rfxcasey

No matter what I set my aspect ratio to, 21:9 (normal) or just plain 21:9, when I hit OK Arma 3 keeps resetting my display back to stretch. Why?

Having a bit of an odd issue. I have updated all my mods through Play with Six and I'm having an issue where Acre is working in general but in game I cannot pull up my radio nor can I transmit. When I step away from players in game the volume level changes as expected and eventually disappears, however my radio is completely non functional. I have the TS plugin installed, I have tried restarting the plugin, restarting TS and restarting my game but makes no difference. Please help this is very annoying.

Anyone soliciting praise here? Just ask and you'll find lots of people will give it, whether warranted or not.

Shadows can be a bit of a killer, try dropping the shadow quality, I keep mine at ultra just because it looks better and I don't have any performance issues. Some of the other stuff you can turn down without really impacting visual quality just to get a better FPS overhead. You'll have to play around and find what you like. Ambient occlusion quality can be turned down from ultra to very high if you choose and in your Nvidia properties, from quality to performance. Other than that, view distance, terrain detail and anti-aliasing are going to hit performance. Trying running at x2 or x4 AA and turn off AToC except for maybe grass, I personally don't like the way it looks anyway. PPAA didn't seem to hit performance much if at all, personal preference as to which setting you choose. V sync also can be turned off if you don't experience screen taring. Make sure its turned off in your Nvidia control panel as well. Hard drive access is another bottle neck, try to run off an SSD if at all possible. Its possible to run a ram drive with extra system memory and preload certain files into it (textures and the like). That's a bit more of a project then some are up for but if you like experimenting, have at it. Optimizations will come in time, between those for engine and graphics you could be looking at a 50% increase in FPS shortly.

Believe me, most of the issues (opinions varying greatly) will get sorted in time, but no one is giving it any time. Seems like there are many placeholders in the sim just to get it out to the public. Any issues I saw, I knew, from experience and common sense, would get resolved, added, whatever. I dont' think they've gotten anything "wrong" the sim is still in development for God sake. Though, Arma 2 is not exactly the best example of this in practice. You want to voice concerns, no problems but what I find both funny and pathetic as hell is that people get so scared and upset that they feel the need to petition BIS at this early stage of the game. I mean, a petition? REALLY??? "Like OMG they ruined my beloved Arma!!!" Freaking chillax, the damn thing isn't even finished yet. What a bunch of whiny babes, that's what I really find pathetic, so keep your freaking diaper on and be freaking patient. Most of all "DON'T PANIC!" God almighty you'd think BIS was trying to take away your 2nd amendment rights. Nuff said. Dropping the mic and walking away.......

I find all the whining about the sim "pathethic!". Its the same everywhere you go, people are always crying about the latest iteration of a series. If you all compare Arma 3 to the rest of the crap out there you'd see its heads and tails above most other titles at this early stage of the game. How is it of "no consequence" to me if enough of the whiners sway the devs. Or were you not referring to the likes of myself. The rest of us will just have to start an anti-petition.

First off, the continued development is almost a given, unless the company goes under. The more money BIS can make the more they can put back into development though folks opinion on progress varies considerably. And just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean that its not constructive to have a dialog, however people will be bitching and whining till the end of time about this feature and that, what was added and what was taken away. I personally thing Arma 3 is a breath of fresh air after a long love hate relationship with Arma 2. If some of you loved Arma 2 THAT much, perhaps its your turn to experience the love and hate. Thankfully, history shows that you will not get ALL you are asking for so you may not ruin things for the rest of us. If you love Arma 2, you have a choice, go play Arma 2, plain and simple.

Yeah, and then they posted it here, thinking we would all be like "Oh you guys are so great, BIS actually responded to you!" Get a life. I stand by my original statement and yes saying "the long-time fans of the series" does imply a certain heir of absolution. So I guess the rest of use that don't fully agree don't fit into "the long-time fans". This letter sounds like some obnoxious college kid petitioning a congressional comity. I have an idea, lets just keep everything exactly the way it is and never change anything. If you don't like 3 then go back to 2 if you love it so much.

Did you really not understand what I meant? Wow, I guess some people just can't put 2 and 2 together. Laying down was the closest thing to a deploy the sim allowed for and greatly effected recoil to the point of, what else would you call it? MGs aren't even that accurate when actually deployed on a bipod in real life, not even by a longshot, especially something like and M60. If that wasn't meant to simulate deployed recoil without actually implementing a deployment system in the sim, then BIS really F'd up on that one as it was even more so impossibly ridiculous for simply lying prone. All this talk of realism lacking in Arma 3 make me laugh when you look at Arma 2. Now you are saying that all troops using MGs were meant to just lean on their elbows when lying down and not even use the bipod, now that sounds realistic. To that point, I reassert that the sim was horribly borked by the ability of a single MG wielding troop to lay down and unload an extremely high rate of fire, killing basically everything with greater then sniper like accuracy leaving the assault troops to twittle their thumbs. Perhaps you didn't play a lot of multiplayer. Go sit down.

