Morbid_DK

If you want to opt in on the beta versions via Steam, go to your game library, right-click on the "Arma2: Operation Arrowhead" listing, select "Properties" from the drop down menu, and go to the "Betas" tab. From there look for the "Select the betas you would like to opt into:" option. From that menu select "beta -". Click Close. Run the game. All done.

Glad there is some sanity in the changes. Wished they had been pieced out in the betas instead though.

I was looking forward to installing this patch. Then I saw the changes in damage. Guess I won't being do that after all. I got a zillion zombie shooters already (and I love them), but nothing scratches the realism-itch like Arma. Why, oh why, is going BIS into this n00b pleasing dilution of core gameplay? Can't really get my head around AK headshots not being lethal :butbut: I would really love a comment on, or better yet, a refutation of the supposed changes in damage.

Everything seems to be running fine, except I am not getting any AAN news reports, like the one in the beginning of this Youtube movie: I have googled and searched these boards, but there does not seem to be any discussions of a problem like this. What gives? Any help would be appreciated. OS: Win7 x64 GFX:Sapphire Ati Radeon 5770, 10.4 cats, 1GB Sound: Onboard Creative X-FI licensed to Soundmax (crappy but gets the job done) Ram: 8 GB DDR3 ArmA X: Anniversary Edition, from gamersgate (1.06 Atari online version, with Queen's Gambit patched to 1.18)

Thank you for clearing that up. I can't script and I am just learning to use the editor. I do however have knack for finding bugs. I thought that was the point of having discussions and the ability to edit everything in the tickets... that people who are more knowledgeable about and skilled with the code could pick up the ticket and cooperate on improving the contents. Good.

Well I am sorry. I covered it the best that I could with the information that I could gather. I can't see why referencing official modules, and just running 10 seconds of gameplay, is confusing (which was really all that was needed). I would assume that all information is welcome, even if you are not able to express yourself as a programmer with intimate knowledge of the engine and scripting concepts. If this is not the case, I shall refrain from reporting on the betas in the future.

This is news. However, what you precisely mean by "client-side issues" is unclear. Could you explain?

Already covered by my CIT ticket.

I made the above ticket, and included this problem in my original description. Structures built in CTI (at least promans crCTI) are always aligned north/south, regardless of how the player tries to place them. This is true with both the client and server being beta 84467. No saving or loading involved in this.

Granted offline and online groups are not completely separate. I enjoy both. I do think that estimating with the Stetson-Harrison method is superior to common projection. I'd hate to see Arma2 go the same way as so many other games that completely neglected the SP side of the game, to the point of unplayable, to cater for a very vocal MP faction (*cough* Il-2 *cough*). SP does have a life of it's own. If you doubt my words, just read the "User mission requests" thread.

Thank you.

I would be glad if you could confirm/update the CIT ticket or link it to a similar ticket regarding Cipher.

I don't think it matters how much the online experience improves. You will always have those that either have shitty connections, or just don't want to interact with other people while gaming. Online and offline are seperate groups.

There will be no testing of this beta with Warfare servers. Initial spawning is bugged with game breaking consequences. http://dev-heaven.net/issues/24368

All those who play offline, which judging buy the amount of people on the servers, are the vast majority.

Yeah, I was running some CTI last night, and couldn't fathom why I got spotted and killed repeatedly some 500-700 meters out, no matter where I tried to hide, on manoeuvres I have previously done with success. This certainly could explain it.

I can confirm that. Shouldn't need a repro mission as this is easy to replicate.

@ - Darkhorse 1-6, that's probably the correct explanation.

What bubble? I expect to see it when progressing in the campaign. That is how the game is supposed to unfold. I have found several walkthroughs where they are present. If I depbo the campaign I can see that all the files are there, like in "x01intro.sara" and "x02breakingnews.sara", and so on. The ANN reports can be heard through various OGG files, but it does not materialize when I play the campaign. Neither do the "mission won" or "mission lost" cutscenes. If I load the cutscenes in the editor, after I depbo them, I can only load the "intro" part, where the main character does a voiceover with a cartoonish presentation with silhouette soldiers in the front. The ANN cutscene itself cannot be previewed, even when I select "Mission" or "Outro win" or "Outro lose".

I had that too today, so you might be right. Although it is highly unlikely that several mirrors will have corrupt patches. I solved it by installing Queen's Gambit right after installing Arma. That will take you from 1.05 (1.06 in my case, Gamersgate version) to 1.08. From there you can apply the 1.18 patch.

I get this too, also with the previous betas. Might be because I am on win7 x64, but I am not sure. Anyway, I just delete the everything in the \[Your Arma Installation folder]\Expansion\beta folder, and that seems to work fine.

If you are going for 1.60, you might want to make sure that the official campaigns are working as intended. As it is now, Red Harvest grinds to a halt in mission 3. http://dev-heaven.net/issues/23755

Ditto.

Thank you for that confirmation. Ticketed as Bug #23755, http://dev-heaven.net/issues/23755

Red Harvest campaign is bugged with the beta. It is not possible to complete mission 3 "Into the Storm". Reconing the village does not produce visual confirmation of the enemy communications vehicle, preventing further progress.