55.56 15 141 0 41.67 30.3 16 151 0 55.56 55.56 17 161 0 31.25 55.56 18 171 0 55.56 30.3 19 181 0 30.3 55.56 20 191 0 35.71 55.56 21 201 0 55.56 58.82 22 211 0 23.26 55.56 23 221 0 30.3 32.26 24 231 0 33.33 55.56 25 241 0 38.46 58.82 26 251 0 32.26 58.82 27 261 0 33.33 58.82 28 271 0 31.25 31.25 29 281 0 31.25 55.56 30 291 0 31.25 55.56 31 301 0 31.25 55.56 32 311 0 31.25 55.56 33 321 0 22.22 55.56 34 331 0 30.3 55.56 35 341 0 26.32 55.56 36 351 0 22.73 55.56 37 361 0 21.28 55.56 38 371 0 25 55.56 39 381 0 22.22 55.56 40 391 0 20.41 58.82 41 401 0 21.28 55.56 42 411 0 18.52 55.56 43 421 0 17.54 55.56 44 431 0 20 55.56 45 441 0 18.87 55.56 46 451 0 18.18 55.56 47 461 0 18.18 55.56 48 471 0 20 30.3 49 481 0 18.87 58.82 50 491 0 18.52 55.56 51 501 0 20.41 58.82 52 511 0 17.24 55.56 53 521 0 19.61 52.63 54 531 0 16.95 58.82 55 541 0 17.54 55.56 56 551 0 16.67 58.82 57 561 0 20 58.82 58 571 0 18.52 55.56 59 581 0 18.52 55.56 60 591 0 18.18 58.82 61 601 0 17.86 55.56 62 611 0 15.87 58.82 63 621 0 16.39 55.56 64 631 0 16.67 55.56 65 641 0 14.93 55.56 66 651 0 18.87 55.56 67 661 0 16.13 58.82 68 671 0 16.67 58.82 69 681 0 16.39 58.82 70 691 0 9.71 55.56 71 701 0 11.49 55.56 72 711 0 12.66 58.82 73 721 0 9.8 55.56 75 741 0 11.36 55.56 76 751 0 10.1 55.56 77 761 0 6.45 58.82 78 771 0 6.9 55.56 79 781 0 6.17 55.56 80 791 0 7.94 58.82 81 801 0 6.41 30.3 82 811 0 5.99 31.25 83 821 0 6.49 55.56 84 831 0 5.65 58.82

Not Desync. Persistent FPS lag throughout play and server performance. ;)

Thank you. So. SO Much. Almost lost for words on a patch that fixes this much (even though it may seem so small). I now have 2000 units theoretically in game, even though they are not always existing... I am just ecstatic!!! Spawned, and de-spawned, and spawned... oh? and de-spawned spawned de-spawned. I can set up the graphs, but they are consistently 60 fps after deletion so...

New Beta Build 70951 is up! Click here to download Changelog: [70817] Fixed: Crash while rendering some custom worlds, e.g Schmalfelden [70793] Fixed: Character animation jerky after a unit disembarked a vehicle (http://dev-heaven.net/issues/3116) [70790] Fixed: Fps stayed low after spawning and deleted many units. See http://dev-heaven.net/issues/5147

I really enjoy the episodes, it wasn't nit picking, it was just something I picked up on, they are human :). Checked my RSS feed daily (was ignorant to the release times) for Ep3.

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/5147 As was reported, just thought I'd post here in hope to get it sorted sooner. Description: Placing units down on the map, then deleting them, will cause overall performance loss regardless of how you clean them up. It appears to be more dependent on bulk placement, meaning a thousand groups map spawned, but only one at a time, however if you place 40 groups down, then delete them straight away. You will have lingering performance loss. Reproduction mission attached to the DH post. Notes: In an attempt to clean up everything, I delete all group way points, units, and groups themselves to ensure the map becomes very close to 'empty'. No difference. Tested on Build 70256.

Thanks to BIS we should be able to test this issue again in the upcoming patch; with different results (speculation is: good results ;)). Ref: http://dev-heaven.net/issues/5147

We want to keep this as a addon thing (guaranteed for each release of ArmA so far), or should it be implemented by default? Figured I'd throw in a poll for the hell of it; I didn't want to put a feature request unless I knew it was generally wanted...

Those ORC videos were awesome :)

Or go through IDEA games so the money is more directly going into BIS's pocket... funding for patches. ;)

Haha. I have a E6750 @ 3.2, ATI HD4890 (512), 4GB RAM (3.4 technically ->) and XP 32bit. I'm very glad to hear there may be a fix, nothing beats a MP mission with 2000 (deleted) AI across the map, and players reporting to me they have 60FPS (unless they are present during the deletion of AI), while the server chugs at 20 because of this (players can reset their mission by rejoining, server can't).

