barakokula31

You must have a helluva rig then.

The British also have electrically charged armor FYI. In fact, they developed it.

To everyone complaining about how BF is better optimized: Go to Stratis and set your VD and object draw distance to 1000. Tell me what you get.

http://forums.bistudio.com/private.php?do=newpm&u=118326 Do your thing.

Like to several other people in the thread, it wanted to change pretty much every option to low/medium and turn my VD and object draw distance to 7400. WTF!?

BIS, where's the like button on this forums?

What mod is that?

Actually, in Planetside 2 (I assume that's what you're referring to, not Playstation 2 :p), infantry renders at 300 meters, at least that's what pretty much everyone says on the forums. That's pretty small. In Arma 3 that would be ironsight range. Try putting your object draw distance to 300 meters, or even 500 meters, I bet you'll get way more than 60 FPS.

No, I don't copy&paste it. I've already memorized it from all the times I've seen you posting it. :p But sure, if you don't like it, I'll stop. Now, if only you could stop say spamming every thread with it... :rolleyes: But, this is offtopic.

Actually the CTRG use some kind of triangular pattern, IIRC.

Now ProGamer will come here and say "There's no artificial balancing in Arma" or something like that.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=arma+3+user+textures

Have you tried using a user texture (10x10 m) and painting it green?

FLIR was added in Operation Arrowhead, IIRC.

Who cares about AMD, give us GPU accelerated PhysX!

Let's compare all the vehicles, shall we? Quadbike - Yeah, the same as it's always been. MRAPs - Some are faster, some are smaller, some have commanders, some don't. I don't see the point of more differences. APCs (wheeled) - The AAF one has missiles and a 30 mm cannon, the NATO one has a 40 mm and a 6.5 coax and the CSAT one has 2 less wheels (not like it makes a huge difference, though it's easier to disable it with small arms) and a 40 mm cannon with less ammo and without the APFSDS-T rounds. IFVs (tracked) - The NATO one has very thin armour, while the CSAT one has better armour and ATGMs. All other weapons are the same. MBTs - They both have a 120 mm cannon, but the NATO one can carry 6 people in the back, while the CSAT one is smaller and more agile (or is it?). Attack helicopters - The CSAT one is a flying tank, it has 8 ATGMs, 38 rockets and a 30 mm autocannon. In addition to that, it can carry 8 people in the back. The NATO one is very fragile, has only a 20 mm (pretty much useless the way it is now), 24 DAGRs (which are, AFAIK, supposed to be as powerful as the DARs on the AH-9s, but they can still take out APCs in one hit) and 4 ASRAAMs. It is faster and more agile, though. Light transport/attack helis - Only NATO has them. Medium transport helis - The PO-30 and the UH-80 belong in this category. The UH-80 is bigger and has just two miniguns, while the PO-30 has either no armament or 12 DAGRs and a 6.5 minigun. Heavy transport helicopters - Only AAF has them (at the moment?). Jets - Only AAF has them, at the moment. Armed boats - The NATO and AAF have a 40 mm GMG and a 6.5 minigun, while the CSAT one has a 40 mm and a .50 cal HMG. Unarmed boats - The same for every faction, they can't be different. AA and arty vehicles - Okay, they're completely the same, just mounted on a different chassis. NATO does have an MLRS, though. Now, the weapons: Main service rifles - NATO and CSAT are pretty much the same, though since CSAT rifle uses a bullpup design, it has a higher muzzle velocity. AAF and FIA use a 5.56 NATO rifles, which are weaker than the NATO and CSAT ones. DMRs - NATO uses a variant of the main service rifle, which has a uses 6.5, while CSAT uses a 7.62 rifle. AAF also uses a 7.62, but with bigger magazines, than the CSAT one. Carbines - Both use variants of the main rifle. LMGs - NATO uses a variant of the main rifle, while CSAT uses a 7.62 rifle, with bigger magazines, but a slightly slower rate of fire than the NATO one. AAF uses a 6.5 caliber LMG with bigger mags than the NATO one and around the same RoF. Sniper rifles - NATO uses a .408 rifle with 7 round mags, while CSAT and AAF use a .50 cal Russian rifle with 5 round mags. All of them are, obviously, bolt-action. Launchers - NATO uses a guided launcher that can lock-on onto ground vehicles, while CSAT and AAF use unguided RPGs. Pistols - NATO and CSAT pistols are completely the same, but how different were they in Arma 2? AAF uses a 1911 variant. Heavy pistols - NATO uses an 11 round .45 ACP semi-auto pistol, while CSAT has a .45 ACP 6 round revolver. Heavy AA and AT launcher - OK, you got me. I posted this on the feedback tracker in your ticket as well. They don't "mirror" each other, but some of the weapons or vehicles are balanced (balanced≠same). Now, if you would take the time to reply to this and stop spamming every thread with your tickets, that would be nice.

You know, it would be nice if you stopped spamming the dev branch discussion (or whatever they call it) with you requests.

One of the promised features that were never added by BIS...

What exactly is wrong with these two?

Haha, ninja'd you!

Have you tried N?

What's the question here?

But most of them are dense.

And the 6 hours in FPS games much, much more.