avi13

It really depends on how much 1 side hates the other, if you hate the other country then its gonna be allot easier squeezing the trigger than a guy that has no idea what hes doing there and is told to kill someone that he has no feelings toward.

Hmm, AFAIK missions that run on servers are server side, your CPU is basicly doing nothing - the server is running the script not you.

Your system is fine, before I upgraded I was playing on P4 3GHz 1gig ram and radeon9600xt[256mb], 12x10 resolution with low-medium settings. I upgraded to E6300[dual core 1.86ghz], gig ram and x1950pro 256mb and the only difference is the graphics, AI is still stupid as it was on my old machine.

Same problem, no solution for me..I believe it was an windows update that broke ArmA. http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....l=avi13

The problem with this game is, Its not optimized for the future, you can see that BIS obviously does NOT care what happens to ArmA in a year or two from now. Why?no dual core optimization while AMD and Intel are focusing solely on dual and quad cores, look at the next generation of AMD cpus, Phenom is the name and its all quad/dual cores, not even one 'single' core cpu in the future. Also, I'm not seeing any hints about DX10...in a year or two when dx10 becomes standard who will enjoy playing a dx9 game?the dx10 cards wont be optimized as they are right now for dx9 meaning less performance. Really I don't see any future planning from BIS about the game, There might be one that we don't know about because they fail to communicate with the community but, Its not looking good... ArmA is limited by itself and not hardware, It barely uses half of my E6300[intel, dual core 1.86ghz] abilities yet the game turn in to a slide show when the AI has to do something. Another 'funnny' thing, Windows update apparently broke the game and wont let it start and I have yet to find a solution for this, the game doesn't work for many others now...another example of poor optimization/coding. Meh, I really hope that Game2 will be groundbreaking as OFP, and at least be playable as OFP was out of the box..You cant even finish the campaign in ArmA 1.00 without the use of cheats or extreme luck.

Up we go, And no - Reinstall isn't an option, perhaps it had something to do with the recent windows updates, thats the only thing I can point that might have changed something.

No idea what happened, I didnt play ArmA for a while now I want to play again but it keeps crashing on startup, I get the message "ArmA has encountered a problem and needs to close. We are sorry for the inconvenience." The technical details are: AppName:arma.exe ModVer:5.1.2600.2991 AppVer:1.5.0.5136 ModName: Kernel32.dll Offset: 00012a5b It doesnt even get to the main menu, After I click the shortcut I see these little boxes fill up, then I get this message specs: E6300 P5B Deluxe X1950PRO 256MB 2gig ram 7.4 driver for GFX Any ideas?

Ever played Evolution? BF2 scale doesn't come close to that. Some missions do make use of the large maps in OFP/ArmA. Yep i have, get your self in to a helicopter or jeep, head to a city, clear it - repeat that about 10 times and your done Most missions that make use of the huge maps in ArmA/OFP are mainly for transportation and not huge battles, most battles are confined to small pre-determined areas by the mission designer.

Erm do you actually use these gazillion kilometers when you play in MP or do you play in a small area?most missions are around a relatively small area and its hardly any difference from the 'maps' system thats present in BF2:PR etc. Larger missions such as Evolution are confined to small towns that the action take place - same scale as BF2 really. Slightly offtopic but... I think most people are overestimating ArmA's technical requirements, Like how much stress it puts on your CPU - right now when ArmA is on and during a large mission the CPU is barely peaking at 40% on my E6300[1.8GHz dual core] on one core, the other is just idle, I'm sure the remaining 60% and the other core can be used for stuff like physics[that add ALLOT of immersion to the game!], weapon ballistics and collisions - All of that are stuff that would make the game awesome..and I'm clueless on why they're not added, physics are standard in all games now days, "first ragdoll-physics" game I played was Postal 2 back in 2003. More modern games are half-life 2, that has some of the best physics to date yet even games such as half-life 2 barely use our cpu to its maximum. Yes they do, Armies rarely ever throw stuff to the garbage bin. One of the things that annoy me - you cant jump in ArmA..I really expected the ability to jump in ArmA when i bought it. How would it add anything to the game?We'll be able to climb rocks for better positions, or jump over fences for whatever reason (Naturally, I'd expect that you wont be able to fire while jumping...)

