doveman

As did I.

Upvoted as there's no question this needs to be changed. I would recommend putting throw grenade on a separate key though (I use double-tap I, with G for gear and Ctrl-G for grenade switch, although I'm also using the Switching Weapons on the Move mod, which lets me use Shift+3 to cycle thrown objects as well) to avoid any chance of accidentally throwing a grenade. Even with my keys, the current HUD/switching behaviour is damn annoying, so I'm not suggesting changing key assignments can in any way reduce the need for this to be fixed but you can at least minimise the chance of accidentally throwing stuff ;)

Could do with some information on how we're supposed to use the Set Trim (Rctrl+Num5), as it doesn't seem to do anything when I try it. I'm used to using Trim in DCS, where it holds the cyclic in position (and in the KA-50, updates the Autopilot/stabilisation channels but I don't expect that sort of thing in ArmA) and whilst there is a Trim Reset in DCS, everyone advises that it's not something that exists IRL and should be avoided, so I wonder if the same applies to the Trim Reset in ArmA3? DCS also has an option for the Huey to disable trimming the rudder/pedals, mainly because without force feedback pedals (which don't exist) it leads to the rudder getting stuck in a trimmed position without the pilot being able to tell where it is, so it might be an idea to either have this option, or fix it off, unless there's situations where some players will want/need the rudder to trim along with the cyclic. I'm afraid I'm not impressed at all with the flight model at the moment. I know I'm a pretty rubbish pilot but I can control the DCS Huey with my FFB2 stick and Saitek pedals easier than I can the A3 rotorlib helos, which seem to be a nightmare to control right now. I really think that it would have been better to take some advice on how helos actually handle IRL, which no doubt would have been freely offered (as it has been in this thread) and is already in various ToH threads on this board (some of which are linked to under this thread) before releasing anything to the general public, as it doesn't really instil confidence hearing that it's available for testing and feedback, only to find it's so deficient at the moment. Fingers crossed it will be vastly improved anyway, as I'd very much like to have more realistic helos in ArmA3 but it will have to get a hell of a lot better before I choose to use it over the existing simple and unrealistic flight model.

I'm getting a very distorted, so bad it almost sounds like 8-bit, explosion sound when I crash the helos. I already had the main effects volume on about 25% as it was too loud to use with TeamSpeak otherwise but I've just tried setting everything else (VON, Radio, etc) down to the same level and it hasn't made any difference. Anyone know how to fix this as it's very annoying?

My opinion hasn't changed from my previous post. In it's current form, it doesn't seem very useful to me and it won't be unless BIS can either get all the mods on SW, no matter the size, or they move to a different network, like Six. Unlike PwS, it doesn't let me specify a mods directory meaning the mods get downloaded to the A3 directory, so I won't use it for that and even if it did allow me to specify a directory, I probably still wouldn't use it as it doesn't allow me to select a specific version of a mod, unlike PwS, which can be useful if the latest version breaks something and I need to rollback, or to specify a version to prevent it updating until I'm sure it's safe to. Basically, it doesn't seem to do anything that PwS doesn't already and what it does do, PwS does better. It does look more polished though, I'll give you that. What PwS doesn't do is allow me to select a SP mission and automatically enable the mods needed for that (well I think it does for the very few missions that are on Six) but BIS needs to specify a standard method for mission creators to list what mods are needed (which could be as simple as a text file accompanying the mission file) and then make their launcher read that. The launcher needs to list the missions that the user has subscribed to first though, so that the player can select one and then it can launch with the required mods. Even then it will be quite awkward, as we'll need to completely exit the game and go back to the launcher to select a different mission, so hopefully at some point this will be possible from within the normal GUI. Even if it has to shutdown and restart the engine in the background, it will still be a lot more user-friendly.

Thanks, very interesting. It's a shame the Maxxmemm results don't show the RAM and NB settings. Where you using different RAM or settings when you did the Aida64 test, as that is quite a bit faster?

I had a go with this but in the calibration GUI, the head is constantly going round in circles and the calibration doesn't move the two dots to the inner circle, in fact they stay on the edge of the outer circle. It also seems to use a button on the device to re-centre, whereas the other sketches posted here do this in software, using a FTNoIR hotkey which is much more convenient.

It would be very useful as we could then compare RAM benchmarks across platforms to see if the same results on AMD and Intel produce similar performance in ArmA. We could also establish what benchmark results translate into acceptable performance in ArmA, as the RAM benchmark will be affected by NB speed, not just the RAM Mhz, so it's not simply a matter of saying DDR3-1800Mhz will produce acceptable performance.

Has anyone successfully hooked the Pro Micro to a HC-05 to use Bluetooth? http://www.instructables.com/id/Cheap-2-Way-Bluetooth-Connection-Between-Arduino-a/?ALLSTEPS I've got the HC-05 working and detected by my PC now and after adding the HC-05 device, Properties shows 'Serial Port (SPP) Dev B' on COM 16. If I look under BT Settings, it shows this as Outgoing and also another line for HC-05 Incoming on COM17, so I'm not sure which I'm supposed to use. If I try and connect to COM16 with Teraterm, I get an error and although it connects on COM17, I get no output (I've uploaded the 'send test' sketch which should show a counter and does if I connect to COM 14, which is the USB port) Reading this http://arduino.cc/en/Reference/SoftwareSerial#.UxIQbXk1jFE I get the impression I can't use the RX1 pin on the Pro Micro, so I tried connecting pin 10 to HC-05 TX and 15 to HC-05 RX and adding this to the start of the sketch include <SoftwareSerial.h> SoftwareSerial BTSerial(10, 15); // RX | TX but it hasn't helped.

