Page MenuHomeFeedback Tracker

Arma3 Launcher feature request - duplicate / alternative mod checking
Acknowledged, NormalPublic


The Launcher functionality is fantastic at present and getting better all the time.

An increasing number of users report having issues with duplicate mods - i.e. mods that exist both as SW subscriptions and as manually downloaded local mods. To address this a useful feature would be for the Launcher to check for local mod duplicates ie. locally added mod and SW subscription - then prompt the user to select the mod to retain. Perhaps the rejected mod could be deactivated via renaming etc. (rather than deletion as a safety option or prompt user for deletion). The decision would need to be up to the user - given possible missing mod version / naming issues.

Another really useful feature would be for the Launcher to search SW mod submissions and offer to replace the existing local addon with the SW version if found - assuming it is the same or later ver. The Launcher would then deactivate the non SW mod as above.


Operating System
Windows 10 x64
Operating System Version
W10 Pro

Event Timeline

Rick0Shay created this task.Oct 8 2016, 8:53 AM
BISWizard changed the task status from New to Acknowledged.Oct 8 2016, 7:15 PM
BISWizard changed Severity from None to Feature.
BISWizard changed Category from Feature Request to Launcher.

It would even be better if the Launcher would not compare manually installed local mods with the SW versions. It should be so that when it detects a local mod it just skips the check.

No instead it tells people the mod is out-of-date or has a signature mismatch while it is in fact the same mod as the one on Steam Workshop - the only difference being it is manually installed. Even adding that stupid meta.cpp file does not help.

Yes, the mod will show up as green in the mods required by the server when the file is there but when you go below it still chooses to unload it. Yes, you can select keep loaded but then again, if it isn't even a SW version then why compare it? There is a bloody erason why we chose the manual method is there? We don't want anything to do with Steam Workshop, so stop shoving it down our throats. Not everybody wants to be a lazy arse.

Right now we have people complain our modpack is incorrect because the Launcher is a rather poor and limited product. It is so poorly made that it can't tell the difference between manual installed mods and SW versions. It just scares off people by telling them the mods from our modpack have signature mismatches, while all content on BOTH our servers and modpack is current.

Again BIS is forcing something on people by disallowing them alternative methods. Yes, I know they are there and how to do them but it makes things just more complicated.

Clearly you don't speak for the vast majority Arma3 players. Simply because you dislike the SW is no reason to criticize the A3 Launcher. Even RHS have agreed to distribute via the SW. Why, because most people subscribe to a lot of mods - it's an impossible task to manually update all mods on a daily and or weekly basis. The Launcher simplifies this task and saves users hours of frustration. I think it does an excellent job - and my feelings are mirrored by most of the players I speak to on SW. I personally have around 230 mods in the launcher - over 98% are SW the rest local - I've never had the weird issue you refer to and I've spent over 11,400 hours in Arma3. And I host games at least once a week.

Clearly I speak for a group of people feeling the same way. My personal preference has nothing to do with what I said. I find the Launcher a poor product. Our group finds the Launcher a poor product. If you can't handle that that's your problem, not mine. So with all due respect, you have no clue why I feel the way I do and are just saying things.

The thing is you clearly have no clue what I am talking about. I am talking about a few people who update mods in our modpack manually when it is needed. Yes, we do things the old fashioned way. And we do not mind about it.

We are speaking about mods like ACE, TFAR and such. Why do we do it manually? Because we don't run too many mods. We can easily keep up with updating them manually. Again something you have no clue about but still wish to comment on as us running tons of mods. No, we do not.

You also clearly have no clue that I am referring here to an issue the Launcher puts quite a lot of people in. Especially those who create modpacks by hand and people who download them and install them by hand, without any interference of Steam Workshop.

Do you really think people like that are waiting on a Launcher that keeps nagging about subscribing to mods while they don't want to, or have to? Do you think it's fair to such users that a Launcher tells them the mods are out-of-date and have signature mismatches while they are in fact up-to-date, and everyone knows they are as current as they can be? Do you think it is fair a piece of software always disallows the usage of such mods while they are in fact no different than the ones on Steam Workshop? Is it maybe too much to ask to just skip these checks when the Launcher discovers a mod is not a Steam Workshop mod with subscription? No, it is not.

That dear gent is what I am talking about. Thank you and have a good day.

@celticalliance: Arma 3 Launcher is actually comparing the list of signatures required by the server with signature and pbo files present in the mod folder, it shouldn't matter whether the mod is from Steam Workshop or not. It comes to me that only explanation for the behavior you describe that is that Launcher either didn't detect change in the local files or gets stuck somewhere in the process. I've multiple local mod packs here and they work just fine for me, it's definitely not intended for this scenario to not work correctly.

Is your server and mod pack publicly available, I'd like to test it with the same data as you have.

celticalliance added a comment.EditedSep 20 2017, 5:45 PM

Well, all I can tell you is that the mods we are using are installed in the Arma 3 folder, each in their own modfolder as it should be. It's the same for everyone else.

On server level it is the same way. There is no difference in what is installed on there or on client-side level. I have to admit though we have several keys installed on server level of mods that are not in our modpack but are used by some of our members. I don't think that is related though.

All server keys are there. All .bisign files are there. I highly doubt it has anything to do with our set up, as it has always worked up until a few updates ago.

celticalliance added a comment.EditedSep 20 2017, 7:40 PM

@BISWizard: we got it working now. Turns out removing a number of mods from the -mod= parameter and adding them to the -servermod= parameter in the server commandline fixed it. Some members have joined both our servers and reported no issues.

The Launcher now shows CBA, ACE and TFAR as the ones required, the rest are neatly listed in the Suggested and additional mods section. All the mods in the Suggested and additional mods section also show the correct status, i.e. Keep loaded, so everything seems to be fine.

Finally! I'd been breaking my head over this for quite a while already.

@celticalliance: wasn't there a big red banner in the window with server mods before, by any chance?

I don't really recall. I do recall that we woudl get a big list of mods with some mods offering subscription links and others showing up in red saying signature mismatch.

That's all gone now though.