Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

KorJax

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    57

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by KorJax

  3. Posted

    Eventually Steam will get it's own patch but in the mean time you can use this patch for Steam.

    Just don't try to verify cache integrity after installing the patch.

    ---------- Post added at 01:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:52 PM ----------

    Oh, and as I mentioned, avoid mods for now, you can test which work but try one at a time. Some mods have major issues while some have smaller issues. ACE is suffering from a number of issues right now which will hopefully be fixed in the next ACE patch, but many mods are causing CTD's, error codes, and general unplayability.

    But... if we install this patch won't that make the steam version (once it gets the update) detect a problem (in that the version is "different" or the cache is or something) and potnetually lock out?

  4. Posted

    Well there wasn't a briefing at all. The map screen was completely blank of information.

    The only thing I can do is choose to spawn as the default "Tank commander" player (all the other 70 selectable players don't seem to work to well trigger wise), and when the game starts I just *spawn* as a tank commander in the tank and nothing else happens other than the occasional plane flying overhead. I assume only to move towards the red squares? And being a tank commander means I get a very crappy selection of gear.

  5. Posted · Edited by KorJax

    Same, can't play the mission...

    It would of really helped to have the mod author set it up how it's supposed to work when you drag+drop it to avoid problems like this

    EDIT: just figured it out, you need to have it say "@pmc_apache" (for example on the pmc mod), then inside that folder have one that says "addons" and then inside that one put the mod files.

    EDIT2:

    Played the mission... I really have no idea what is going on or what to do. Sorry. It seems very action packed but I just don't like it because everything feels totally random plus I don't understand how to actually PLAY it in the sense on what player to choose etc.

    The only one that seemed to work was the first "tank commander" player, but the problem with that is you become serious bait for AT soldiers by being a tank (which makes them p. useless as they die easy), and no one else seemingly does anything, even if I play as them.

  12. Posted

    Sarge;1400850']the grenades don't go through the bushes' date=' that is the problem!

    they explode when they hit the LEAFES of the bushes, you realy should watch the videos again.

    It seems to me you never realy tried to bombard an infantry squad hidden behind some bushes, do you?

    I assume you haven't, because you would know what the videos are showing.

    I shot 40mm grenades in real life with a HK 69 [url']http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_HK69A1[/url] , its like getting a jack hammer rammed into your shoulders and I accidently shattered a door frame on a distance of 50 meters with just a training round.....so the grenades have ALOT of oomph....not to mention what you can expect from an automatic grenade launcher like the GMG 40 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_GMG, the ammo has a larger cartridge

    you can make some serious injuries to a human body with it from a shorter distance, without the grenades exploding.

    so a bush realy shouldnt be so much of a problem, should it?

    and Legislator has more PC knowledge as you might expect + he was playing Arma 2 long before you did (you didnt read the handbook completely)

    besides, my Dual Core was maxed out while running arma 2 with a crappy frame rate, my Q9550 doesnt make the game run significantly faster, but uses alot less of its computing power........ better hardware for what do I ask?

    The second video (which I didn't see) shows the issue well, you are right. A grenade round fired from an APC should go through bushes.

    The first video though showed you firing 203 rounds and they clearly went through the bushes, just impacted agianst the tree trunks, which appeared to be correct.

    Seems like an unintended bug since it works for some things but not others, I'm sure it'll get patched. Like maybe the game is reading them as "generic grenade" instead of being as a "slow rocket" so it blocks the collision for the grenade launched rounds.

  13. Posted

    Name games that have better AI then ARMA2? There are not many of them imo.

    To say a game has better AI is hard to say. What exactly = better? Better as in fits the game enviornment and design as well as possible? In that case AI such as in L4D of CoD would be near flawless, because they work as intended in the environments they are placed in extremely well, as such they don't feel out of place.

    I think a better question would be to ask what large-scale open ended games similar to ArmA2 have better AI than ArmA2? Then things start to make more sense.

  14. Posted · Edited by KorJax

    Sarge;1395222']thats not true.

    The Patch only fixed the Rockets' date=' M203 (or any other 40mm grenades) and explosive HE machine cannon rounds still explode on contact with a bush or a tree.

    [url']http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCzFPkVoGrs[/url]

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ho9l3wF-p-k

    (if the videos dont work yet, try later)

    ... I don't understand the issue?

    The grenade goes through bushes, which is normal. The M203 also hits the trunks of tree's, which is also normal.

    The M203 isn't a super powered rocket, it's not going to snap a tree in half when it hits. They are like 80-100 mph baseballs that explode (which is the speed of a well thrown "fastball" in baseball), all it's going to do when they impact a tree trunk is blow up.

