RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

[hartzie 10]

Hey guys.

I found the awesome 3D scopes in your modpack. This is what every freaking scope should work like :D. Only problem I found with it is if you lean left or right the perspective does not change and it looks weird. Here the screenshot that shows the issue. Great idea how you created the scope I hope you expand this over everything.

[artisanal 22]

yeah, the PiP scopes are a nice proof of concept. The fps hit isn't even that big (well, it depends on your rig I guess...). However, some issues are remaining (see the post above mine), like the resolution of the PiP render (pixelisation/blur) which is too low, it makes it really hard to clearly recognize the shape of a soldier at 300m. Also, no shadows are rendered through PiP (doesn't bother me that much).

Anyway, keep up the good work as usual :)

[reluxstudio 11]

MistyRonin,

There would be the possibility to check what is happening with the soldiers?

I'll try to explain what happens, I'm in the weapon editor, select the RHS USARMY WOODLAND. is what most use, select infantry, when previewing every soldier is not with backpack, and 2 units say "I'm out of ammo."

If I use another MOD soldiers that does not happen, but I like the work and the quality of the RHS and want to use this mod.

It's not often play with friends, often game using the AI, so it is difficult to "fight" enemies with soldiers out of ammo, there is no loading of standard units, play only with "real people" this is no problem but if it used the AI is difficult.

I do not know if I'm explaining well because English is not my first language, and I am not very good with English, lol.

[Wilco 944]

MistyRonin,

There would be the possibility to check what is happening with the soldiers?

I'll try to explain what happens, I'm in the weapon editor, select the RHS USARMY WOODLAND. is what most use, select infantry, when previewing every soldier is not with backpack, and 2 units say "I'm out of ammo."

If I use another MOD soldiers that does not happen, but I like the work and the quality of the RHS and want to use this mod.

It's not often play with friends, often game using the AI, so it is difficult to "fight" enemies with soldiers out of ammo, there is no loading of standard units, play only with "real people" this is no problem but if it used the AI is difficult.

I do not know if I'm explaining well because English is not my first language, and I am not very good with English, lol.

Are you playing with just RHS mod active?

[OMAC 254]

For 0.3.6, the afrf beta includes "rhs_missions.pbo." Does this contain playable missions? If so, how can we play them? I tried placing the pbo in the A3 Missions folder, and that doesn't work.

Are there updates to the three missions that were included in 0.3.5?

[reyhard 2082]

I'll try to explain what happens, I'm in the weapon editor, select the RHS USARMY WOODLAND. is what most use, select infantry, when previewing every soldier is not with backpack, and 2 units say "I'm out of ammo."

If I use another MOD soldiers that does not happen, but I like the work and the quality of the RHS and want to use this mod.

nothing to worry, those two soldiers reporting low ammo are soldiers with AT-4. They have on rocket because launcher is disposable yet recognize it as "low ammo".

[camo_steve 27]

First of all, congrats on your mod(s). They are progressing quite nicely!

Anyways, I noticed you guys added Top-down mode for the Javelin awhile back, but I can't figure how to switch to it. I tried looking for documentation online and found nothing. I was hoping someone on this thread could tell me how to switch modes. Thanks.

[armyinf 33]

To use Top down you need to use AGM- Top Down pbo, then just press "P"

[reluxstudio 11]

nothing to worry, those two soldiers reporting low ammo are soldiers with AT-4. They have on rocket because launcher is disposable yet recognize it as "low ammo".

they have nothing with them, only the rifle ...

[reyhard 2082]

they have nothing with them, only the rifle ...

post what which units don't have ammo or upload somewhere mission where that error happens then

[mistyronin 1181]

they have nothing with them, only the rifle ...

Are you using the last "progressive update"? ( 0.3.6 )

---------- Post added at 20:20 ---------- Previous post was at 20:17 ----------

For 0.3.6, the afrf beta includes "rhs_missions.pbo." Does this contain playable missions? If so, how can we play them? I tried placing the pbo in the A3 Missions folder, and that doesn't work.

You don't have to place them anywhere, they should appear in the MP missions :)

About the test missions, at this moment nope, but we are thinking of adding a parallel mission repository where you can get updates for that ones and more.

[maquez 141]

could you please be so kind and make for us arma3sync users an autoconfig.url and a arma3sync repository for RHS ?

http://www.sonsofexiled.fr/wiki/index.php/ArmA3Sync_Wiki_English

that would be so kind :D

regards maquez [Q-Net]

[reluxstudio 11]

Are you using the last "progressive update"? ( 0.3.6 )

---------- Post added at 20:20 ---------- Previous post was at 20:17 ----------

You don't have to place them anywhere, they should appear in the MP missions :)

About the test missions, at this moment nope, but we are thinking of adding a parallel mission repository where you can get updates for that ones and more.

Nop, but i make download here http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=27149 and here http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=27150

[soul_assassin 1750]

could you please be so kind and make for us arma3sync users an autoconfig.url and a arma3sync repository for RHS ?

http://www.sonsofexiled.fr/wiki/index.php/ArmA3Sync_Wiki_English

that would be so kind :D

regards maquez [Q-Net]

Perhaps in the future some time. For now we are happy with our method of distribution and will not waste more time on this.

[jakeryan760 10]

Suggestions:

+M320 & Shotguns equipped as a sidearm or under launchers via inventory.

