- User Since
- May 23 2013, 1:42 PM (434 w, 21 h)
Sep 13 2017
The original op just doesn't know how what he's trying to talk about works. If anything bullet velocity would increase with a suppressor. The supersonic boom is the exact shockwave of air which the baffles of the suppressor divert and redivert before venting the air to the atmosphere at subsonic speeds ie the suppressors function is to reduce or negate the sonic boom.
May 10 2016
Thank you very much. I find this all quite interesting.
As a side-note, I reinstalled Windows and am no longer receiving this error (touch wood).
Again, thank you very much for your time and information. If I discover anything of use I will post it here for your future/current reference.
Located the following regarding Exit Code 255 from a google search;
"Exit code 255 sounds like a .NET exception within the tool (target application) you're running. You'll not be able to catch this exception in your code.
I would register a debugger for the target application to see what exception it throws:
Go to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Image File Execution Options
Create a key with the name of the executable you're starting
Create a string called Debugger
Give it a value, e.g. vsjitdebugger.exe if it's a .NET application
This will start the debugger and you can catch exceptions."
Same thing occuring with error code;
1 073 741 819
I will do so and will addend relevant results here.
.NET Framework 3.5"
Please inform me whether I should be looking for Exit Code 255 in the .NET system or in the language that ARMA is written in, and please inform which language that is, or if it is neither.
Still waiting for update on this. Not a happy chappy at all. Please work it out or at least give us some info as to where we can start troubleshooting.
Small as it is, it is such details which turn something from being good to being great.
neodart that will happen if you are missing the files required for the server or if you have outdated files
you can resolve this by contacting the server admin and getting an updated list of the mods they are running and making sure to launch the game with those mods and without any extra mods
Waste of time this tbh. Reverse gears have higher gear ratios therefor could easily result in faster final drive ratios.
25 OCTOBER 2013 - very happy to report that this issue seems to have been completely fixed.
I have played in multiplayer games for about 4 hours and had 0 crashes whereas before I would have at on average 1.5 crashes per hour in multiplayer games.
Thank you for the great gaming platform BI, I just ask that you promote first person only servers, or release maps with "1st person forced" zones i.e. 3rd person is enabled but 1st person is forced once the player enters a city/other built up area.
Thanks again and if my tickets helped I'm happy too.
yeah my response is heated because you are wasting my time with a halfwit argument
you are arguing against an ingame implementation of a realistic method of employment of an established military equipment in a realistic military simulator
arma is not about making it nice for you to play. i like infantry gameplay. i play multiplayer servers and get deep in infantry combat. then i get sniped from 700m away by some dick. you think i like that? no. but i dont argue against having it in game because it is a realistic aspect of modern war, which is unfair and highly asymetrical.
when you say you must consider "how PLAYERS would use it" in game you are also advocating balancing through selection of features/equipment, which is contrary to the whole concept of arma and shows a basic misunderstanding of the term "simulator."
balancing occurs ingame through terrain, strategy, tactics, etc. not by removing certain real life aspects of war because they appear inconvenient to NodOod. after all the "balancing" is done, someone has the high ground, and someone has the sun in their eyes. what i am saying is there is no balancing.
the point is not to create a fun game. VBS and ARMA are simulators which inherently strive to include as many aspects of real life war as possible. by definition, a simulator aims to recreate as many aspects of the real life activity as possible.
think before you write things on my tickets please
or at least pretend to
what a retarded argument. you think in WW2 guys werent throwing satchel charges all over the place?
so basically, your argument is that because its in another video game it shouldnt be in arma.
dude. go to university.
military explosives are specially designed to include stabilizers in order to allow them to withstand shock. there is a huge industry around this and large funding for people studying this science.
its ridiculous that you can sit 12m from a main road intersection where you know a tank/convoy will pass yet you cant toss a 4kg weight 12m. a small child can do this.
yup just checked. stuck at 27% again.
FIXED 29 aug 2013
the small "Steam Workshop" update on 27/28 August 2013 seems to have fixed it for me
what i have is under "Steam Subscribed Content" in my scenarios list it loads to 27% and no further and i cannot access any of the steam workshop missions
so i have "Steam subscribed content - 27%" in my list of scenarios and no dropdown menu with the actual missions
thank you for your time and your response. due to my slow internet connection i will only be able to confirm if it fixed or not in a few days.
