• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by eagon89

  1. Dont worry Thats the big 1 core CPU bottleneck since Squad started nothing Ryzen specific ,we will have to wait if the promised Animationrework will solve this knot or not. Besides the 1 core problem (that I still don't understand if is an Unreal Engine 4 problem) I have also the doubt that the game have some kind of problem related to the use of thread, especially when there are intense firefights with a lot of sounds... same problem of Arma series games and is not good (once again, I still don't understand if is an Unreal Engine 4 problem)
  2. From 65 to 43 frames in a server with 70/80 players. Especially during intensive firefight and a lot of sound around. This problem is very similar to Arma series and I think it's related to the use of thread (but I think this is an Unreal Engine 4 problem)
  3. If I understand the situation, the patch could be delayed if they meet some kind of problem:
  4. or... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Patriot_(1998_film)
  5. Is not possible to use the Steam Family Sharing function ? If your brother will never use Squad you could use it without problem.
  6. only for clearance on bullet dimensions
  7. Depend on the mood, when I really want to play this kind of game yes... otherwise no; just a question of mood. Moreover remember that is not even 60 steady, yesterday on 3 people server I shoot to a tree... drop from 120 to 75/80 for a few second; so I guess that when I do this on a full server I will reach 20 fps... good during an intensive firefight on a mobile phone game. As in the game, the important is to reach the objective... and we will never reach it if part of the team start to say "30 fps is acceptable" like I recently read around on the forums, this kind of comments is the reason that a lot of game run bad on all PC. Actually only the 7700k can give this range, there is something around the forum but I don't find the link, I remember something like 75 to 100 fps on a full 80 player server. Happy to wait, as I said before even to the beta. I repeat, is a game "from gamer for gamer" and if they need money they have only to ask, or if they need time they only have to release the game later. The only thing I don't need is a fast paced mix between arma 3 (that is more slow than Squad and 60 rock solid could be acceptable) and a generic shooter full of people happy to have a 1000/2000 $ PC and play at "smooth" 50 FPS on a 100 hz monitor, in 2017/2018, using 1/2 core of a CPU... I like old thing but I have a limit. This decision is in the hand of the community, a good tactical FPS, or a tactical FPS for consoles, where is better to set a 30 FPS cap. Unfortunately, is a small team, with limited amount of money (don't know how much they have now in the budget but surely they're not a big company like EA or Ubisoft or any other, so no money to waste), with an engine under build (recently UE4 received an update), and they put a very very very incredible high goals (100 player in the same server, simulated Newtonian physics, with vehicle and maybe choppers and planes). Personally... I like this, big goals, small team (compared to other company); but even if i like the project I would not become a super fanboy who accept a barely performance in exchange to a shiny chopper who can be personalized with a new fancy patch Luckily for us, developers know what play a game is (multiplayer PvP, not single player or co-op, big difference) so I give them my trust. Welcome to the club, normally 45-65 on full 80 people server (depending on the map and the situation) on a 5820K. If I can, I prefer to play on a 50 players server where i can reach a good performance. The focus on optimization will be for the beta and, to be honest, I don't think that the actual PC's could run the game at the final release because it will contain a lot of things and it will need a new good PC based on the best components.
  8. Question. Can somebody from US with itunes help me buy a track and send it to me ? I can pay by paypal.
  9. Currently the discussion focused on two very important points: 1- More Cowbell 2- We are trying to find a solution regarding the pollution of aquifers in the hinterland and how this leads to a depletion of the fish fauna, especially the Beluga sturgeon (Huso huso) Joke apart, I think we can try this solution and then propose an alternative. Example, instead of 2A72 we can ask for 2A42 (two different fire rate, low 200/300 and high 500) and then put an ammo limit for cannon, maybe ~ 300 rounds.