Why: These weapons are not primary weapons. Making them a "sidearm" or "launcher" in Arma inventory terms would give them actual in game purpose in a realistic manner.

Also reading back I saw the topic of TLs & SLs using grenade launchers. Working in both TL and SL roles in Afghanistan I always had M203 or M320. This is pretty standard these days in all infantry units. Reason is so leadership can not only engage the enemy with HE but also to mark targets to direct fires.

+1 on the m320 to side arm or launcher. Perhaps side arm would be a bit better because it will be hidden unlike the launcher. It really does get frustrating having to drop your weapon to the ground to use the m320. Still i'll take it either way, great mod once again.

[sorophx 25]

However, some issues are remaining (see the post above mine), like the resolution of the PiP render (pixelisation/blur) which is too low, it makes it really hard to clearly recognize the shape of a soldier at 300m.

that's why they probably should switch the scope and the rest of the field of view: leave the scope zoomed in clearly, and make the rest of the screen PiP

would also solve the issue of having to do math for the rendered scoped in image.

[Max255 59]

+1 on the m320 to side arm or launcher. Perhaps side arm would be a bit better because it will be hidden unlike the launcher. It really does get frustrating having to drop your weapon to the ground to use the m320. Still i'll take it either way, great mod once again.

Ekhem, cough...

http://feedback.rhsmods.org/view.php?id=311

Already suggested and acknowledged :)

[Defunkt 431]

that's why they probably should switch the scope and the rest of the field of view: leave the scope zoomed in clearly, and make the rest of the screen PiP

would also solve the issue of having to do math for the rendered scoped in image.

How's that gonna work in a 3D implementation? You'd need a PIP surface beyond the weapon that encompassed the player's entire FOV (and which other nearby players/objects would clip through). If you think pixelisation/blur/pip-fps is a problem inside the scope at present imagine how it'll look in that much larger proportion of the view. The only way that will work is if it's done with a 2D implementation (ala AGM) - I think what we have already is superior.

[Uroth 10]

Anyone know how I can spawn the scuds in launch ready mode so that I can use them as a call in support . Is this even possible? Cant seem to get any of the new artillery to work as a call in support.

[SSgt Decker 4]

You guys do awesome work! Are there any plans to do a Navy SEAL faction at some point? My group would sure enjoy that. Thanks!

[reyhard 2082]

Some news from PIP optic front:

So far, I managed to fix following errors:

• fisheye view - to be honest, it's not truly fixed as texture inside have fixed aspect ratio & right now I tailored them to 16:9 (as probably most common one)
  
• wall hack exploit
  
• m240 ironsight view
  

Also, as Defunkt suggested, I tried to move eye memory point closer to the optic and it seems reticle is readable enough to be useful.

current view

With increased sharpness of reticle it is quite visible that 512x512 PIP window is not enough but as I said before, that is current r2t limit (comparsion to normal tex).

btw: I'm actually surprised that nobody find not configured yet m88 like uniform texture (made by Gurdy) hidden in infantry files :P

to test yourself - player setObjectTextureGlobal [0,"rhsafrf\addons\rhs_infantry\data\flora_m88.paa"

[Defunkt 431]

With increased sharpness of reticle it is quite visible that 512x512 PIP window is not enough but as I said before, that is current r2t limit (comparsion to normal tex).

Can you explain what it is that you're illustrating here? To my eye the most notable issue in the first image is that the bottom half of the optics view appears to be made up of the last row of image data stretched down. Is that a product of the limited texture size or just incidental screen tearing? I do also see that the top half of the view is considerably fuzzier (but I could live with that if BI can't be prevailed upon to increase the maximum texture size).

In terms of the scale of the optic with the altered viewpoint, I take it all screens were the taken with the view 'zoomed' in? Looks good.

Do you expect to be able to resolve the issue with the view angling when the player leans?

Edited March 5, 2015 by Defunkt

[sorophx 25]

You'd need a PIP surface beyond the weapon that encompassed the player's entire FOV (and which other nearby players/objects would clip through). ... The only way that will work is if it's done with a 2D implementation (ala AGM) - I think what we have already is superior.

that's kind of what I meant - AGM. I know they use a 2D texture (or at least I think they do). but I didn't realize they accomplish that by having a PIP surface beyond the weapon.

[DGeorge85 10]

Can you explain what it is that you're illustrating here?

If 512x512 is the limit, I think that first shot is the result of trying 1024x1024. Only the first quadrant (512x512) is rendered correctly.

[Defunkt 431]

that's kind of what I meant - AGM. I know they use a 2D texture (or at least I think they do). but I didn't realize they accomplish that by having a PIP surface beyond the weapon.

With a 2D scope the weapon model isn't visible so there's no need for the PIP surface to be distant.

Without getting into which is better the key thing to my mind is that a 3D scope can only be done by RHS (who have the model sources). If AGM or somebody else wants to it should be possible to config 2D PIP scopes onto any RHS weapon as an optional addon which means there will be a way for everybody to enjoy their preferred implementation. This is why I'd be very keen to see RHS work towards 3D versions of all of their battle scopes.

If 512x512 is the limit, I think that first shot is the result of trying 1024x1024. Only the first quadrant (512x512) is rendered correctly.

Oh, right, thanks.