astaroth from what i can recall it happens everywhere, mainly inside buildings, and definitely inside the barracks buildings on King of the Hill multiplayer servers
like i said, anyone who votes this down is voting to use 3rd person in built up areas therefore is a noob
i dont think you know anything about coding and how unbelievably easy this would be to implement
it would take about 1 hour to zone the map and that would be the end of it
@mbbird in fact if you werent so busy being just another internet moron you would realise that i am offering an intermediate solution for servers as in a hybrid "3rd + 1st person forced" setting for server owners but as usual the ones with the least brains talk the most
there is no valid argument against the disabling of 3rd person within built up areas except a 3rd person noob who wants to keep abusing 3rd person in built up areas
the other problem is that you simply cannot "always play in 1st person" on a 3rd person server because you will always lose to a 3rd personing noob at some point and the problem i have is not losing but the ridiculous way that it occurs - being spotted over walls/around buildings by some guy who has been lying prone in 3rd person for 15 minutes pretending to be tactical
it is against the ethos of the game
@mbbird this is my ticket and i will phrase it how i like if that is alright with you
the effects of 3rd person abuse are clearly exaggerated in built up areas
most 3rd person servers cater to entry-level/casual gamers who will not accept total disabling of 3rd person
therefore the solution is to zone areas of the map where 3rd person abuse will be most disruptive to immersive gameplay (cities are traditionally CQB areas and best played in 1st person)
FOV can easily be adjusted within 10 minutes in config files.
My FOV is 100 degrees.
SO basically i should run into the rock and press z, which arma will definitely throw me down on the side of the rock, and i should think this through all in 0.75 seconds whilst the enemy is walking tracers onto me from 10m
i mean like putting your face closer to the window in order to be able to see more outside as you would IRL
as in you press a keybinding and your character switches to actually looking through the window
i honestly dont care how good/bad it looks i just want the functionality of it so more people will play in 1st person
edited for clarity
dude r u serious? that just does what holding alt does
ya but u know. thats kind of, what they do.
yes exactly i think it takes too long
@anyone who disagrees
I have a $30 maglight. you can not see a thing when it is shone into your face, day or night, and there are visual artifacts which obscure 75% of vision for 45 seconds after the light is removed
i know because im doing it right now -> lol
all police, security, etc use flashlights because they are cheap, nonlethal, and very effective
vote up pls
not sure exactly what you guys have done but i have had ZERO of these crashes since around 19 August 2013 so great job and thank you
i will report and upload dumps if it starts up again and definitely will upload whatever you guys think will be helpful for altis
see "Additional Information" with RapidShare link
thank you i will definitely begin to do this
that will be excellent
you just are a noob and dont understand that the whole point of this is to make it so that no verbal cue has to be given in a number of situations to enable silent execution of an already planned fightplan without giving the enemy intelligence on your location or your planned move.
but youre a noob, so thats fine. also explains why you love the idea of balancing.
as to your "reason" - I think its quite obvious that developers who have gotten this far would know how to allocate their resources effectively. you are not here to decide what the devs work on you just vote yes if you want the feature in game and no if you dont.
jesus christ what a pretentious attention seeking troll.
again longjocks thanks so much for your input its as relevant and interesting as always.
i cant stop with this guy. reading through your comment again. like what youre a game developer now? youre on BI dev and know what they are dealing with and whats "important"? jesus just fuck off rash
let me explain how this works; you vote yes if you want the feature in game, you vote no if you specifically don't want the feature in game. if you don't have an opinion, you dont vote.
you dont act like some pompous fucktard pretending to have some inside information on the prioritization of the BI development pipeline.
jesus christ this thing needed a screening process
i think the feedback tracker should be updated so that people have to type a reason if they want to vote no for something because there are some serious retards on here.
how can anyone say that non-verbal signalling in a milsim is a bad idea?
same key could b used to tap the rearguard in a fireteam to indicate the team is moving forward. the player tapped would receive a visual and audial cue, ie some visual cue accompanied by a soft, dulled thud as if patting a leather jacket.
lol again noobs voting no
i can tell you anyone who votes no for this uses teamspeak ingame specifically so they can communicate silently because they are noobs and need the advantage
this is very important long term for arma
i will again ask people to reconsider their votes as i have just thrown 3 smokes when i intended to throw frag grenades and am certain that there should be separate keybindings for the throwing of frag grenades given the high pace of situations typically calling for frag it is simply a higher same priority item compared to chemlights, flares, smoke grenades, etc
@Dr death your input is assinine as usual
the aim is to be able to throw either 1 instantly without having to switch between them so that you know if i press g i will toss smoke and if i press cntrl+g i will toss a frag. to avoid having to check which 1 you have active.
dr death IRL you 1 - would store smoke grenades differently on your body to frag grenades and 2 - would be able to feel which 1 was in your hand by the shape so you would be able to instantly and without thinking, throw the 1 you want. your argument that this would make the game faster and more fluid is inflammatory and redundant.
oh my god why do people who know nothing vote?
just do a search for infantry thermal camouflage and look at pictures. yes krovogad im talking to you. wow. definitely should be some sort of screening process for this feedback system.