chrisb

Looks interesting, but will wait until its released fully, I think.

Saw this on KS. Not sure myself, but probably worth some opinions. I haven't played WW2 for quite a few years now, so won't be getting into it myself. But I know there are players interested in the period, so thought I'd put it on. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/bulkheadinteractive/battalion-1944-pc-xb1-ps4

That's interesting.. Is FXAA GPU side ? I'd be interested to find out for sure, what takes its performance from where, as in, cpu or gpu. Or at least where it takes the majority of its performance from.

Although we would have to wait to get a comparison done by someone with the same problem in A3, when using crossfire. Preferably using your test i.e. same test setup in same location. Then we would know for sure. One test, doesn't make it a AMD problem.. Yet..

So its an issue with the crossfire, you think. Perhaps someone with amd running crossfire could run the same test to confirm that, would be interesting to see, before judging. Also interesting to see someone with NVidia run the same test/location to compare (unlikely we'll see that though). I've never really seen a reason to play with more than the one card for this series, seems to work well with a single card. Also, I don't find any difference in performance between High & Ultra. Although recording can cost fps of course, perhaps only drop settings when recording (you may have done that though).

My current gpu is amd 290 and my previous was a 5850 amd. I always have shadows on the highest settings and haven't had a problem with either in A2 or A3. Think it maybe something else, unless its your card directly (individual problem).

Great, thanks for this release. Your work and kindness in releasing, is much appreciated. :)

It would be very sad to see the 2d editor go, if that is the case. But playing A2 much more than A3, means it won't effect me much. But it will steer me even more away from A3. Such a shame if that is the case.

I bought an i7 in anticipation of A3 back when first released. I was running A2 on my other system which was an Athlon IIx4 640 with a HD5850 2gb card (toxic card, very underrated card). When I first got A3 I wasn't sure if I was going to like it as much as A2, so instead of putting it on my new shiny i7, I put it on the Athlon. It ran at very high settings on everything I wanted on high settings, with a 2000vd (ground, much higher in the air) and it ran flawlessly. Back then A3 was less optimised than now, I would say anyway. But yeah, when someone tells you you'll not run it on this or that, don't listen. Until you've tried you'll never know. It depends on individual systems, how well maintained they are and if they're reasonably clean (imo). Good to hear you run it well, most players don't have an issue with A3, its only the few. Note: you do need a reasonable system, but that would be around 3ghz (min) with a half decent card (imo), but lean and clean. But that's just my opinion, there are players running it on lower, i.e. the OP.. Nicely done. ;)

To be honest they're shocking results for the system. I'm not sure crossfire will give you much over a single 290. My 290 does fine on more or less all ultra @ 3000vd (ground, much higher flying) single card. I have an i7, but your system should still be producing more than those figures shown. Have you built the system yourself (looks like you may have from your list) ? That is where your problems may lay. If you don't work full time putting gaming pc's together on a daily basis, then have someone that does, look at your setup and check everything.

Pics look great. Will look forward to any release that may come. :)

To be honest this statement is just.. well.. Problem with statements like yours is, and this is the main point... Its your opinion.. Which in most cases, means nothing to other players.

Yeah, that could explain the readings I get from msi. So its labelled wrong then ?

There are many reasons I prefer A2/OA over A3. Content that isn't available for A3 and only found for A2. Huge amount of terrains for A2/OA, plus of course the units, equipment, vehicles etc. etc. (that all work correctly). But the main reason I play A2 over A3, even above the much needed player/group made content I need to play the game, the way I want too. Is because I love A2/OA and the dlc's. Simple as that really. Its nothing to do with the setting, that's easily changed, its the feel of the game. That's it really.

I was testing a little time back and if you put in pagefile, then I was at around 14gb (Ram & Pagefile). That is using a R9-290 @ only 1920x1080p, 12000, all the settings I like at Ultra, there again I don't like all the options, so take that as you will. But the main settings @ Ultra, PP turned off etc. But yeah, add in pagefile and it goes up quite a lot. I think I have a video showing it, not sure, may look it out later. :) I would add, that playing @12000, unless flying, is.. well.. not recommended. Unless your saving on the central heating.

I have the same cpu as he has, but with a single R9-290 and don't have any issues. Servers is my guess, which to use is a problem. Get into a group if possible that use their own. You'll have a much nicer experience all around. But I do understand that many players just want to jump in and out of playing. But find a good server.. at least.

