Llano

And how does this communication between the client and server affect the fps on the client? Let's say a server running without any mods. Just because the server is slow to send data to the client, that shouldn't affect the client fps?

I read Dwarden answer So now the server fps barely matters for client fps? How often does a server,with let's say 50 people joined, go below 5 fps? Also, regarding te post from fred41 It no news that more objects will decrease the client performance. The question is why the server fps decreases it.

Yeah that's what im trying to get people to tell me: Why is it like this? Why makes this happen? Btw, you have any link to a post or something where the devs say this?

So, rendering on client in Arma 3 is based on packets received? I dont know, it doesn't make sense. If a server isnt't able to send the positions, who is shooting etc, it shouldn't affect the frames per second drawn on clients, no? Desync understandable would occur.

So network speed affect the fps in Arma?

Arma doesn't care about the number of cores.

inb4 "i get 100+ fps multiplayer, ur pc sux" Edit: Btw, where is the Physx part in arma?

Yes, i've had some trouble with that too. I will try to implement a real-time map, but it's not on my top priority list so to speak. But when it gets relevant i'm more than glad to get help from you :)

Update There is still work going on.. I have moved from my custom made design, to a already made template. Therefor i will be able to focus more on the functionality. Right now i'm putting the most stuff together. Sending data from the webbsite to the Arma game is now working also. So basically the core-things is implemented (Sending data back and forth). Will upload some pictures of how the design will look as soon as i include a little bit more of the remaining functionality.

You can't. I would be pretty happy with keeping 50 fps in this game..

Can you show some kind of benchmark comparisation? Same mission, AI, action etc..

Maybe this is an alternative? http://www.mattermost.org/ Opensource and a self hosted

From my understanding it's focused on small combat areas?

Pff, will bring it to 600 pages ;) Anyway yes you are right. No big changes are going to happen that will increase the performance drastically. Only a few fps here and there if we are lucky. Waiting for some new game that is similair to Arma that will hit the market... but i doubt it.

No they won't and shouldn't. Why? Bewcause it's not worth it. Naval warfare in Arma 3 is close to 0. Barely gets used in multiplayer. Yet another time consuming not-worth-it implementation.

The main problem here is not the RAM usage, it's the cpu usage imo. Surely they both need fixes, but the problem with cpu utilization i would say impact the performance more than the RAM problem.

But seriously, who cares about the RAM? It's obviously the utalization of the cores/cpu that is lacking.. This thread is now 200 pages.. Sigh.

Funny how you have zero clue. And for your information, i have a AMD Phenom ii x4 965. Yes, it's the cpu. They are multiple benchmarks where intel cpu perform better than amd. 8 GB RAM not enough??.... please.

They probably wont fix it. Why? Because they dont have to. People are still playing and accepting this horrible state of the game because it's been like this from the start. I laugh out loud every time i see a post on facebook/youtube/whatever implying that this game not at all runs terrbible and that your computer sucks or that the mission is poorly optimized (which in some cases can be true, but mostly not).

Which they barely do anyway.. http://feedback.arma3.com/plugin.php?page=Vote/list_bugs Years old feedback items.

What do you base this on? How small is "small groups","small number of channels" and "small history"? What exactly do you require?

The CallExtension command, will you even change to it doesn't block the game?

Curious: How does ping affect fps?

Similair? Slack is ten times better when it comes to group handeling and messaging. Making people switch to another client can't be so hard. Let the people who wanna stay stay. The key is that you (The devs) switch, and people will follow. I'm sorry, but no, skype doesn't work good at all. It's worthless on handligs groups, specially with many users in. I left the skype groups because i couldnt stand the message desyncing, group handeling, and people posting multiple lines of unformatted code.

A little update - Website is now public and has a domain (http://monithor.net), requires login which will be given out later to people who has requested a invite. - The server applikation has been worked on. Fixed minor bugs and changed from TCP to UDP - Website has gotten more functionality and pages (Add server, edit, etc...) Might upload some more pictures later on. If anyone feels like that want to help with development, feel free to contact me :)