cyop

I have had this for a long time and finally decided to post. Yes, I have installed all the latest patches, etc. NOTE: I only get the pop-up when I launch from the Arma 2 shortcut. Nothing special in it but -nosplash. I have: (Arma 2 ... 1.11) Arma 2 CO ... 1.62 BAF PMC ACR TIA EDIT: Yeah, I thought it was unusual.

I just call it, 'losing' packets. :p I am not going to elaborate on your #2 opinion, after all. I will say, if someone could code that in a way as to not make people mad, that would be fantastic. Some of the whole warping problem comes down to client common sense, too. (See also, geographical location/host/dedicated/ISP.^ And, I am not going to be as scientific as you, daikan. :)) One thing we have not mentioned is client personal settings. For instance, if a persons computer is already 'choking' in SP, he will be worse off in MP. - When I would play a game a great deal in both SP and MP, I would make sure my (graphics) settings were a lot less demanding for MP. If possible, I would also tweak the game Internet connection settings (in a game file). I cannot guess how many people hinder themselves, now a days, but a long time ago, it was pretty common for people to have their graphics settings way too high for MP, which would 'hurt' their MP experience. I am assuming this would apply to Arma 2 (3?) regarding warping? EDIT: Or, 'stuttering', anyway.

Of course, all of this is fine for discussion. :) (Really.) However, regarding Arma 3, I think the discussion is somewhat unnecessary. With the experimental betas addressing things like (AI) warping, and the release date a year away, I, personally, will wait a lot longer to try and seriously discuss this. (I need to do more research on the betas, anyway.) And, with other discussions about warping, and BIS already knowing what people's complaints are and what they may need to improve, the 'discussion' would be more like... rehashing. But, I guess rehashing is OK. I do see your reason for this thread, though. Anyone have a good link about any work BIS may doing with the net-code? As for Arma 2, and current game-play, yes, people need to try and find servers to play on that suit their geographical location. The less hops, the better. But, probably, everyone knows this already. And, of course, it is better to play on a (good) dedicated server than a hosted one, and, probably, everyone knows this, also. Everyone (probably) already knows, too, if your ISP sucks, you're screwed, no matter what. ASIDE: I have not messed around with a dedicated server and COOP with any Arma sim. But, for those that like to build COOP missions for themselves and friends (or for squad practice, etc.), if you do not have a dedicated server, it should not take much money to build a sufficient server to host the game. Hey, all the friends can pitch in. - It could even be located with the person that has the best Internet connection. (I am sure 'we' do not, or some people would have not been called a cheater, from time to time.) To simplify, I just usually call it, 'losing' packets. The simplest thing would be forced dynamic netspeed for each client. I do not know if any developer has ever implemented that 'properly'. Maybe you have come across different people than I, but I have not known anyone that likes to die after reaching cover. My personal answer is, no. However, your personal opinion is good enough to make me want to say, yes. I do not like that. I will try to elaborate on that further at a later time.

"Wow", is the only thing you have gotten completely correct. Trouble is, that would only refer to your posting style (or, lack of said). And yes, I caught the wiping off the Cheeto's part. I also know what the (later produced) shirt says. And no, I am not one. Maybe you should do a little research on the origin of the nick, regarding 'the shirt'. If you know what I am talking about, then how could you expect anyone to take what you said as anything but derogatory, (heck, extremely derogatory), especially since it was obvious you were being nothing but a smart ass. Also, you should practice what you preach. For instance, about putting words into someone else's mouth. And yes, you do need to rehash, at least from the perspective of reading again what someone has posted, and not over reacting, or completely misunderstanding. I was clear enough in my last post that I meant no malice in my original post to you, and that I can discuss things with you in a more proper manner, and stay on topic. I even mentioned the failure on my part to put in (at least one) smiley face, so you would have had a better interpretation of my 'mood' to wards you, in my first post. But, I see you will have none of that. And really, how dare I try and turn a ridiculous confrontation into something more civil! Anyway, I really did not think you could do an about face and be civil. Too bad you proved me right.

