Just an idea : Limit you Vitual memory to 2GB.

You are descending too fast. At least in the videos its more your fault. Try to look up some landings in reallife it will help a lot.

Maybe the configuration wasnt written right. try to put the keys back and try again.

BTW if its easier for you i also understand russian. It seems it would be easier for you. I just cant type in russian so i would answer in english.

Do you have any performance tweakers installed? Just in case.

Thats not a joke its just not something that is easy to find. Such things happen. The difference is most of the people like me had the problem and it was gone. Some people had no problem and it came in APEX. The biggest problem is that the devs cannot find the reason for that leak. Still its not the swap file. Please just say RAM usage. If your PC loads Arma 3 into the Swap file than your OS is broken or trolling you. Could you make a screen shot of the windows taskmanager of the process. Your custom taskmanager is confusing me. Arma 3 can only use up 3.5GB of Ram (in the arma 3 process it can use more with some tricks) so your taskmanager says it uses over all 6GB what definetly is not right. And your programm says its in the virtual memory what would be stupid and absolutly unrealistic in terms of performance.

Damn it. A swap file is a extension of the ram to unload unused data to free the ram. The Swap file (linux) or the virtual memory (windows) arenliteraly files on the hard drive. What you mean is the memory usage in general. And like i said the devs are aware of the problem. Like i said try different mallocs on some systems it helps a lot with the currently observed problem.

No offense but it seems that you dont know what a swap file is. ;) Its a file where not needed things from the RAM are loaded into. What you mean is just a problem in clearing up the RAM. Try out different malloc parameter. Sometimes that works.
The devs wrote about a similar problem in the latest sitrep.

Im not that into scripting. But in arma you can execute things on the ckients only or on the server only and you can execute it global (means bith and synchronized ) there should be a tutorial how to do so on google (maybe look for execute on all machines). This splitting is needed when you for example use draw... function. Servers cannot draw anything there for only clients use this func.

execute it global

Its already on the ToDO List of the Devs there was somewhere a list of Functions

As such repair Installations are pretty complicated. At first i would isolate the file and upload it on Virustotal. There you can check what the AVs tell you. The other thing is Virustotal gives you the hashes of the file that are pretty unique.
@Adam could you provide the hashes for the original file so he can compare if its the same file.

I mean thats a joke right? What do you expect when you bug the tank in the ground?

I dont know adam but it seems to be an issue in GData dince virustotal is just saying positiv on 3 AVs

Welcome to reallife...except the radar range.

Its not sticking to the head. Its changing the distance to your point of view thats why it seems that the crosshair sticks to the head. Its a optical illusion

The solution is a top attack mode.

Like i said please provide information if it happens if you drive without shift.

Your additional Information are duplicate to your other tickets.

The interface changed not the way the rockets take. So thats still the same issue like before.

The point is PIP has its own view distance. Regardless of your set view distance. Like adam said its currently not a topic for a discussion since its a performance decision.

Uavs ha 2 AIs in them. 1 gunner 1 pilot/driver
With the UAV terminal you control them like in Zeus. As a Pilot you have no weapon (thats a fact). There for you have no weapon sights. What i meant is that as a pilot when clicking LMB ist saying fire to the Gunner(without direction just simple fire).

The crosshair shows the approx bullet hit point so thats intended.

Addingt 2 things to this discussion.
Arma 3 uses the OpenSource variant of PhysX(provided by Nvidia) for reasons they at some point explained.
That means everyone is using their CPU... all the time. No GPU accelerations at all.
The actual problem is PhysX itself. The original PhysX can work multithreaded but is only allowed on Systems without a NV GPU. So a server (!) that has no GPU at all is not allowed to use The multicore functionality of PhysX. Arma 3 is a simulator where everything for every player needs to be the same regardless of the vendor that they got their parts from.
A alternative would be the Havok engine where GPU acceleration works on all cards and GPUs. ( Wont happen!)

Thats because its the weaponn of the gunner slot of the UAV. When you are in the pilot slot you just give the ai the command to fire you actually have no weapon selected though no marker.

Its a duplicate to the other 2 tickets.

I will just mention Adams answer from your previous ticket.
Hello, this is not an issue due to fact that if the draw distance was bigger it would hit the performance quite a bit. Thank you for your ticket!

