Demidekidasu

Aye, truce indeed. Thanks again.

I do know what you mean, and have seen the type of poster you are talking about. As I said, I've been playing ArmA and messing around in the editor for a few years now :) I'm just not someone who particpates in forums a lot - hence my low post count. I can usually find what I need by looking at the wiki, forums and whatnot, or simply by experimentation, but in this instance I was way off in my understanding of how it's done.

Thank you, I see how I need to do it now. The script there provides tactical support, but not missions. With some modification/simplification to the script, I have got it to create a SecOps manager with the default settings - which generates missions. At least, it looks that way... createCenter WEST; _group = createGroup west; SOM = _group createUnit ["SecOpManager", [0,0,0], [], 0, "NONE"]; SOM synchronizeObjectsAdd [player]; waituntil {not (isnull SOM)}; However, I maintain my view that there really was no need for you to be as rude to me as you were. I wasn't aware that it needed to be scripted. I was looking for some solution involving the init field or the condition of presence field in the module itself. That's the reason I couldn't find what I needed.

So, bassically, what you are saying is that if I don't know, I shouldn't be allowed to know? What a wonderful person you are. FYI, I've been around for more than 5 minutes, Mr. Elitist. I think this is probably the first time I have ever needed to ask for help from others because I cannot find out how to do something anywhere, and this is the response I get?

What? I said I've been seen searching already and couldn't find it. In fact, I have been trying to find a solution pretty much all day. Don't talk to me as if I'm stupid, thank you.

Hi all, Been searching for this on here and google, but can't find the answer I'm looking for! Bassically, I am making a mission where you start in a base so you can choose your own weapons etc., then board a helicopter which transports you to another location on the map (quite far off) to "begin" the actual mission. I want there to be SecOps active in this mission, but not until you enter an area defined by a trigger. In other words, I want to activate the SecOps module via a trigger. Is this possible at all? Huge thanks in advance! ---------- Post added at 21:29 ---------- Previous post was at 20:20 ---------- Nobody able to help me? :( Thought I had it sussed for a minute by creating a trigger with "deployed=true" in its on act field, then putting "deployed" in the condition of presence field of the SecOps module... Am I on the right lines at least?

Alright, thanks. I had a look and it appears that they all have different IRQ's, which is good, right? This is what their IRQ's are in the windows device manager: GTX 470 - 0x0000001A (26) GTX 470 - 0x00000018 (24) Creative SB X-Fi - 0x0000001E (30) As I have said before, there is quite literally no apparent problems with my system at all. The soundcard has not caused me a single headache in any game so far, and SLI always seems to work great too (in games that support it, of course). Put it this way - In most modern games I can maintain well over 60fps almost constantly with max settings @1920x1080 and 16xAA. My system has some serious grunt under it's belt. So I am still at my conclusion that the game's engine is the cause of this. I fear that Bohemia are incorrectly assuming that low frame rates are being caused by hardware innadequacy, when in fact it appears to be the engine's innadequacy to handle the vast amounts of data involved. Obviously on many systems it will be due to hardware innadequacy, but in my case it simply is not so. The game is not particularly taxing any area of my system, so it must be the engine at fault...

I have a very simmilar system to yourself (more powerfull in fact, with an SSD too), and I am getting crappy FPS - yet the game is not maxing out any department on my computer. Read my earlier posts in this thread (only 1 or 2 pages back). Judging by my observations, I am absolutely convinced that it is the archaic and crudely-written engine that is limiting the game's performance, not necassarily weak hardware. But nobody seems to be listening to me...

1. Yes, ArmA 2 is on the SSD 2. Oh, I dont have OA sorry, lol. But when I run the vanilla benchmarks with "Single GPU" mode, I get much lower frame rates. MSI afterburner reports even and decent GPU usage when SLI is enabled too, so I am pretty sure that the problem is not an SLI issue. 3. Yes I am. I believe they are up-to-date too. The only thing the auto-updater offers me is some pointless programs... 4. I have no idea how to find out, lol. I was under the impression that modern motherboards (especially a high-end one such as mine) assigned IRQ's automatically? I've certainly not had a single issue with the machine other than with ArmA 2, so I have so far assumed that all is fine and dandy. I wont rule out the possibility that it is wrong though, so if you could kindly tell me what to look for in the BIOS I will check it! 5. Yeah, PhysX processing is assigned to the CPU alone. Thanks for the reply BTW!