TL;DR: Summary... me an Max Power going back and forth, being really silly. "IMO, that reads like something coming from a 'fan-boi'." Max Power, I guess I was expecting too much (on the Internet). (Well, I will take some (secondary) blame. I could have thrown a smiley face in there, somewhere.) I thought you would ascertain the difference of... that reads like something coming from a 'fan-boi'... from... you are a 'fan-boi'. There is a difference. At least, when I was typing it, 'I' knew what I was 'saying'. Would the following have helped? Oh, c'mon! IMO, that reads like something coming from a 'fan-boi'. :p And why are you being so over-dramatic and sensitive? - Hissy fit? White wife beater? The latter is you being very callous with your typed words. About your reply to my initial response... And my (partial) answer (which, unfortunately, was affected by your hissy fit remark) (with words in parenthesis being added for clarification)... I am not trying to be condescending, but in case you missed it, (and even though I was somewhat sarcastic), the original, "maybe you mis-quoted him", was a very important part of that paragraph. You should know, that is me saying that the words may not be a quote from your friend. However, you did, very specifically, claim, it was, "his expert opinion", which could very well be construed as you quoting him. But, you were never clear on any of this, at all, from your very first post, which is what I replied to. And you typing words, without you clarifying those words are an off-shoot of what someone else said, makes you the owner of those words. You out-right dismissed a legitimate concern about the game being 'optimized', stating, with your words or a derivative of someone else's words, that they are in fairy tale land. There is not even any real content to that reply. (BTW, everyone here is not a layman. To restate, also, anyone can discover 'something' is wrong with a software program by doing a little research, or, in addition, by simply just using the program. A person does not have to be a software engineer!) And again, the manner (not the spelling) in which Kirq used the word, "optimisation", was, IMO, acceptable. I did not misunderstand your original statement (reply to Kirq). I simply replied to it, minus a cute little smiley face. The result... the silly banter going on back and forth between us. The thing being suggested, well actually being said, is that you think you know who is a layperson, and who is not, and that 'they' do not know how to use their settings, consequently, 'they' have no legitimate complaints. And who in the heck wants less responsive AI? C'mon. And you seem to be stuck mostly on graphics regarding 'optimization'. Who is ,"we"? Are you the BIS lead developer? Has the BIS lead developer come in this thread and stated that everything is perfect? Of course not, to either of those last two questions. And the latter will never happen. Of course, there is much to be taken into account regarding software development. It will never be perfect. But, they will do their best to make any of their sims as good as possible for us, with what they have to work with, whether it be time, capital, man-power, whatever. ... There will always be something that can be made better. Or as Kirq (or others) might put, there will always be something that can be 'optimized'. And me saying, "read more carefully", in no manner or form, equates to me saying someone cannot read. Many people skim a thread, or do not even read it. And we cannot see each other's face, and hear the tone of each other's voice. A person trying to be sure that what they are reading (on the Internet in a forum post) is properly understood, and not over-reacting, is only prudent. Thus the comment, "read more carefully". Now, if you want to carry on, then please, do so. But do it without your uncalled for, derogatory remarks, and I will try and remember to throw in some smiley faces. Whatever the case, we need to spend more time on-topic, and less time on nonsense. ---------- Post added at 09:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:22 PM ---------- I have fired different weapons of both origin, also. While I would like the sounds to be better, it is not a deal breaker for me. (tacticalnuggets, I am not implying that you are saying it is.) I am more concerned with other 'things', such as the editor. I am sure, though, over-all, I will be satisfied with Arma 3.