I have an i7 now. But I've used and like AMD systems. I ran A2,OA on an Athlon 640 with great results. Plus when I first got A3, to avoid putting it on my brand spanking new i7, I thought I'd see how the AMD did. The results are on my YT channel, it did very well to be fair. O.k. it wasn't as good as the i7 is, but there again the i7 was nearly double the price, and I'll tell you I didn't get anywhere near double the performance. So AMD, provided they're lean and clean, can be fine with this series. For me anyway.

I think it would be wise to leave it at the price they're spouting. It will be expensive, without a doubt. However, I'd much rather see the results first with the game I'm thinking of playing it with. It may be completely different to the results from other games using OR.

Take it, as it was meant.. In jest. :D If you start the topic, then can't bring yourself to tell us who to avoid, just in-case we should. Then the topic is not really relevant, is it. If you have positive proof and evidence, then I can't see a problem in stating who it was. But be sure you have proof first before starting the topic. Also don't assume that a user name on Steam is the same person here with the same user name. I've had a few messages via my YT channel, agreeing or disagreeing with me on Steam, when in-fact, I don't use Steam forums. Because 'ChrisB' on Steam is not me, so beware this person is who you think they are. Some user names are very common, especially if they're concerning actual names/initials of people. Case of who gets there first to use it. Just a thought.

Go on.. get banned.. Nobody would miss you.. ;) Look, I'm just being honest. :rolleyes:

Name and shame.. I would. Rules or no rules.

I have run tests in A3 and the driving wasn't bad. Depending of course on what you want and how you design your missions. It isn't as good as A2 was, especially when using something like slx_steering, or any other type of driving help mod. That said, you do have to use what the AI recognise, if you stick a brick wall in the road and they run into it, well that's your fault, not theirs. Just work around the game, there are lots of things you can do to work around problems. Not all mission makers do, but there are many that do. If you don't make your own missions, then stick to those mission makers that put the effort into their mission making. There's plenty out there.

This is exactly where this series excels itself. The all powerful and wonderful 'Editor'. I don't play the BI campaigns or other user made ones, so can't comment on them. Its for my own SP, but also and mainly, the group I play with, for that ongoing war-gaming world that I play the series. There is so much you can do in this game all because of the Editor. If your playing, just for the supplied campaigns, then once they're done, your moving on. Then your missing out 'big time' on the Arma experience. I believe fully militarised terrains is where this series really excels. Ongoing war-gaming is great, but for that you need really decent AI, almost autonomous AI, to be honest. One that the player is willing to wait for and not try to rush through. Regards reacting to dead bodies, well I have never played Arma where the AI don't react, in a decent way, to dead bodies, recent wrecks etc, I've sort of always had it via one mod or other (or mix). If vanilla are getting this done in a proper way now, after how many years... Then that's a good thing finally. The problem they have is the after affects of finding a dead body or wrecked vehicle, if the AI respond in a realistic fashion. That is where the important part comes in. An AI that will do something about the situation that makes sense and not just hit the ground. They need to be able to radio in for anything they need (if available), to alert other groups, HQ etc. Or, act independently if they need to, if communication with others in their faction is restricted for some reason. If they can do that, then your getting into good 'AI mod' territory. I just can't see that in vanilla to be honest. Partly because it can become heavy on cpu resources, slow down the game for the average system etc. So you need compromises for the vanilla game. Then leave players that want that 'extra' realistic behaviour, to mod it to what they want or need. Based, of course, on the systems they're running. AI is the most important thing for our group, we play against it a lot, so it has to be a modded advanced AI, to be able to cover what is needed. But as with everything, if players are worried that AI finding a dead body is a problem, and that it may slow the campaign down, then really your playing the wrong game. The whole idea is this series is slow, methodical, needs time. I'm not saying you can't play in a faster way, but its not as rewarding as a slower paced more tactical and realistic game. The type of play that can be had, if your willing to put the time into the game. But I do appreciated not everyone wants that, or indeed has that time.

Nicely said. I don't play using vanilla AI, but if I did, then what you say here, would be the way I'd do it. Learn to love your AI. whichever AI that might be.

These are looking very good indeed. Nice to see more mod/addons appearing for A2/OA. Good luck with your progress.