RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

[PuFu 4600]

for most of the "will you make xxx", there is a answer in our FAQ here: http://rhsmods.org/faq

@jocko, will ask if reyhard can give you a better answer...

[jinougaf 11]

for most of the "will you make xxx", there is a answer in our FAQ here: http://rhsmods.org/faq

@jocko, will ask if reyhard can give you a better answer...

Lol,all the thing i seen was "Who Killed Captain Alex",ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

[liammch 10]

i have a sound problem in mcc4 editor using rhs wepans and attachments sound cuts out all together any ideas ? great mod btw :D

[jinougaf 11]

i have a sound problem in mcc4 editor using rhs wepans and attachments sound cuts out all together any ideas ? great mod btw :D

What means sound cuts out?Seem all work fine to me with MCC4

[Redphoenix 1540]

why are you taking the rg 33 out ? love that thing

It's just more common.

[h-singh 39]

Please do not take out RG33.. We need it.

You guys made the best Trijicon ACOG Scopes for the Arma 3. Can you guys make Trijicon ACOG scope with red dot & backup iron sights mounted on the site. Eg. "" ACOG/RMR Combos "" .

Are you going to add more stuff for Humvee because we love RHS Humvee.

One more thing RHS USAF ARSENAL doesn't work in MP but it works fine in SP.

[jinougaf 11]

Please do not take out RG33.. We need it.

You guys made the best Trijicon ACOG Scopes for the Arma 3. Can you guys make Trijicon ACOG scope with red dot & backup iron sights mounted on the site. Eg. "" ACOG/RMR Combos "" .

Are you going to add more stuff for Humvee because we love RHS Humvee.

One more thing RHS USAF ARSENAL doesn't work in MP but it works fine in SP.

I think they said replace it with RG-33L.

And,is there a big difference between RG33 and RG33L,why replace it with RG33L makes you guys wanna cry,lol.

PS.I think they've psot what you should think before you ask some question like "Are you going to make..." in this thread earlier.

[chompster 29]

Guys, chill out and read what the devs are saying..(beyond the "we're removing x"

It will be removed in one of the next versions as we will replace it by the bigger RG-33L.

They are taking out the RG-33 and are replacing it with the RG-33L, a bigger version of it.

With that said though, will the RG-33 eventually make it back in or will the L be replacing it indefinitely?

Ninja'd..

Edited April 23, 2015 by Chompster

[jinougaf 11]

Guys, chill out and read what the devs are saying..(beyond the "we're removing x"

They are taking out the RG-33 and are replacing it with the RG-33L, a bigger version of it.

With that said though, will the RG-33 eventually make it back in or will the L be replacing it indefinitely?

Okay,now I find there ARE a lot of differences between these two.But...I think they also said in "one of the next version"...huh,is this a word game?

[Cerarco 10]

Do you guys have any plans to allow the c-130j to achieve an altitude higher than 5000 meters? Would make it the best out there for High altitude jumps.

[i3r4ndon 16]

Do you guys have any plans to allow the c-130j to achieve an altitude higher than 5000 meters? Would make it the best out there for High altitude jumps.

5000 meters is a pretty damn high jump for Arma standards.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

They are taking out the RG-33 and are replacing it with the RG-33L, a bigger version of it.

With that said though, will the RG-33 eventually make it back in or will the L be replacing it indefinitely?

RG-33 is only really used by SOCOM (MARSOC mainly) where RG-33L is used by the regular army.

RHS have said before that the US Forces side of things will focus on stuff used by regular forces rather than various SF elements. That means the 4x4 RG-33 is pretty much outside of the scope of the mod now, so I guess the decision has been made to adapt the model in a way where it will fit the current scheme (i.e. stretching it to make RG-33L) instead of simply abandoning it or having it there alone with no further SF assets to support it.

AFAIK the model was something that Adumb made way back around 2012 and passed over to RHS more recently. So it was included in the mod before the decision to change focus was made, simply by virtue that the model was available.

[tachi 10]

Can anyone explain me why hitpoints on russian and us soldiers differ in favor of ru soldiers?

Hitpoints inside russian soldiers:

class HitPoints: HitPoints
 {
  class HitHead: HitHead
  {
   armor=1;
  };
  class HitBody: HitBody
  {
   armor=2;
  };
  class HitHands: HitHands
  {
  [u][b]armor=1;[/b][/u]
  };
  class HitLegs: HitLegs
  {
   armor=2;
  };
 };
 armor=2;
 [u][b]armorStructural=7;[/b][/u]

US soldiers hitpoints

class HitPoints: HitPoints
 {
  class HitHead: HitHead
  {
   armor=1;
  };
  class HitBody: HitBody
  {
   armor=2;
  };
  class HitHands: HitHands
  {
   [u][b]armor=2;[/b][/u]
  };
  class HitLegs: HitLegs
  {
   armor=2;
  };
 };
 armor=2;
 [u][b]armorStructural=5;[/b][/u]

[Damian90 697]

Tha is odd, we will investigate.