Rye, So, you have no personal experience? OK. No biggie. And I think it is Cu Chi (at least from my memory). As far as I know, books about Cu Chi came out way after I knew about that operation. And, that is a major point. 'It' was an 'operation'. That was not just a squad (or two) coming across a hole, and then someone volunteering to go down, and being handed a pistol and a (hopefully with new batteries) flashlight. - From my understanding, because I was not at Cu Chi, but, after a long while, there was an active search for tunnel complexes. The operation came about because of continuous activity, such as abushes, and then weapons and ammo, even tins, etc., which were 'magically' disappearing from the bodies of fallen US soldiers. Of course, also, the area had been bombed and napalmed almost into oblivion. Someone in command finally got it through their head that there was way more to Cu Chi than what 'met the eye'. I really do not want to read books about the subject. And for myself, I really do not want to get into this (that) any further. - I have said more than I wanted to (should have), anyway. OT: I don't think anyone should hold their breath while waiting for knives or bayonets to be implemented in the Arma series. EDIT: Tell you what, I will look into some of what you suggested. (I am not sure why.) Maybe tomorrow night. Or, the next night, or... :). Sooner or later. Seriously.

Max Power, First the person you replied to, then your reply. Now, you are not even taking ownership of those words, that those words are from a friend that is a software engineer working for 3M. Well, I feel sorry for 3M. or, at the very least, your friend should choose his words more carefully, you should not quote him, or, maybe you mis-quoted him. Not everyone knows everything, about everything. A person can very well learn about a problem from doing simple research. Thus, you, or your friend, saying someone mentioning optimization is just in fairly tale land, UNLESS, they know what they are talking about, is absurd. And, 'optimization' is just a general term, but perfectly fine to use, in the manner in which it was used. (Hey, BTW, I know the space shuttle flies. But, since I do not know exactly how it flies, I guess I do not know what I am talking about, and I am in fairy tale land.) I assumed you were talking about Arma 3, and possibly referring to Arma 2, also. After all, this is Arma 3 General Discussion. Sooo, you, basically, shooting Kirq's remarks down with such a silly reply, does, again, IMO, sound like someone being a (Arma) 'fan-boi'. - Are you really trying to convince anyone that people referring to the Arma series and optimization are just in fairy tale land? There are not sound mods? How about texture mods? How about things we do not even 'see', such as CPU/GPU instructions, etc. And for those jumping on the 'fan-boi' remark band-wagon, read more carefully. OT: The sounds are good enough for me. Yes, though, I could do without the birds chirping while I am rumbling around in a tank.

Well, anyway, I apologize. I should not have even brought up some things I did. This is a game thread. But through the years, these threads where someone starts bringing up 'real-life' just get to me. :( EDIT: Fortunately, it is very rare.

Rye, Maybe I should have been more precise with my words. As for this game, and regarding the modern Army, we will never have a knife for CQB, or for any stealth mission. While I am not a BIS lead developer, that would be my bet. As I stated, it would be OK (by me) to have a mission where the player could use a knife (bayonet), but I seriously doubt BIS would go to the trouble. And where do you get your 'info'? It surely is not from personal experience. I mean, really... As for tunnel rats, I am sure there is nothing you could tell me that I did not know about or learn over 30 something years ago. - I, personally, do not know (of) a single person that went in a hole with a .38 revolver. '45, yes. '9mm, yes. So, you saying, "they", like it was (even, possibly) most of the tunnel rats, is completely false. And, please, instead of just throwing statements out there you 'think' may have happened, cite some instances (from Afghanistan and Iraq), where soldiers are killing the enemy with a knife. Regarding jamming in close quarters (you mentioned 5 meters), a soldier surely does not throw his rifle down and try to 'acquire' his bayonet (if he has one). I know I would not. The thing that got me shaking my head the most was, when you mentioned about cutting the jugular so the target would not scream. The breaking the neck was a 'good one', too. And, please, also, tell us about the other, "number of instantly debilitating procedures", regarding a (stealth) kill. I really want to hear about those. EDIT: Wow, damn, it has been more like (strike 30 above) 40. Unreal.

rscarrab, OK, I believe I get it now. It has been a really long time since I saw that movie. About lighting, I guess there could be places where only the flashlight could be used to see. IMO, most would probably forgive the lighting issues in exchange for something a little different, and possibly even relevant to some real world places, regarding where the conflict is taking place.