Duplictae. What you want is actually a top attack mode. There are already about 100 Tickets for that.

It seems to fall in the Heuristik of Gdata. Just add it to the exception list. There are methods BE uses that remind of a Trojan. Thats the problem in Heuristik

The thing with the signed driver could be the problem. BEs ways are strange but effectiv. So it works thats the most important thing.

The question if you use hacks would be stupid because BE would ban you quite fast. The actual problem is what kind of DLL is that. Are you using mods?
Actually i do not know that file...
BEDaisy.sys
Hmm try to delete the whole battle eye folder in the Arma 3 folder and the one mentioned in the log. then verify the integrity again.

Actually there is the option that BI makes a frame limiter for the menus. Space Engineers did that.

3 things. Pls post a repo, try out the performance binaries and write all of your startparameters.
Use the stable branch with performance binary pls

What memory allocator do you use?

Can you check it, when driving without shift and turning just after you drive 1 m forward?

As stated by the devs before 1.60:No!

Actually the problem is the ghillies do not change their brightness due to shadows. hey stay the same color all the time

Can not agree. Played today un Sahrani with cup complete

Actually for the sake of history i will try to upload a artwork so we have a ticket for a potatoflamethrowercannon. I mean how many games have such a request? XD Maybe its something for 1.April next Year?

What aimlock?

I think a mod can close this ticket. Because of duplicate or troll.

http://www.bistudio.com/blog/breaking-the-32-bit-barrier

For all guys who want to use more RAM on Arma 3 : Ram disk -> copy ARMA enjoy highspeed loadingtimes.

People i dont know. You guys hopefully use wikipedia and know what a Large Memmory Aware Flag is. The engine is soft coded on 2047MB (launcher says more but ok). the memmory crashes with out of memmory are getting fixed and even the mighty x64 wont help when arma wants 1.6 EB (Exa Byte) of RAM. And no x64 is not always better. Yes it can utilize more RAM but no its doesnt really make your CPU faster because 32bit is just filled with 0 and if a program uses only 32bit variable because of performance then you just have exactly the same Situation like you have now. The only thing is x64 would use more RAM for the exact same tasks (not more usefull but just more RAM). x64 is not the lord and savior. The actual problem is who will invest time(that is needed for bugfixing in the 32 bit engine) to compile and then debug a 64bit engine? That request is similar to hey guys screw arma 3 and start from scratch.
I hope you guys understand what i mean.

Edit: @TutSi if you look closely the only 2 things getting better are : more possible RAM for the engine (didnt found a reason why but its possible maybe good for servers) and 64bit variables for scripts (pretty nice for example for Life servers since values more than 16 Million are possible.)

Yes i am. 64 bit means its a complete new engine. Its not just saying hey now the engine is 64bit. The other thing is it doesnt matte. 64bit gives you the opportunity to use 1TB of RAM. Arma could already use up to 3.5GB and uses at normal just 2GB. I would say you go and ask someone what the difference between 32bit and 64bit is. And spoiler alert: its not 2x faster.

BTW the windows you use has a 32bit part of the system. So you want bugs to be fixed... why for f. Sake you want to create new bugs? Thats not logic.

You are not the first one and definitly not the last one. Not know is the answer. Arma can handle everything in 32bit. So tell me 1 good reason why the devs should fuck up the engiine and go 64bit with 2 engines(for devs that are 2) with bug fixing for both(each one has its own bugs) and maybe ruin the 64bit engine completely? Tell me please 1 good reason.

Use bisabke simulation for the items

Since when can for example a javelin change the lock? This are Fire and Forget missiles that do not have any adjustance after beeing released(not talking about MCLOS). I know that the Top attack is missing but still the systems are pretty acurate.

I agree on all things but one. The targeting on the cold Ifrits is possible. You dont need a Heat source you need a temperature contrast means something thats colder or warmer.

Im not sure but in the jet it is not possible while flying.

The problem is if the variable comes from the client it will be hackable. Better would be if the server autocompletes the IP to the object. or the GUID by IP-List.

It seems that there is currently a hack going on. We see the same problem on other servers too. Even spawning AI and stuff. And teleporting or beeing invisible.

%appdata% in the explorer bar and the 1 folder up.