[Redphoenix 1540]

RG-33 is only really used by SOCOM (MARSOC mainly) where RG-33L is used by the regular army.

RHS have said before that the US Forces side of things will focus on stuff used by regular forces rather than various SF elements. That means the 4x4 RG-33 is pretty much outside of the scope of the mod now, so I guess the decision has been made to adapt the model in a way where it will fit the current scheme (i.e. stretching it to make RG-33L) instead of simply abandoning it or having it there alone with no further SF assets to support it.

AFAIK the model was something that Adumb made way back around 2012 and passed over to RHS more recently. So it was included in the mod before the decision to change focus was made, simply by virtue that the model was available.

Finally..... someone who understood what we are doing.

Thanks.

[mistyronin 1181]

RG-33 is only really used by SOCOM (MARSOC mainly) where RG-33L is used by the regular army.

Yup, besides the fact that we are also working in the MATV which is a 4x4 MRAP.

It would make no sense to have almost two identical vehicles.

---------- Post added at 14:40 ---------- Previous post was at 14:32 ----------

Can anyone explain me why hitpoints on russian and us soldiers differ in favor of ru soldiers?

They US are based in vanilla's NATO and RU are based in vanilla's AAF.

US soldiers have gloves so that's why they have an additional hit-point there. The structural armor is because of the nature of each protective gear.

[PuFu 4600]

Did anyone notice this? Please give me a hand.

http://doc.rhsmods.org/index.php/GAZ-66#Antena_deployment_for_R142_version

[vintorez 250]

http://i.imgur.com/HdFrkX7l.jpghttp://i.imgur.com/5AhxR5Ml.jpg

My Dear Devs,

I repeat the question: which vest will be provided for the gorka? Do you'll create something new?

Thank you in advance for your answer.

[phronk 898]

Will you guys eventually work on UAZ's with stuff like SPGs and HMMWVs with TOW launchers? After the spirits have been consulted, of course. ;)

[soul_assassin 1750]

Does noone read our fa(s)q? :)

[-ghost-tf 12]

Does noone read our fa(s)q? :)

No. Maybe. Probably. :P

Loving the gorkas btw :)

[Przemro 18]

Well people should read faq that you posted on your site, but it does not provide anwsers we (users) seek. Like, you have your own list with wehicles/equipment you plan to add, but we don't see it. You want to suprice us and you have right to do it, yet some of us would be less anoying (mean less questons abou 'Will xxx be added?') if we could know what is planed. Or if we could reveal next planned thing by something we could do, even likes on facebook, or simple mission sp/mp for RHS.

[Jackal326 1181]

Well people should read faq that you posted on your site, but it does not provide anwsers we (users) seek. Like, you have your own list with wehicles/equipment you plan to add, but we don't see it. You want to suprice us and you have right to do it, yet some of us would be less anoying (mean less questons abou 'Will xxx be added?') if we could know what is planed. Or if we could reveal next planned thing by something we could do, even likes on facebook, or simple mission sp/mp for RHS.

I don't think knowing what is planned would help. All it would do is turn the "Do you plan to include 'X/Y'?" questions into "Why haven't you planned to add 'X'?" or "Why isn't 'Y' on the list of planned things to include?"

[jocko-flocko 13]

@jocko, will ask if reyhard can give you a better answer...

Thanks man, it's greatly appreciated. This modification has breathed new life into Arma 3 for me as I am in no way a fan of "fake futuristic units" that use none existent equipment and manufacturers. There's nothing better than seeing the exact same perfectly modeled and textured AR-15/M4/M16 variants I shoot at the range on the weekends. Cheers. :)

[Redphoenix 1540]

Well people should read faq that you posted on your site, but it does not provide anwsers we (users) seek. Like, you have your own list with wehicles/equipment you plan to add, but we don't see it. You want to suprice us and you have right to do it, yet some of us would be less anoying (mean less questons abou 'Will xxx be added?') if we could know what is planed. Or if we could reveal next planned thing by something we could do, even likes on facebook, or simple mission sp/mp for RHS.

Why so?

We know what we still have to do, so requests won't actually help anyting at all. We have a list of things we direly want. That particular list will keep us busy at least until end of the year, if not even longer.

So after that, we might take requests, but honestly, new ideas come and fly.

So, please, stop requesting. Eventually, if you are lucky of course, your wish will be granted anyway. We are working in the best production cycle we can afford.