    Now if the 203 round was exploding on the outer leaves where the thick trunk is not located then that would be strange and bad. As far as I know they do not do this.

    In any case, I'm a satisifed with 1.03 but I would have liked to see more improvements considering the wait. I'm finally playing the campaign now though, and it's TONS of fun and a lot more deep than I expected it to be. I also never realized just how good my friendly AI was. I tell them to advance with stealth/danger through some woods twoards an enemy encampment and they all go one by one, stealthily and tactfully to the waypoint I issue (or to the formation if I tell them to follow), while staying low and using the trees for cover, AND while covering each other. Very impressed.

    The AI not being super-soldiers now is also much appreciated, though I still have to test it out more.

    I laugh though at most of the people in this thread saying REALLY stupid minor stuff like the stars being too big with NVG's enabled as "MAJOR ISSUES". You guys need to unbunch your panties for a bit and realize that's not really a pressing issue at all, and infact it's a totally minor cosmetic one.

    I agree though, the stars are a little over-done in NVG (I know, I own a NVG monicle and all it does it make the stars more contrasted against the black sky, not big or larger). But a major issue? Hell no. I'd rather have some other things looked into first, such as some kind of "grass layer" for distances or the rather terrible performance with several bushes/trees being fixed.

    ---------- Post added at 01:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:03 AM ----------

    I'm not satisfied too. How can it be that this game isn't using the multicore support more effiently? I don't know any dualcore or quadcore machine that runs ArmA II as it should be. For example I've a got a Q9550 at 3.4 Ghz. Still ArmA II is only running 50 to 60 % cpu load (using all 4 cores but having a load of 20 to 30 % on each core!) while the hell is going on ingame (much AI, huge terrain, many objects). I don't think my GTX 275 is limiting. There are plenty of users that have a Core i7 which isn't running well too.

    To make it worse, even our simple 1.8 ghz dual core windows server isn't running at full load. And again, no more cpu load than 50 to 60 %. :(

    I don't know if you know anything about computers (it doesn't sound like you do) but having it so 20-30% load on each core means the game is VERY optimized and IS using your multicore processor to the max. If it runs choppy, it's something else that's the issue. Personally I think it has to do with the fact that the game might rely way to much on fetching data to the HDD... which is the SLOWEST component in any modern day computer.

    I'd rather have all my cores at 100% load on my QX6850 than have a game rely on fetching all the data off the hard-drive. But then again with 225km^2 of map... is there any better way to do it? Surely there must be?

  20. Posted · Edited by KorJax

    Thats why I say you need to join a good clan. If you are doing coops with your clan and are still dieing then your CO's are doing something wrong or you just aren't very good at this game. I think the reason people die so much in coop is because they are trying to play this game like you would play BF2 or Call of Duty. You can't just run in like Rambo and expect to take out half a platoon by yourself. You have to rely on your team mates to do their job. If you are infantry then you have to wait for armor and air support to clear out enemy army and gun emplacements before moving in to take out enemy infantry. Even then you have to move as a team and use cover and flanking manuevers effectively.

    As long as I'm playing with my clan and we are working together as a unit and everyone is doing their job we as a unit suffer few casualties. If I die more than once during the taking of one city then either I or my CO's aren't doing their jobs.

    Tell that to the AI.

    This happened to me today:

    1. Shot an AI guy while prone in the woods, took 8 shots to kill. Was using G36 at a range of about 300-500m, probibly shorter.

    2. The AI near this unit was basically totally oblivious. Occasionally a few of them "auto locked" in to my location (aka prone+aimed directly at me) but they never fired. All were pretty much just standing/laying around, and moving about 10m at random then stopping. Basically being dumb.

    3. I get shot, by a guy 300-500m away, behind the treeline on the other side of town (I was up on a hill and these tree's were concealing the entire town, the only visible spots were at the tree bases and the town edge that I attacked). All shots without fail land within a meter of me. AI continues to stand still and act dumb reguardless. I get hit a few times from this psychic AI in the town that was 100% obscured by the treeline, while the AI that WOULD theoretically be able to see me continue to just kind of stare in the middle of an open field.

    Your argument becomes valid when I find the AI is capable of a little more than psychic ghost shooting and standing around.

    If I were to of gotten flanked by a couple of AI from the town in search of me, before opening fire, I would have been impressed. If the AI that COULD have the ability to realistically see me, managed to shoot back at me in surpressive fire at where the gunshots were coming from, I would have been impressed.

    In this case (and all others I've experienced) neither happened. And it always seems to play out like this. Give me AI that isn't just a bunch of psychic rocks that bleed then I'll agree with you.

    ---------- Post added at 10:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:59 PM ----------

    Indeed. It's a shame that 80% of the servers are running those.

