Dedmen

If you run a Mod on the Server that breaks TFAR then.. no.. Then it won't work. Check your server and client logs.

MyHashMap = createHashMap; for "_i" from 1 to 10000 do {MyHashMap set [_i, _i];}; `MyHashMap find 125` 0.002ms `MyHashMap find 9999` 0.0019 ms Don't have perf on the insert right now. Should be as fast as the finds though. If you know what Tree and Hashmap containers are then you will know what this is useful for. If you don't then this is most likely not useful for you. They are Array-like containers optimized for a certain use case. Usually way better lookup performance (Finding a specific value).

.rap is the start of a binarized(rapified) file. You can use Arma 3 Tools CfgConvert. Or just load it in Eden. Under I think Attributes->General you can remove the check in the "save binarized" checkbox.

"gaming PC" ahhh.. Try to only run CBA+TFAR. Mods like Exile and Life crap really like to mess up TFAR and then blame TFAR for their idiocy.

It's not my attitude. BI doesn't want people messing around with their binary. If you crash your game your crashdump will be useless. If you just use my modifications then atleast everyone will have done the same modification which makes everything compareable. And comparing is the purpose of this. I'd be happy to teach you. But I won't because I can be very happy that BI is letting me do this as I do it right now. Also according to EULA I am not allowed to do what's needed to find these offsets. And I won't teach you to break rules. If you want to learn it yourself that's your thing and neither I nor BI can do anything about that.

New ACE version 3.11 contains A LOT of improvements in AB. The MRAD conversion of scope zeroing was wrong. Scope height above bore was wrong. G7 coefficient was off by quite a bit. I think also some spin drift issues. https://github.com/acemod/ACE3/pull/5651 https://github.com/acemod/ACE3/pull/5650 https://github.com/acemod/ACE3/pull/5648 https://github.com/acemod/ACE3/pull/5640 https://github.com/acemod/ACE3/pull/5566 (the biggest one) https://github.com/acemod/ACE3/pull/5541 https://github.com/acemod/ACE3/pull/5489 https://github.com/acemod/ACE3/pull/5485 We are actually still working on some very minor things. But the major things are all in 3.11 With the new fixes you should recheck everything that showed accuracy problems. That might be fixed now. We have a completly new way of measuring the scope and rail height which is as precise as you can possibly get. Before we were just guessing. All ACE configs and compats supplied by ACE were updated using the new method. So I'm not sure if Dagger Mod needs updating. @quickdagger If you want advice on that message me here on ask on ACE Slack. M2010 is my main weapon btw and it has M118 Ammo. Not M118LR. Buuut Due to my magazineGroup fix (https://feedback.bistudio.com/T82996#1650367) we might get the ability to use real M118LR soon. Also with the new changes in 3.11 we are now spot on with external ballistics calculators like JBM Ballistics or Strelok(Which I use personally). Just talked with the AB maintainer and we would love to get in contact with you to make Advanced ballistics better. Would be awesome if you could visit the ACE Slack we need someone like you.

No I won't. BI wouldn't like that. And as I said. Profiling build doesn't create any noticeable performance problems. And it a contains the same performance improvements as the performance build. I don't see why I should put about 20 minutes of work into something that's completely unnecessary. So just use profiling build.

I'm personally running profiling most of the time. Could never notice any performance difference between profiling and performance versions.

I just fixed magazineGroup and forwarded it to the devs so they can integrate it. I'd say for a standard we could go for ASDG. The ASDG Joint Rails standard is wildely approved and used in many weapon mods today. So https://github.com/CBATeam/CBA_A3/issues/108 should make the standard. With magazine groups we don't even need a dependency on any Addon.

I can but no. Profiling is better for this as this also allows to easily get performance logs. Which is what this test is about.

You have to remind me to add the addresses. Just added v7 x64 windows.

Battleye randomly blocking TFAR? Mod nor running ingame? wrong version running ingame?

He has seen it and did nothing. See Recent Visitors: From the names there I know Tajin and Jman. And I know Jman just checked his profile a couple minutes ago. And Tajin found the upload an hour ago. So Foxhound has seen that post and then proceeded to view his profile. And he did nothing. This is speculation.. Could ofcause be that foxhoud by pure random change visited his profile in the last hour and didn't check what he uploaded.

BI already took it off when it was uploaded about a week ago.

He is on Arma Discord. And was already flagged for misbehavior. And reading his last posts.. He's not trolling. That's how he really is.

Here is a quote of what a Moderator wrote on the comments of that mod: So literally.. A Moderator has seen it. And chooses to go against people badmouthing it instead of going against the mod. Armaholic literally approves this.

Correct. If you wear DLC clothing or carry DLC weapons or weapon attachments then you will get watermark. The Items just laying around somewhere don't do anything... besides laying around.

No there is no other way than removing the mods from mission.sqm

Why were the other versions worse than the 100fps one?

Battleye will help against most people you have problems with.. But it won't help against the real Hackers.. But honestly they probably won't join your server and act like kids.

Dependencies* yes. No. (dependencies*) If you use DLC assets then every player needs to have them. Which is not a problem because every player has all the DLC content (besides Tanoa map). Doesn't matter if the bought it or not. DLC vehicles are generally restricted in that you can't drive/fly them if you didn't buy the DLC. People will get watermark overlays if they use DLC Items. Which people will not like.

Apparently that thing has an edit box to enter the IP address.. Completly forgot :D Uh.. The source on Github is not the source I have on my PC :D https://mega.nz/#!J0tHAYDa!95ICct767e60Zqf3mRJo2I1R_2thXwcN6JnbQLadnII Straight from compiler to application. Didn't do a test connect as I don't have a ASM server currently.. But should work I guess

When work on 1.0 started the release date was... about a year ago from today. So no, not really.

Yeah I linked my ArmaServerMonitor project. That is a rewrite of the clientside application using Qt. It's a bit crusty and doesn't look as nice as the original. but it works.

Oh gosh I'm dumb... :D Give me half an hour :D