Umm, when i think about what ArmA has improved for me in gameplay from OFP back in 2001[or was it 2002?huh] not allot comes to mind, but: Better graphics, slightly cartoonish but ok. More then 1 turret per vehicle. Ironsight not locked - this is biggest change for me. Better multiplayer interface Bad stuff: The whole damage model system, while its acceptable that if you shot someone 20 times in the leg he'll die, its not for tanks, these OPFOR jeeps with the gun on em..forgot the name - when one attacks a US Tank from behind, before the tank can turn its big gun at the jeep hes already smoking dust and exploding - yes that fast, realistic?perhaps - I have yet to experience that IRL but when you can do it to the front of the tank in the same ease its just shitty damage model system. Animation system - cant reload on the move, the animation of magazine coming out and in the rifle, generic reload animation for all guns..you get it Crappy multiplayer squad system, look at stuff like BF2:Project Reality, thats how it should have been done in ArmA[Not pointing fingers at the mission-makers, it should have been default by BIS] But overall I love this game, nothing can replace it.

Beagle this is 2007, this isnt 2001 I played OFP since day one, back then I was willing to accept its short-comings as technology difficulties but after so long, you can expect BI to change the damage models. I don't see how exactly its hard to implement we're not asking for rocket weight or acceleration/deacceleration to be modeled in, Whats so hard about giving each part of the tank a different armor value, and only when certain parts combined or alone reach 0 then it explodes - Instead we get a "5-hits no matter where" system that feels like its a decade old..Is that a real combat simulation? But /shrug, I still love this game.

About the missile hitting the merkava, It was Metis-M[AT-13], Russian anti tank weapon which is allot more powerful then your typical 20$ RPG warhead. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metis-M But that discussion is fruitless, We're not talking about the game. The only proper solution right now is to implement a modeled-damage system, Meaning your tank will never go kaboom when an RPG hits its wheels but rather disable it and only allow direct hits on the turret-joints to inflict a massive boom, And back-hits will cause the tank to catch fire and explode in a delayed matter.

[CS]SOBR[1st-I-R], I can assure you no single RPG will take out a Merkava Mark 4 tank or M1A1 and make it go kaboom like it does right now in ArmA - Thats what I'm talkin about if i got sidetracked. About the movie, seems like i placed the wrong link..? Anyway, it shows you a merkava mark 4 taking a hit from a missile aimed at its joint, and as you see it bounces off, not exploding fully - without causing it to go kaboom as shown in the link you posted above, and in ArmA right now.[the crew members survived but with some injuries]

I'm not pulling facts out of my ass, firstly i was talking about M1A1 and not the type of tanks you see getting blown up. Secondly, I was talking about RPGs and not about Swedish weapons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_propelled_grenade (look at the picture..) Thirdly, my real life friend in the latest lebanon war is a tankist, his mark4 took 7 RPG hits and kept rolling fine, his words "These RPGs barely scratched my tank" Now last, heres a short video showing hezbollah hitting a israeli Merkava Mark4 tank with several missiles[Note, NOT RPG] and as you see, it keeps moving and attempting to dodge after taking 2 hits. Mind you, these rockets are alot more powerful then RPGs and this tank is alot stronger then M1A1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltCxHIWj658.

Tank battles are not clash of titans that last hours, first tank to hit the other one 99% of time wins. Why?When you get hit you generally get tossed around in the tank, You'll be lucky to survive a shell hitting the part where the hull and turret meet[joint, not sure of the word] which everyone aim at. And even if you survive you wont be in a condition[the tank itself AND the people inside] to fight back. But since this is a game, Its needed to be taken with moderation, Right now tank vs tank is fine game wise, however infantry[RPG etc] vs tank is not. No visual indication of where the RPG came from, and RPGs cause to much destruction to tanks - Its extremely hard to blow up a tank using an RPG irl, my assumption it would take at least 30 rounds to do such a thing because RPG does not penetrate the tank's thick armor. RPGs disable tanks, they ruin the wheels, or turret and such - making the tank enable to fight and the crew to bail out. Now that we covered that, The only way to balance it is to implement a better modeled hit-points system or just leave it as it is right now.