    I too like coop games, but not like that. Where the hell are regular old fashion coop missions (OFP) without consolish goddamned respawns. If your dead, you are DEAD. No biggie, just start again. I have always considered respawns as a cheat in every game. If i complete some mission using respawn in my mind i know i really haven't completed it properly. It haunts me afterwards.

    I loved big missions where you walk long distances in woods with your squad occasionally encountering enemy patrols and finally after 1 hour you get to the target area and half of your squad was left dead behind. But when you completed the mission with only couple of guys left to celebrate it felt so good. I remember i died many times right in the first fireifight in big coop mission, but i didn't get bored of the waiting. I find it interesting to observe friends playing style and maybe learned something.

    I was stunned when i first saw that stupid flag pole in some evo mission that you can use to teleport yourself to target area. Jesus...

    In fact i have had more fun playing regular DM than Evo or domination. :butbut:

    To be honest nowadays i just stick with good SP missions. No flagpoles, respawns and other shit that doesn't belong to realistic military simulator.

    That's totally possible, if you play with a group of friends. Personally I'd want nothing like that at all if I'm joining a multiplayer game.

    That stuff is cool, to have a group of 10-20 guys on a locked server going to complete an objective a little bit more complex than "kill everyone". I'd love that too, but when I join a big mulitplayer game with 30+ people, on a map that's 225km^2.... hell no. That is NOT the kind of enviornment for no-respawn 3 hour long matches. I don't know about you but I've got things I gotta do and if I join a match, start a game up, with 40 other people, am forced to drive+walk halfway across the entire map, manage to get killed, and have to wait a few hours before everyone is dead... no thanks. I'd rather spend my time in a respawn server.

    I'm always of the opinion that there is no place for a no-respawn game in mulitplayer if the area of conflict is very large and/or the teams are very massive in size (unless the objective isn't some huge mass-killing thing where you have to spend 20 minutes finding the last AI to win). Doing stuff like a squad of 12 guys, no respawn, or maybe a platoon would be cool. All focused on a goal to reach/accomplish.

    Actually that's part of my problem with Dom/Evo as a whole. There are no objectives except kill everyone. The only ones that have objectives that are not this are the side-missions, which are often ignored. If the large-scale co-op missions involved more than just killing everyone in an area and spending 20 minutes finding that last AI hiding out, and actually had REAL objectives to complete, I'd like it a lot more. It's basically deathmatch right now. Oh and disable all aircraft except transport heli's so the objective isn't piss easy to complete via blowing it up.

    You know, I think if I ever learn the editor I'll try and do a mission like that.

  21. Posted

    One thing which i don't like with the arma 2 multiplayer is that there is no structure in the gameplay imo, since you always respawn after like 15 seconds after you have died, so after a while there is soldiers (human controlled) scattered all over the map.

    Is there a mod or something which does so that you can't respawn after you have died, or that the respawn timer is much longer?

    I'm sorry but that would be terrible. This isn't WoW where there can be thousands playing on one server.

    "Oh hey let's travel 225km which can take 10-15 minutes to do, die, and basically not be able to play unless you join another server".

    The only thing that would happen is frustrated players just quitting and rejoining to "force" a respawn if the server supports jump-in playing. I don't know if you realized this but maches in ArmA2 usually last hours!

    No respawn games make sense if the map/round in which you are playing is small (counter-strike). This is because if you die, the wait isn't going to be astronomically large.

    In large games, it's pointless and frustrating because all you'll want to do is just join another game. Not the kind of mission server owners would like to have on their server. Let's not forget the fact that dieing is a punishment in of itself due to the travel times a player has to go through to get to an objective, unless the server is using mobile respawns (and even then there's a signifigant "delay" between the soldier being put back into action).

  22. Posted

    Berzerk is fun, I just wish it would get out of beta already! There's only one or two servers that play it, currently the only one I ever see online is still running beta 39 which is filled with bugs...

    Also would be great to be able to play on something else other than Sobor, but alas something I'll have to wait on when it gets out of beta.

  23. Posted

    Play on Bezerk, it's basically limited to a two town PvP scenario.

    Currently though the game mode is in beta, which means there's lots of mission script bugs and there is ONLY one map/mission ATM, between the two towns Novy Sobor and Starry Sobor.

    It's still large scale but it's not "225km large". All fighting is focused within the 2-3 capturable areas near the towns

  25. Posted

    Meh... love the mod. Sadly I'm going to have to stop playing it.

    Almost every server out there has ALL mods disabled, so I can't use something like this and play multiplayer on most servers. Usually it's not too bad but 90% of server admins purposly disable all user-side mods, even for something as cool and legit as this one.

    Oh well.

×