Yes, you're quite right, I'm sorry. I obviously forgot what I wrote in my original post when I referred to it :o Still, it would be useful if you could benchmark your RAM at the two different speeds to see how the results correlate with the fps increase you get.

Yes, so you've overclocked your RAM and I asked you to test it at the two different speeds and also test ArmA performance to measure any performance increase, nothing about overclocking the CPU.

Just as a quick example of the different RAM performance, here's my Phenom II X4 955 running 16GB DDR3-1600@9-9-9-24: and here's my I5 4670k running 4GB DDR3-1333@9-9-9-24 (it's actually rated for 1600 at those timings but I haven't got it booting at that yet): As you can see, copy and read speeds are about double, whilst write is about triple. So if ArmA is as dependent on RAM performance as people have said, clearly it's going to perform better with Intel CPUs.

Err, you just said you've overclocked your RAM :confused:

If you could benchmark you RAM as I suggested here http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?147533-Low-CPU-utilization-amp-Low-FPS&p=2721176&viewfull=1#post2721176 to show what it achieves at stock and overclock, I'd find that interesting as well.

Hi Olds Thanks for your work on this (and the NATO-PACT mod) it sounds great and I'm interested in using it for our MP Co-Op sessions. Is it compatible with MP as far as you know? Is BIS still using the hitpoint system in the latest build of A3? Also, we use modded missiles, so would you be willing and able to make RAM compatible with those?

He's saying that you can add a category at present but not actions, which is what's needed.

Yeah, I wasn't suggesting ArmA should use the exact same implementation, just showing one way of adding custom keybinds to inspire the devs ;) I didn't realise that ArmA already allowed for adding categories, so in that case I agree that it would be better for each mod to add it's own category listing all it's commands, which the user can then assign as desired. I think this needs to be automated though, so that the addon developer only needs to specify the category name and list the commands in his addon and ArmA will pick this up and create the category, etc. I've posted another comment to the ticket.

You could try the HeadRangePlus mod, that might help with the restrictions on view somewhat.

Aha, that's a relief. Thanks :)

No need to spend loads though. I got the Samson SR850, which have been called the best cans you can get for under $200, for about £30 http://www.head-fi.org/t/546544/samson-sr850-superlux-oem-review-a-50-budget-champion They were like a breath of fresh air compared to my Creative Fatality headset and being semi-open, allow for a wider soundstage, which helps with virtual surround from Razer or the like.

Whilst I'm glad to see some activity on this, it's so far from what I've been hoping for that it doesn't make me hopeful at the moment that we're likely to see what myself and others have been asking for, for a long time: https://dev.withsix.com/issues/35469 http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?120878-Automatic-Mod-Downloading&p=2244269&viewfull=1#post2244269 I appreciate the comments about this being an early version to test the water but still, if you intend to do something completely different in future, why now use SW if it only allows up to 200MB mods when many mods are much larger, why put the mods in a different place to where they normally go (using PwS, I assign a separate folder S:\Games\Arma3mods to keep them separate from the game folder S:\Games\Arma3, which makes it easier to update/fix the latter but even without PwS, mods normally look like S:\Games\Arma3\@AGM , which I understand this launcher doesn't stick to as it says it only handles single .pbos, not folders)? I certainly don't want a third copy of every mod in addition to the two that PwS already gives me and this alone is enough to make me avoid using the launcher. The main reason I hear for people not liking PwS is because it requires almost twice as much space to keep a backup/sync copy of each mod, which is a pain but with most mods on the Six Network, I was hoping BIS could have come to some arrangment to use that repository with their own software. I personally don't have any objection to SW but if half the mods aren't going to be on there it's not going to be very useful. I'm actually quite happy with using PwS for servers, as it makes it very easy to get the required mods to join a server. I see the need to automate downloading/enabling mods for offline/SP missions as far more pressing, if BIS really wants to encourage mission makers to use mods and players to play those missions.

At the moment, we either have userconfigs which the user has to manually edit and which don't warn the user of conflicts with any keys assigned via the GUI, or Custom keybinds of which there's only 20 and which are bound to end up being used for multiple mods and thus conflicting. A far more sensible method would be the one used in X-Plane. On this first screen, I click Add New Key Assignment, which adds a blank entry at the bottom then clicking in the box highlighted at the top opens this screen, which lists all the plugins with assignable commands, where I can select one and then assign a key to it on the previous screen. As long as each mod uses a unique name, like sandybarbour in this example, then there's no conflicts. This really needs to be fixed ASAP, to encourage modders to use the new method and to make it easier for users to manage their key assignments. Please vote for these tickets to show the devs there is demand for improvements to the Controls settings: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=17449 http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=96

Voted and commented, with X-Plane screenshots to inspire ;)

On every other forum I use, I can view a list of topics I'm subscribed to, with a link to the latest post and to change my subscriptions, like this On this site however, the closest I've found is this list which has a seperate entry for every single post in each thread I'm subscribed to, making it pretty much useless for finding a particular thread I'm looking for. It's easier to find a thread using tapatalk on my phone, which does list my subscribed topics properly but then I don't like using that for posting replies, so I decide to leave it till I'm on my PC but then can't easily find the thread! Am I just looking in the wrong place or does this forum have this unfortunate problem?

I think the only sensible approach for add on keybinds is to have them defined in the add on, such as /agm/select pistol/ and then any such definitions should appear in arma's control settings, from where the user can assign a key to them. This is how xplane handles them and it works great.