Boo freaking Hoo......Cry me a river, I'll concede the weight limitation, but nothing else. Oh and bye the way, I take objection to your use of "the long-time fans of the series" as your 67 do not comprise all of "The" long time fans of the series.

Might be dumb question, but do the UAVs have limited fuel and battery life? Haven't really tried them out to much and hadn't noticed if this was the case or not.

Donno dude, I can still shoot the balls of a nat at 100 yards after sprinting 100 meters with an AR-15. Arma 2 human limitation simulation was always way over done in my opinion, and historically, troops have fought their way out of bad situations through seer will and skill quite often. I actually feel connected with the character now, instead of hopelessly frustrated by a horribly clunky and cumbersome weapons handling, movement and human limitation model that I am always having to make exceptions for, not because its realistic but because its just not done well. Still hard to hit a moving target in Arma 3 I don't see a whole lot to complain about except perhaps more wind effect and bullet drop. If you set the AI on a hard enough setting, you'll easily find yourself planning attach out for the best results else wind up real dead, real quick. We've all experienced our 'WTF' moments in Arma 2 where the chunky clunky movement has overly limited our ability and gotten us killed prematurely. Not to mention AI seeing through cover. If I am laying down in Arma 3 and get engaged the AI will continue to attach my last know position for a time even if I move out of sight. The farther I crawl away the fainter the sound of the shoots coming in my direction as they pelt to bush I was laying under a moment ago. I'll tell you another thing that seems vastly improved in my limited time testing. Used to be in Arma 2 you'd always have a guy in the squad grab and MG just so he could lay down and engage every targets with laser like precision. The deployed MGs in Arma 2 were always way to accurate and ruined the sim for assault troops whose weapons were much less effective at those ranges. An MG is more of a support/suppression weapon though it sure didn't feel that way in Arma 2. Now in 3 seems that the MGs have a bit more spread and are less controllable as they should be, assault weapons feel more like precision implements as do most modern assault rifles. Love Arma 2, and however you may choose to belittle people who don't share your opinion, I was quite good at it. Still, I must say that Arma 3 is a hugh leap forward in combat simulation. If you want clunky unrealistic, basically turn based combat strategy, perhaps you should try some Jagged Alliance or some board games like Robotech instead. Arma 3 is still not a run and gun COD or BF3 though BF3 is fun to play. You can't play Arma 3 like BF3 and expect to live long so I think if you're putting it in the same class as those you're exaggerating. Arma 3 is not Arma 2, which is both a good and bad thing, though I love what they have done so far, with more content and improved AI it will become the new standard as hard as that my be for some folks to except.

Can't say I agree with this comment. One of the nicest things about Arma 3 is it still feels like Arma 2 only much smoother and refined. The firefights so far have been a blast for me as have the explosion effects from grenades, mortars and the like. The UAV stuff seem very good as well. All in all, If Arma 2 was as refined as 3 in respect to movement/gunplay and such, it would have been almost perfect. Nice to be able to import Arma 2 content into 3 as well. Do things need to be added, yes, thought the sim has great potential as I see it. Hopefully others see that potential as well and develop more content. If 3 had the same level of content and development as 2 I think there would be no agreement. I do miss the tall tree forests in 2 though, hopefully we'll get some more maps based on more woodland type environments. Keep the faith, modders are doing amazing work these days and Arma 3 is a good engine to build on so far.

I use MyVoiceController, best free one I have found. I'll be making a profile for Arma 3 shortly which I'll post. Here's a tutorial I wrote on installing and using it. http://dangerdogz.com/forums/tutorials/article/19-voice-control-tutorial/

Your sig is borked, resize it.;)

I'll get sys specs out of the way first 5 3570K @ 4.2Ghz 1 x COOLER MASTER Hyper 212 EVO RR-212E-20PK-R2 Continuous Direct Contact 120mm Sleeve CPU Cooler BIOSTAR TZ77B LGA 1155 Intel Z77 G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 16GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) Nvidia GTX 670 GPU 2GB 1 x MSI N670GTX-PM2D2GD5/OC GeForce GTX 670 2GB 256-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 3.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video Card 1 x OCZ Agility 3 AGT3-25SAT3-180G 2.5" 180GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) (running Arma 3 off this drive) 1 x Western Digital WD AV-GP WD20EURS 2TB SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive hec X-Power Pro 650 650W Continuous @ 40°C ATX 12V v2.2 / EPS 12V SLI Ready CrossFire Ready Power Supply Ok, game is running great overall. Problem is there is a lag/slowdown/microstutter whatever you want to call it when running around occasionally and it seem to have to do with scenery loading. Even on a SSD drive its still present. Even with high FPS just seems like when running/flying/driving around there is a bit of a herky jerk at semi regular intervals. Can this be optimized or tweaked away? I certainly hope so but time will tell I suppose unless anyone in the community or BIS knows how to smooth it out. I'm possibly splitting hairs here but it is present and a bit annoying, hopefully it can be delt with.