Please add the .mdmp .bidmp and .rpt . Please use google to locate them.
Also the launcher has a option in the upper right corner called "Prepare for Error-report"(or something similar, i use german thats why i cant accuratly tell you).

If im correct the Interface size is fix that means there is a new size needed or all the interface sizes need to be proportional.

I would agree that all ifv could get some more round but regarding the marshal he has a tiny innerturret compared to a Marder (seen the turret in RL) and the ammo is stored in this inner turret so that means he has low carrieng capabilities

Actually i play the Marshall often PvP and he has enough ammo to have a long fight. His strength is his 40mm(all others have 30mm) GPR rounds. BUT if you fight a bunch of infantry without AT just use the MG. The Marshall is nt a spray and pray tank like the Mora. The Marshall is more a troop carrier.

Additionally FFV(Firing from Vehicles) is the wrong topic Please consider that when editing.

The config value are almost all really simplified. So the idea with percentage is good. Like i said the biggest problem is the radar range. The system i explained is more like a filter. So still the radar needs to see all vehicles that it would see now just with 10x more range.

You guys make me crazy with you Note deleting XD!

I would say change the ticket to the method i wrote and leave it like that it maybe takes time and patience but its a good method. The problem i think will be the overall radar range because of performance issues. So as most of the performance issues are dealt with maybe the make the radar distance not 5km but infinite. Who knows?

Give a Blackfoot a Missle Txpe is almost impossible.
What i meant is first value is some kind of radar signature value or how detectable a vehicle is. Second value is how good is the Radar of the vehicle.
The idea would be that the detection range would be calculated by both values.
For example Blackfoot has a signature of 25% (its a hypothetic value) and a Tigris has a detector with 100% (AA should have the best detectors). The max range is about 5km currently. So at all the tange is 25%*100%=25% its about 1.25km.
Same with a littlebird. Its has for example a detector with 50% so the range would be 0.625km so mostly direct view.
For balancing i would like to see all maximum radar ranges to be made bigger so big planes are visible further away and stealth vehicles are visible at about 2 to 4 km. Btw no random value needed and also that funtion could be client side and in a different thread. It would be like the main thread gives all the radar values the second thread creates a sheme for the radar and gives it back to the main thread. Hope any devs can understand what i mean.

The type of a asset in Arma has far more Values than just the radar signature. For example: The Blackfoot is a Vehicle so it has vehicle soecific variables (what should be loaded or what ever) than its a helicopter soadditionally the afm can be configured and finally its a Blackfoot model that means the 3d object is soecified. The radar marker is defined in the class Vehicles.
A dagr is a ammo class (so dmg values etc) its a missile class so it flights and its a missile cause it can steer (rockets are missiles with maneuvarability of 0). The radar signature is defined in the missile class.
Its a very good style (mostly some things are a little bit weird but thats a different story) of sorting a config so the idea of changing the markers yes it is possible but a very bad style of config.

How about something more universal? How about a config value that determines the "stealthiness"of a vehicle(for both Ground and air). The value will determine at what range a vehicle gets visible on the radar(should depend on radar and vehicle). That would provide modders to do some interesting futuristic stuff. Also that would allow proper B2 or Nighthawk mods.

The popping sou d he means is not really a popping sound it seems to be a noise and when the sound end the noise ends in a pfft. Just my suggestion.

*tank

I will just clearify the ticket: You want the Landing site on the Saltlake to be east west instead of north south as it could be longer.

duplicate of 0027596

is duplicatef by 0027596

I will just clearify the ticket: You want the Landing site on the Saltlake to be east west instead of north south as it could be longer.

Try to use the current performance build exe for the logs(just google "arma 3 performance binaries"). The devs are currently working on a fix for a problem and the performance binaries are logging some additional stuff maybe it will help you.

Maybe some kind of menu where you set the percentage of the specific sounds and the current Effects volume is some how the master volume for the effects?

RC is 1.56 not 1.57

Look 3 post above:"ballistic calculation"

Koala this ticket is more related to the newer "glass is broken but still there for ballistic calculation"-ticket. The tickets you set as related are version 1.22 or something. The issue was solved and reoccured some where at 1.52.

The problem is that the ropes work with physix means the have a break force. You cant move buildings or cars(they have standard handbrakes on) so currenty rope work only by pulling something up.