Yeah, ArmA 2 is completely brilliant otherwise and I hardly ever play anything else. But thats why I am so bothered by this... I just tried running it with everything on the lowest setting possible (including the resolution and fillrate) and still only managed ~30fps (occasionally dropping into the 20's) in the situation that I mentioned before. Therefore, once again, my conclusion is that the performance problems are a serious issue that lies within the game's engine. Put it this way: If my 4.1GHz CPU is not getting more than ~70% on any core, CPU-intensive happenings are obviously being choked simply by the engine. The engine's innadequacy to handle the data is a major flaw in the game, and I really hope that BI are aware that the famously-low performance isnt completely related to hardware.

Fair enough point I suppose, but I was refering to the unreasonably-low performance during gameplay as well. I just used the benchmarks as a common frame of reference. The worst thing is during a big firefight in a city... 26fps even though no cores are at more than ~70% usage and my GPU's are hovering at ~85% usage is just terrible. It almost gives the effect that the game is emulating running on a slower machine than what it is... Know what I mean? It seriously annoys me, because I love ArmA 2, but if the engine is simply innadequate for the game, no future hardware upgrades will ever fix the problem...

Hi everyone, this is my first time posting in the forums. Ive been around here for a while though, watching from the shadows, hehe (visited the forums before but only just made an account in other words!). The reason I am posting this is because I am quite troubled by how ArmA 2 does not run particularly well on my system, yet none of my system's resources are being taxed. Firstly, here is my system (built by myself): *ASUS Rampage III Extreme motherboard *Intel Core i7-950 o/c @4.1GHz *12gb Corsair Dominator GT DDR3 @~1500MHz *2x EVGA GeForce GTX 470's (SLI) o/c @688MHz/1376MHz/1795MHz *Creative Soundblaster X-Fi Titanium *120gb Corsair Vertex 2 SSD (primary drive) *1tb Samsung HDD (storage) *Corsair Obsidian 800d case (with lots of extra fans!) *Corsair A70 CPU cooler *Corsair AX1200 PSU (1.2kw with 100a rail) *Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Now, this was an expensive build (£3000). I built it with the intention of enjoying games such as ArmA 2 with little to no noticable slowdowns. But this is simply not the case! I run the game with 1.8km view distance and everything at "Very High" (except for "Video Memory" - "Default" and "Object Details" - "High"). In the first benchmark, it returns an average of 59fps (yummy!), but the second benchmark returns an average of 22fps (yuch!). Sure, it sounds like a CPU bottleneck, perhaps, but please first allow me to explain what I have observed... I use the Logitech G19 keyboard and use various system monitoring applets on the LCD screen to keep an eye on everything in my system. When I was running the second benchmark, none of my CPU's cores (I always monitor the usage of individual cores, not the overall CPU-usage) were exceeding ~70% usage, and my GPU's were only at 20-40% usage. (BTW, SLI is working in ArmA 2, I can confirm this, as I enjoy a great boost in performance when playing with it set to "AFR 2", so the problem is not SLI-related). This is something that occurs every time a lot of CPU-dependant things are happening, and it severely kills my enjoyment of the game. There is no reason why the frame rates should be dropping when my system is not being challenged, unless the problem lies within the game itself, which is indeed possible, because I have seen this before in some of Bethesda's games - the dated engine simply cannot keep up with the amount of data involved when you run it with a lot of mods, resulting in frame rate drops even when the system is not being particularly taxed. I am at a loss. I am not new to ArmA 2, and in fact I first played the game on it's release with a 2.8GHz Pentium 4, so I know all of the tweaks and tricks! But nothing changes. All drivers are up-to-date etc. Game is version 1.08. Enabling/disabling HT in the BIOS makes no noticable difference either... Excuse my rant, just needed to moan about it, as the game is quite clearly a faulty product if my conclusions are correct, which is a crying shame because the game is utterly fantastic otherwise!