Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

11 Good

1 Follower

About Brute

  • Rank


  • Occupation
  1. Could someone please tell me where the missions you download when you join a dedicated server are saved to locally?
  2. I have't seen that stated officially anywhere, as far as I am aware they were still considering civillian AI?
  3. I completely agree, hopefully PR:ArmA 2 won't have any, or at least very few, AI in which case reaching 128 players on a high-end server should be possible. Whether they allow the player limit to be increased for high-end servers however is a different matter altogether, they might simply leave it at 64.
  4. The dedicated server is probably being bottlenecked by either the CPU, RAM or bandwidth. Would you mind posting the specifications of the machine you are running the dedicated server client on?
  5. PVP servers, with little to no AI, can host 64-128 however I'm talking more about PVP/PVE servers which run Warfare and have to handle large quantites of AI. I think it's ridiculous that I can only run a 64 slot Warfare BE server on a server with 2 X5690s, I could run 6 64 slot Warfare BE servers but not 1 128 slot Warfare BE server.
  6. I'm not saying that it would be easy to implement, I simply think that there must be dedicated server optimizations that can be made a few years after the game's release. The dedicated server network settings are quite simply abysmal, having to set specific values is ridiculous, the dedicated server should detect the resources available to it and scale automatically as a map progresses. Manual settings should also be available but deffinitely not the default.
  7. Obviously I'm referring to servers with an equal or greater number of AI to players. The dedicated server client creates a bottleneck which cannot be overcome by the hardware of the server or the player. Currently I can run a 64 player warfare server on two cores at 3.46GHz, scale that to another ten physical cores and you're looking at 640+ players on a single server. The hardware and Internet connections of players will better over time, however if the dedicated server client is left in the condition it is now, there won't be anything to scale up to, because we would have already reached the limit of what the game can do, which is nothing near it's potential. Clock speeds are only increasing in tiny increments every year, the only choice they have is to redesign the dedicated server client to utilize the full power of multi-core processors, beyond two cores that is.
  8. Being able to run 128+ player games, possibly even 256, would bring quite a lot of attention to the game.
  9. It would revive ArmA 2 massively, giving ArmA 3 a nice platform to launch from. But I would imagine their development team is probably quite occupied now.
  10. BIS, can you please create a dedicated server client that can actually utilize the full potential of modern day servers? ArmA 2 has the potential to support multiplayer scenarios with hundreds of players and hundreds of AIs, but since the server is restricted to using two cores it can handle nothing near that.
  11. Brute

    Signature Check

    I added the following and now it only kicks, thank you. onHackedData = "kick (_this select 0)";
  12. Setting the min bandwidth to 75% of a 100mbps line actually decreases performance, it's ridiculous.
  13. Could someone please tell me how to make the signature check kick instead of ban? Currently when signature checks timeout the users gets banned.
  14. Brute


    One of the most appealing features of ArmA II is the large scale warfare, which simply isn't reaching anywhere near it's potential because, for some reason, all AI related operations are restricted to one core. Can this please be changed? If AI operations were spread over multiple cores we might actually be able to see servers with 750+ AI on them with very little lag.