Haven't been around the Arma scene forever but have been playing Arma 2 for quite a long time. I'll say this, I am thoroughly enjoying Arma 3 and love most of what BIS has done. I don't think the new inventory system was necessary nor does it seem to add to the experience of the sim. Having to go into individual vests and whatnot just seems a bit tedious but whatever I'm getting used to it. Apart from that, I'd have to say that the improvements, especially in gunplay, far outweigh any negatives so far, at least in my opinion. Once the sim matures it will be the new standard. I know folks will complain about certain stuff because well lets face it, its not Arma 2, but I don't see that as a bad thing. I feel what people should be more focused on is the fact that BIS have, when so many others have not, keep the overall feel of Arma 2 alive in 3. So many companies deviate so far from the core of their games in sequels that they aren't even recognizable anymore. I personally don't have much of anything to grip about and it all could have gone terribly wrong like in so many other titles. I usually try to be very objective and have to say as a whole BIS has done a fantastic job. So many release version of games/sim these days are more like alphas so it was nice to see the Arma 3 alpha felt more like an early release. With that in mind, what they have so far is heads and tails beyond what would have been expected and with time it will only get better, so to be this far ahead of the game at this early stage is wonderfully refreshing in a world of crap that is being produced as of late. I really have to take my hat of to them and I don't usually give that kind of praise without it being thoroughly warranted. The new graphic engine is just the icing on the cake, the overall package so far is extraordinary.

Need help in Warfare. How do you stop a factory from autobuilding units like helicopters and how can you set what the default autobuild unit is? Thanks.

Yep, complete uninstall of Zone Alarm did the trick. Off to enjoy some Arma 3 alpha with the boys. Thanks, though I wouldn't have guessed a complete uninstall would be the answer. I'll probably be using Comodo untill ZA gets this fixed.

Same, beta drivers didn't fix anything. Pretty annoyed my this, my friends machine played it fine right away. I have spent a lot of money to have a great modern gaming system. All and I mean all my other games work just fine, damn alpha.

Having sort of the same problem but I don't even get the black screen. Start Arma 3 and immediately crashes. Tried running as admin, turning off desktop composition, compatibility mode but nothing helps. Also installed the latest Nvidia drivers to no avail. Win 7 64 bit GTX 670 2GB 15 3570K CPU 16GB memory Lots of HD space to spare.

I think you should know that running your memory at a higher frequency will make no difference at all unless you keep the same timing, at which point stability can become an issue. There are many, many benchmarks out there that support the fact that running tightening your timing is the way to go. By running your memory at 1600 you are just creating more heat and basically spinning your wheels in place. If you can run your mem at 1600 while keeping the same timing you use at 1333 you will see a difference though usually pretty small but this might be hard to do while maintaining a stable system depending on how good your memory is. I would suggest just running it at 1333 and tightening it as far as you can. While I don't necessarily dispute this, I have seen other test done where OCing didn't seem to make a huge difference. The real problem I see with this is, while is works very well for some people its really a workaround for another underlying issue. The fact that the game doesn't even max out any of multiple cores before grinding to a halt really suggests very poor coding and optimization. My specs are... AMD x4 Phenom II @3.2Ghz GTX 560 ti 1GB OCed to 950Mhz core 4GB DDR2 @ 5,5,5,15 timing 1TB 7200RPM Sata II HDD The game only uses up to 50% of any of my 4 cores. My video card is much better then what I have seen many others using. The GPU utilization is about 25% or less with the game maxed out. I can run BF3 at max settings and never drop below 38FPS. Arma 2 on the other hand, runs like relative Kakah. I have even tried lowering all the graphic settings as far as they can go and in the mission where the black guy gets promoted after the squad leader is killed, at the base next to the water where Lt. Marney is the game still only tops out at around 26 FPS. In the woods its a different story but still. The difference in FPS from maxing out the game to running it at minimum is marginal. I think Arma II is just very very poorly optimized which is a real shame. I have seen people with lesser systems then mine claiming to run the game at max setting with vis distance set on 3Km and never see the FPS drop below 35FPS. I have tried looking at the various tweaks in this thread but to be honest the thread is huge and somewhat convoluted. Not the mention the fact that is is hard to tell what settings are still relevant as some of the suggestions I don't even have and entry for in any of my Arma configs such as the one for setting the sound on hardware accelerated. My post is long enough already, but I would like someone to look over my configs and other factors and try to help me get this game working properly. Overclocking the CPU would be a last resort and really something that should be completely unnecessary even though I'm sure it makes a difference for some, just not for the right reasons. Can anyone consolidate these tweaks by relevance to the most current version of Arma II. I do not have AO. I see there is a beta patch, is it still worth looking at or have recent patches made it obsolete. Thanks for any light anyone can shed.