A little stealth mission, as Blackfox34 eludes to, would be OK. And, as he stated, he does not mean running around with a knife, chasing players and trying to stab them. ;) What mission was that in, I guess in Arma 1, where you had to sabotage some tanks. Man, maybe I was just too stupid (in-game) (even though I am really familiar with such tactics), but I could never get in and out with out being discovered. I finally had to, somewhat, just Rambo through some of the mission. It was absurd! A stealth mission in which there was no real, viable way to be stealthy. (Maybe I should have just kept trying to figure it out. I think I only tried about three times. I was probably just impatient. Hey, it's a game!) And yes, when things get up close and personal, all bets are off. However, the person initiating the attack does, somewhat, have the advantage. EDIT: Really, though, knife take-downs are a thing of the past, and even in the past they were, to my knowledge, rare. - Even tunnel rats used a pistol. (Yes, that is a different situation, but they did not go in announcing they were there.)

Are you just drawing a wild conclusion? :p If not, please, clarify, because I do not get it. I mean, where is a quote being referenced from Apocalypse Now, and who is doing the referring? OT: I think some under-ground complexes, of some sort, would be OK. However, I do not think the AI will have fun with tunnels. :) I can just 'see' the AI not getting out my way, and me having to (hopefully, be able, to at least) micro-manage them. Yuk!

Oh, c'mon! IMO, that reads like something coming from a 'fan-boi'. While there is absolutely no shame in being a big (BIG) fan of Arma titles, that was a really poor reply, and somewhat of a put-down to the person that mentioned 'optimization'. A person does not have to know what they are 'talking about', I.E., from a developers standpoint, to learn or discover that a software program is not 'optimized'. This has been shown over and over again with many software releases, not from just Arma titles. For example, texture mods. No one wants to buy software, and then wait and hope that someone outside of the developing company will make the software better! Especially when a person's computer may very well play a game that is just as 'demanding', but plays the other title way better.

Sooo, has anyone done this... In the editor, I place one unit as the player, linked to the High Command Module, I place one group (or squad), with the Team Leader as playable, in-game, when I switch to the Team Leader, then back to the Commander, I can no longer command the Team Leader, I need to be able to switch back and forth, and still be able to command the Team Leader!

I loaded a new mission with the Proving Grounds map, set up a simple High Command mission, with one squad, and it worked perfectly switching back and forth between the Commander and the Squad Leader, with me still being able to command the Squad Leader. I tried it a few times, to be sure. EDIT: The only thing I can conclude about the immediate above is, I just was not paying close enough attention. *Possibly, the squad was moving, as mentioned below, but the Squad Leader was not. Then the game locked-up. (The mission had not been saved yet.) I used Task Manager to shut down Arma 2 OA. Restarted, re-designed the mission, but then I could not get it to work. I tried different maps, with different commander and group set-ups. I tried different ways of linking, in different order, and eventually, of even grouping and linking, of using multiple groups, and multiple switchable/playable units in a single group. I even tried naming everything (for instance... BIS_HC_0... for the High Command Module). Nothing I did would work. *During one mission, though, when an order was given to the Squad leader to move, and he accepted the order, his squad moved, but he did not. I was able to replicate that in another mission, but that will not do you any good. hadoancuong, The High Command Module works, as far as I can tell, just like it is suppose to. So, I can not say it is buggy. Apparently, it is just not designed to work with switchable/playable units, as you wanted it to. I have not tried any kind of scripting to make it work as you want, but I do not think that would help. Of course, someone with more scripting expertise may be able to accomplish this. - Anyone? Sorry I could not help you, hadoancuong.