doveman

So are you saying that if I untick that option it will delete and no longer use the A3-Synq folder? As for why I've stuck with PwS for now, it's because I'm not sure that Sync has the custom Repo features working that I need. With PwS, I can import from http://mysite.net/six/server.yml and have that as my Custom Repo Collection, then create a new Collection to publish and add mods from my Custom Repo Collection to that new Collection. Then, if I update my Repo mods, this is automatically synced to the published Collection and users are prompted to update. Is that all working exactly the same in Sync? On an unrelated question, if I want to remove a particular pbo from a mod (ACE in this case), is there a way to do this without creating a custom version of that mod and serving it from my custom Repo? I seem to recall there used to be a way to indicate (in the config files) that certain files should be disable/deleted. Ideally it would be possible that I could just have a folder on my Repo (e.g. @clan-custom) which contained the necessary config files to tell PwS to disable/delete certain files from one or more mods when that Collection is used, so that users could continue to download those mods from Six, have different pbos active depending on the Collection/Server and avoid unnecessary duplication and work.

V0.9.9 on PwS now http://withsix.com/p/Arma-3/mods/WodrQ-NW4xG6HQAVF72WTA/task-force-radio

Are there any plans to make PwS no longer use double disk-space (which I presume means there is no longer any need for the synq folder) as well or will this only ever be for Sync WithSix?

Still not working for me, rejects my login as invalid.

You can always use PlayWithSix, as that will update whatever you already have. Just make sure you rename your current folder to match the folder name on PwS (in the case of CUP terrains, that means all the *maps* files under @cup_terrains_maps/addons and the rest in @cup_terrains_core/addons) and it will recognise what you already have and take it from there.

Yeah, I've got an eye on one of those but nonetheless, the Recommended Specs for ArmA3, even on the Apex pre-order page say "Radeon HD 7750" and my HD 6950 is more powerful than that http://www.game-debate.com/gpu/index.php?gid=1271&gid2=797&compare=radeon-hd-6950-sapphire-2gb-edition-vs-radeon-hd-7750-1gb-gddr5 I'm hoping there's going to be considerable optimisations pre or post release but I can't see how a HD 7750 would cope with Tanoa, especially if we need to run some settings on Ultra to prevent the distracting LOD switching.

I'm afraid that's not the case for me with my 2GB HD6950. OK, it's a bit old but not 20 years old! I generally find even OC'd to 850/1300 (stock 800/1250) it's loaded 99% most of the time, even on the menu screen and with relatively low settings, whereas my OC'd i5-4670k only uses about 50%. Tanoa seems particularly bad at the moment and I get as low as 20fps in certain locations/views with only one rifleman on the map, whereas Stratis gives me about 35-50fps. I uploaded a short video showing the problem and my settings (I normally run higher to try and minimise the LOD issues but turned them down to see if it would make much difference, which it didn't) with MSI Afterburner's OSD for technical stats. I limited it to 30fps whilst recording and although I'd expect recording to cause a bit of a drop in FPS, it was actually 20fps at the worst point even when I wasn't recording. https://youtu.be/W9BZe6YQep0

You're missing the point of my request. I know it's too hard for them to make A3 64-bit and multi core compatible (maybe A4, we can live in hope!), what I'm suggesting is that they adapt the HC functionality that is already available to automatically use the extra cores for the AI and scripts in every mission, instead of authors and users having to jump through hoops to make that happen.

Dear BI I understand that altering A3 to make it use more than 2 cores would be very hard. What I don't understand is why you can't do the following. If A3 (SP client or server) is launched with -cores=4, automatically launch a HC process as well as the client or server. Then have A3 automatically transfer AI to the HC process, without missions having to be scripted to do this. This would improve performance/allow higher AI missions in SP and MP, without users or authors having to faff about. Surely it can't be that hard to change the A3 code to achieve this, perhaps by having it dynamically insert the necessary scripts (i.e. the ones authors currently have to add manually) into the mission before running it (although I daresay there might be a better way of doing it)? Perhaps this could even be scaled up, so if launched with -cores=6 or =8, automatically launch 2 or 3 HC processes and intelligently divide the AI/scripts amongst however many HC's there are?