  10. Yes and no, at some point after different updates it become less "team base" game. Moreover they recently start working on a game for both consoles and PC so... I don't know what will happen in the future. I didn't play much time recently, especially after the add of 80 players server with a embarrassing performance. But thanks for a lot of player now the new way of PvP game online is: "make a good computer" or "overclock" for a game that still use 1 core, like '90 years "60 fps is not really necessary" actually the better would be 100/120 frames so you can use the refresh rate of the monitor (even the CRT monitor have 60hz refresh rate) The only CPU that can make run squad with this requirements is the 7700K. In my opinion, actually the game is still in alpha so we have to wait at least the beta to see real optimization. I don't think that the maker will change the base element of the game; that kind of thing is more in the hand of the community. Give them a motorbike for scout/ambush job (like in arma 2/OA) and they will steal the motorbike for... I don't know, try to jump over a hill ? I remember when in Arma operation arrowhead domination by Xeno one person take the chinook (the only chopper who can grab the Stryker mobile spawn) and use it for flying on the top of a mountain and sniping everything. I think that this is a game made "from gamer for gamer", and in this case the gamer who make the game want a classic old style game based on squad gameplay. About race for cash... I think that the better way to get cash is launch a game on consoles with a very big amount of potential player. Moreover, If they want more money they only have to ask in my opinion, this is a quite big community and I think that a lot of people would be glad to add money for complete the project/game/dream... including me.
  11. Yes... I see that most of the server are used for "Arma real life" or something like that... sad. Luckily I have played a lot on Arma 2 and Operation Arrowhead, where the community was different (not perfect, but different). I considering Arma 3 as a money bait for make a better version of VBS 3... you know, the real simulator. And I give them money for alpha... I'm a stupid stupid stupid dreamer. Most of the problem in Arma 3 could be solved by using a good engine with a good optimization, even the 64bit run bad on top PC. In my opinion, is not realistic to compare Squad to... any other game, is a like a "new IP" with a mixed features and idea coming from different games; It takes big maps with a lot of players and vehicle and tactical fight from BF2, shooting elements from Insurgency, performance and fundamentalist fan from Arma series
  12. ??? could I ask an explanation ? Here a leaked clip with ultra max setting (SPOILER)
  13. It's a feature
  14. Actually there is something: https://zippy.gfycat.com/EducatedAnguishedBuzzard.webm about arma 3 stance... I suggest to use the mod SMK from Arma 2 (where in my opinion Bohemia stole most of the stance):
  15. thank you, comment edited.
  16. Question... the audio of the game working on a separate thread ?
  17. 1 year is passed and he's coming again
  18. Thank you very much. Only for info: i7-5820K, standard boost 3,6 GHz ASUS STRIX GTX 980 Ti 64 GB DDR4 G.Skill Ripjaws 2800Mhz WD Black 3 TB Before patch, minimum 40/50 FPS with 60 players on Fool's Road and Logar Valley. Now I get around 75 FPS with 70 players almost everywhere, but unfortunately drops to 45/50 fps when the fight become hard, I don't think that CPU overclock will help much since is netcode problem, in fact before and after the patch V8 the FPS in Jensen's Range are the same, 140/160 FPS and in multiplayer the FPS are not affected by the graphic setting. Of course I'm happy for this performance improved but you know... is not a question of PC Master Race but for PC gaming the minimum requirements is always 60. Moreover, I didn't play much since V7, there was a graphic downgrade, especially for woodland map ? (only a question not a flame/troll post)
  19. Nice job, but I have to ask... in the future there will be other optimization ?
  20. I want a playable Capt. Kelso... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gj8-eRuVgVw
  21. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86bY6Ltrdp4
  22. CPU: I5 -5820k stock clocksGPU: ASUS 980 Ti StrixRAM: 32GB DDR4 Res: 1920x1080Settings: medium shadow - medium visibility - high effect - all the other thing disable 60-70 FPS stable on low population servers (max 50 people). On full 60 + people servers I get 20-50 FPS.
  23. I have a 5820k and 980Ti Strix and unfortunately it doesn't change a lot when servers become full... I think that I can agree with the fact that it need optimization, but we have to wait. My only fear is that the game could be suffer the same problem of Arma series regarding the servers