Ok some data for you devs. These tests were repeated three times with same result. 5*15 = 60 units. After deletion, 60fps. 10*15 = 120 units. After deletion, 60fps. 15*15 = 180 units. After deletion, 60fps. 20*15 = 240 units. After deletion, 60fps. 25*15 = 300 units. After deletion, 45fps. 30*15 = 360 units. After deletion, 30fps. 35*15 = 420 units. After deletion, 28fps. This ... is stupid :P Somewhere you have some CPU wasting cycles, that occur (at least for me) around 260 units... ---------- Post added at 06:47 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:10 AM ---------- Because pretty pictures make everything understandable. And now some proper data and testing capabiliitiesfor the developers. Script to run to test it yourself. testLoc = [2500,2500,0]; _delete = { { deletevehicle _x; } foreach (allunits - [player]); { {deletewaypoint _x} foreach (waypoints _x); deletegroup _x; } foreach allGroups; { deletevehicle _x; } foreach (vehicles - [vehicle player]); }; _getinfo = { [count allgroups, count allunits, count vehicles, diag_fpsmin] }; _dump = { diag_log str [ "\ngroups",(_this select 0), "\nallunits",(_this select 1), "\nvehicles",(_this select 2), "\nFPS during",(_this select 3), "\nFPS after", diag_fpsmin ]; }; _create = { private "_x"; private "_y"; private "_z"; _x = (testLoc select 0) + random 100; _y = (testLoc select 1) + random 100; _z = (testLoc select 2) + random 100; [[_x,_y,_z], west, 10] call bis_fnc_spawngroup }; _i = 1; while {true} do { _y = _i; while {_y > 0} do { [] call _create; _y = _y - 1; }; sleep 3; _info = [] call _getinfo; [] call _delete; sleep 3; hint format ["Test %1 Complete",_i]; private "_info"; _info call _dump; _i = _i + 1; sleep 3; };

http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Category:VBS2_Command_Group:_Waypoints * waypointAttachedObject (VBS2) * waypointAttachedVehicle (VBS2) * waypointBehaviour (VBS2) * waypointCombatMode (VBS2) * waypointCurrent (VBS2) * waypointDescription (VBS2) * waypointFormation (VBS2) * waypointHousePosition (VBS2) * waypointLoiterRadius (VBS2) You have the API functions to set these properties in ArmA2, but not to view/get them. Could you please port them across from VBS2. :rolleyes: EDIT: Nevermind... the BIKI just doesn't have them listed... they do exist in A2.

Hope that helps.

"respawn_west" setMarkerPos getMarkerPos "respawn1"; ;) http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/setMarkerPos http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/getMarkerPos

trigger1: MyNewGroup = [getpos player, west, 12] call BIS_fnc_spawnGroup; Or if you must MyNewGroup = call compile preprocessfilelinenumbers "script.sqf"; script.sqf _return = [getpos player, west, 12] call BIS_fnc_spawnGroup; [_return,getpos player] call CBA_fnc_taskDefend; if (isnull _return) then { //group create failed hint "Reached 144 group limit!!"; }; _return Also, when deleting groups, make sure to use deleteGroup to remove them aswell!!!

Look around for Yoma tutorials, or send a PM to Yoma himself, this isn't exactly relative to ArmA 2, more modding / external software.

They are a business, they are about making money, they would have analyzed their best approach within their capabilities many more hours than you have considered writing this post. They have also released 6 prequels to this game (incl. OFP/ArmA expansions), so I'm sure they understand the importance of marketing. If they don't, well, they have the community :D.

Is good, found this mentioned on AusArmA.org, googled and it came up. Made me miss Sahrani radio :p; and it is essentially similar, except without the music haha. EDIT: I just listened to the first episode, haha at him saying his favorite weapon is the M16"A3"... it was like a miss universe wanting world peace. Either way, great episode, lots of good points, good listening :).

This is just a set of a rough pseudo code to help you get the idea (will probably work too). client_save.sqf _cash = mycash; //predefined mycash variable _pos = getpos player; _rank = rank player; _uid = getPlayerUID player; call compile format ["%1_saveVar = %2; publicVariable '%1_saveVar'; ", _uid, [_cash,_pos,_rank]]; client_load.sqf _uid = getPlayerUID player; call compile format ["_data = %1_saveVar", _uid]; if (isnil {_data}) exitwith {hintsilent "No savefile found"}; mycash = _data select 0; player setpos (_data select 1); player setrank (_data select 2); In the editor: myFlagObjectPlacedInEditorName addaction ["Save Status","client_save.sqf"]; myFlagObjectPlacedInEditorName addaction ["Load Previous","client_load.sqf"]; This last part can be done in many ways, checking when the player disconnects and so on, rather than asking them to push save and load, you could consistently save the data. Hope that gives you a good understanding of how you can do it. Recommended reading: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/6thSense.eu:EG http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/publicVariable http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/compile

One of the best threads for map making, the new guys have it lucky :P.

Or you could just string it, ie "10000000". str(10000000) Might work.

I believe you can get it on ArmAholic, if you can't, relax, I'll be putting out a new version with my ACE 2 mission framework (soon).

Well we've all heard it before, it can strike up many arguments, but in summary. There are too many servers. Looking at a current snapshot from the SWEC: Players Online: 432 Servers Online: 714 --- All this rant about PR being the one to bring the community back together, made me wonder, why can't we atleast attempt it ourselves? A lot of these 714 (currently online) servers have been up for over 4months, with at most 6 missions played. Private clan servers, fine, we all understand 100% that they will never get constant use due to timetables, and the only reason they run them when not being used is probably for advertising, or some kind of 'presence'. But the server : player ratio at any one time is still >1. Which is possibly the worst case. Perhaps we should drive to minimize the amount of servers out there, or as suggested in another thread currently, create an index for time zoned and used community team play / pvp / coop / domination servers so we start centralizing the player base a bit more.