Check maybe you subscribed a beta? If not do subscribe dev build and than go back to normal.

Es gunktioniert genauso wie die Entwickler es sich gedacht haben. Du kannst kurze Zeit sprinten und dann musst du halt joggen (ich persönlich hab in meiner BW zeit ca 6-7Km mit vollem Rucksack geschafft. Es ist halt ein kosmetischer fzehler.

Maybe because my statement was enough?

Duplicate of 0027461
Its not allowed to make duplicate Tickets.

You jog not run thats the difference. The system is based on stamina. Its needed to sprint and to walk and jog. A normal soldier cannot sprint forever but can jog several miles. That you can jog forever is some kind of cosmetic problem, there should be a cap. But all in all its intended.

How about a mobile Arsenal like in Zeus?

Depends on the tank you use and on the weapons the enemy has. Just think of why the modern tanks use reactive armor in addition to their normal one. Arma currently has no full functionality of reactive armor(only the Slammer up has one but it works not that good). If that would get implemented in the right way it would make the tank strong.

It wasnt when you created the ticket.

Before the armor update the Devs wrote in a Sitrep that the try to find a good solution.

I just add something i wrote in the radar system ticket:
What i meant is first value is some kind of radar signature value or how detectable a vehicle is. Second value is how good is the Radar of the vehicle.
The idea would be that the detection range would be calculated by both values.
For example Blackfoot has a signature of 25% (its a hypothetic value) and a Tigris has a detector with 100% (AA should have the best detectors). The max range is about 5km currently. So at all the tange is 25%*100%=25% its about 1.25km.
Same with a littlebird. Its has for example a detector with 50% so the range would be 0.625km so mostly direct view.
For balancing i would like to see all maximum radar ranges to be made bigger so big planes are visible further away and stealth vehicles are visible at about 2 to 4 km. Btw no random value needed and also that funtion could be client side and in a different thread. It would be like the main thread gives all the radar values the second thread creates a sheme for the radar and gives it back to the main thread. Hope any devs can understand what i mean.

There comes a new Missle protection system: Chaffs could temporarily disable radar contact so radar guided AA rockets will loose lock, BUT when the chafs are gone the lock could be aquired again. That means you have to time your CM good to make them effective. Same for Smoke smoke has already the option of obscuring AIs view so why not say it can obscure the view of missiles.

Im not talking about APS on purpose because its quite difficult to manage compared to working CMs. BTW CUP has a working C-RAM if im correct so it is technically possible.

Edit: when using specially designed smoke there is no possibility of hitting a target behind it but just beeing lucky. Current CM smokes blocks: IR, Radar, View and laser designation.

Ok thats a small difference. I meant MCLOS.

Just saying: Wire guided missiles like the tow do not really care about smoke at all unless the rocket is in or behind it.
Currently the rockets should lose lock but the still fly with the latest informatio means the last know speed and position of the target.

Edit: if im right there should be a option for obstructing view for AI why not use this one as it is just very dense smoke.

Im not sure but i think its because at the moment when you go up or down the hill you are walking very slow and sometimes even slow enough to regenerate stamina.

You mean the bar on the right bottom corner. It is deactivated so it shows 0. The devs are currently working on a new solution to display the armor level. The only wa right now to see the armor is open the inventory and hover the mouse above the vest/helmet.

Just adding "An implementation in ARMA3 is not necessary if you are using a NVIDIA graphics card [with a build-in PhysX Co-Processor]." The main feature of PhysX is the load outsource to dedicated processor on the graphics card (not the GPU!!!). Requirement for this is this special co-processor. PhysX is a Nvidia patent so AMD has no option at all.

Woow fast. ;) Merry Christmas to you too Wizard. Thanks for the fast help.

Go to explorer type in %appdata% go one folder above. There should be Local, Roaming an some other stuff. Go local go Arma 3 look for rpt files.
Merry Christmas btw.

Add the rpt file please.

Just mentioning that a side shadow would be better to shiw the issue. In the current image its hard to say if only slings are missing as a shadow or the whole vest. Merry Christmas!

UGV definitly not. There were no UGV in Arma 2.

I think it should be like that. Static means things that dont move.

Reinstall