Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

brightcandle

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    236

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by brightcandle

  1. Posted

    We have been running the alpha on a a BladeVPS X8 from transip.eu. Its done a decent job especially in maintaining very steady performance. The CPU's are only 2.0Ghz and i7 gen 2 hardware so we get 26 slots stable with server fps 20-40 fps. We can get a game up to 35 players but server fps often drops below 20 which retards AI.

    One oddity that we are seeing is exactly 2 cores worth of usage. There is no apparent additional CPU usage past 2 cores which does make me wonder what the ideal hardware is for an Arma 3 server. I would like to hear from some guys hosting on higher speed boxes before we purchase an IB 3570 about the impact of a 6 core machine if you have one? Do you get better than 33% (16.6% with HT on) CPU usage or are you also pegged on 2 cores?

  2. Posted

    Hardware:

    4x 2.0 Ghz i7 Xeon (SB-E architecture) CPU

    8 GB of RAM

    100Mbit/s connection

    A few notes on performance and such we have determined while running a public server with organised coop play and some TvT with our pistol carnage maps.

    - We can't push past 26 players without a server crash eventually happening. 26 Players is 24 hours stable for TvT and coop.

    - With the server fully populated and with a reasonable amount of AI (60) we see server FPS that is 20-40.

    - Fully populated the server will utilise about 8Mbit/s of upload bandwidth and just 2Mbit/s download.

    - The server never goes above 2 cores used fully at any time, ie 200% usage.

    We have found no real difference with tweaked Arma 2 network bandwidth settings or all defaults (empty file). The performance is reasonable in both cases and bandwidth usage is mostly unchanged. Tweaking the settings does not fix the crashing on larger numbers of players.

  3. Posted

    I get better frames and slightly higher utilisation by doing two things:

    1) Setting the SLI to Alternative Frame Render 2

    2) Set maximise performance

    (1) increases utilisation a bit but (2) is necessary because the cards downclock in the game because of the low utilisation. This configuration outperforms single card by about 40% but its not great scaling.

  4. Posted

    ACRE or perhaps the in game von now works just like it. But radio and localized and directional voice is essential for arma multiplayer. Depending on the balance and features of ACE incorporated into the main game presumably ACE. Depending on how the AI has improved TPWCAS and ASR. A decent A2 map ported (like lingor). An in game dynamic mission creator like MCC. All essentials IMO to start to play multiplayer reasonably.

  5. Posted

    I played through a lot of the demo scenarios in Cologne and while they were obviously decent PCs it looked and ran incredibly well compared to Arma 2. They could have been running triple SLI under there on a 3960k and the entire game in RAMDisk to fool us on what the performance would look like but I doubt that amount of cheating in the demo. Doesn't tell us how the real map will fair or what its like when the AI count goes up a lot but it was smooth 6 months ago despite the fancy graphical fidelity. My guess is we'll be pleasantly surprised with performance and the visual quality we get at the various points of performance, for the 5 minutes we get to play it between memory leak crashes.

  6. Posted

    Do we have any details on what sort of support we have on the server side yet?

    - Can we run it on Linux?

    - Does it multithread and what sort of hardware do we need?

    - Server version same process with uploading files or are we looking at something a bit more fancy this time?

  7. Posted · Edited by W0lle

    I have an eyefinity setup with 5760x1200 resolution. In my profile I have

    tripleHead=1;

    fovTop=0.89999998;

    fovLeft=4;

    I am running ACE mod.

    In the video options of the game the interface and 3d resolution are both 5760x1200 and the aspect ratio currently says custom.

    When I aim using the DMR scope at 1m target at 200m it is 4 mildots high. However when a friend uses his more normal view he sees a 1m target at 200m as 5 mildots high, which is as we would expect. The two images are linked below.

    http://i673.photobucket.com/albums/vv91/BrightCandle/arma2oa2011-10-2221-14-49-952.png 192 kb

    - Correct

    Closesttargetontherange.jpg - Wrong (eyefinity)

    How do I fix this?

  8. Posted

    On the easier settings you get two modes of shooting. The first is via the hip and its a little green dot in the middle of the screen, it moves around as you run to reduce your accuracy when moving.

    The second is looking through the scope. The scopes on the guns are (semi) realistic, so whatever mechanism they have for dealing with real life ballistic drop of the bullet the scope will show. In COD most fights are less than 100m so a central red dot is all you need. In Arma 2 its not uncommon to have a fights at 300m+ and a red dot with no zoom is of limited use.

    COD just isn't very realistic in terms of war or scopes or guns. Arma is just a tad more demanding of the user of the weapons, you need to know a bit about what your doing to hit targets and that is a good thing.

×