I have to agree. If you can move you should be able to use the radio. Would be much appreciated if you could make this the default.

Those are just daft reasons to oppose this idea. For one thing, if you want to "try" a server you have to get the mods, which at the moment you either have to do manually or if one has been created by the server operator, use a profile for PlayWithSix or ArmA3Sync. Any of these methods are more hassle than what is being proposed here. The idea that you can decide what mods you like and install them and then go looking for a server that only uses those mods, well good luck with that as the chances are the server operators will have decided to use one or more mods that you either didn't like or you hadn't even heard of. Secondly, any sensible implementation of this idea would prompt you "This server needs mod x, y, z totaling 8GB that you don't have installed. Would you like me to download them for you now?" so that you could click No if you decide not to "try" the server. Thirdly, if the server is using outdated versions of mods, then you'll have to have the same versions if you want to play on that server. The prompt could tell you that you have version y already installed and this server needs version x and ask if you want to allow it to overwrite, or it could install the older versions to a separate folder to keep the current versions available for use with servers that have updated. Either way, you're not forced to do anything and can choose not to play on that server if you want but if you want to play on it, this idea would just make it a lot easier. I'm not even particularly concerned with MP, because at least there are options like PWS and A3Sync to make it fairly painless but I agree with others that it could and should be made easier. My main concern personally is about SP and how the lack of a painless and automated way to launch ArmA3 with the required mods for a mission (and possibly downloading them but that can come later if necessary) is limiting mission authors' use of mods and thus the variety of missions. Even if BIS can't be bothered, a third-party could create a SP launcher if only BIS would specify a simple text file listing the required mods that should be included with all missions, as unless it's official I doubt anyone will take notice.

Now that PlayWithSix has been made open-source, BIS have the opportunity to make their Launcher utilise the Six repository as well as Steam to retrieve the necessary mods for a SP mission. Users can still be in control, there can be options to disable any automatic downloading and just prompt the user if a necessary mod is not on their computer "This mission needs xxx", or to allow downloading from either or both Steam WS or Six. Hell, at this point I'd be happy if the Launcher didn't even do automatic downloading and just listed all the missions I have and once I select one, checked whether I have the required mods and if so, launches A3 (preferably straight into the mission briefing) with them and if not, tells me what is missing. This really needs BIS to get behind it though and specify that each mission that uses mods should be accompanied by a simple missionname.txt (you can use a different suffix if necessary, like .mods, all that matters is it's just a simple text file) with a ; separated list of those mods, e.g. @ACE; @CUP_Weapons, as unless this is made official it won't catch on. It's a simple thing to do but will surely see an increase in mission creators willing to use mods and creating more diverse missions, as currently many must fear that it will dissuade players from trying their missions if they have to go and download a bunch of mods and then create a profile to launch A3 with them and sadly this leads to an abundance of quite similar, vanilla missions on the WS.

I guess it might have been caused by low FPS on the server (I didn't check it at the time but it varies quite a lot depending on the mission) but I played a mission which started with me piloting a chopper that was already airborne and when the mission started it just plunged into the ground. It seemed as if the engine wasn't even on, so I'm wondering if AFM causes that to happen and can only be used when the chopper starts cold on the ground? After switching back to SFM it was fine.

Thanks TheConen. I see the update and that Core is properly named now. I was aware that CUP Terrains wasn't meant to be on PWS, it was just the confusing naming of CUP Core that I wanted to bring to your attention. :cheers:

This isn't showing for me in PwS, only the Maps part shows the 1.01 update. Strangely it shows the core v1.01 on the Home page in PwS and on the website but if I search for it in PwS it only shows v1.0 so I can't upgrade it. The maps part also seems to be mislabelled, as it's named "Community Upgrade Project - Terrains" with no maps in the title (the folder name is @cup_terrains_maps), which is a bit confusing, especially as there was/is the full core+maps pack named CUP Terrains on Six.