RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

[soul_assassin 1750]

Alright, time for some criticism.

 

But to avoid this post being completely negative, I would first like to thank the entire RHS team for the amazing work you've all done. RHS is one of the highest quality mods, not just in Arma 3, but in the history of Arma. The detail in the models and textures, the amazing sounds, all of it is unparalleled and gives a much more rewarding experience.

 

However, there are a couple of issues that make all of the many positives, mute.

 

The first issue that has recently become apparent, is that the "infrastructure" doesn't allow for hotfixes. That seems like a major oversight. As we all know, Arma patches almost always break mods and relying on 3rd parties to create temporary hotfix's for your mod is just wrong. I understand that the current system makes publishing updates much easier for you, but you NEED to have a way to push smaller updates when something breaks.

 

And the second issue is compatibility. While having all your own systems (FCS, Armour system etc.) is great for people that only wish to use RHS by itself, there are a LOT of community's that use other mods that also have these systems *cough* ACE3 *cough* and there have been many of these community's have moved away from RHS due to the fact that RHS has some major issues with regards to compatibility with not only other mods but vanilla assets. I understand that it would be a lot of extra work, but having a "content only" version with better compatibility would be amazing.

 

 

Again, a huge thank you to the entire RHS team for your amazing work. I really do appreciate all you've done.

 

Thank you for your kind words. Let me explain why the things are the way they are.

 

1. Its very disheartening when a team that already gives it all they have for free in their free time gets blamed or gets told off for not patching something fast enough after an official patch (that breaks everything with no backwards compatibility). It is not even a matter of infrastructure but a matter of principle. It is done when it is done. Theoretically we could have hotfixed, but it would have meant rolling back almost 3 months of development and more that 200 commits, commits to un-mergable binary files. A week or so before we are about to roll out a full new version...If we would have been a script and config mod it would have been much easier. When you understand how these things work, it makes it easier to make the hard call to wait and rather have a solid release. What we "need" is for the community to be a little more understanding and patient.

 

2. Compatibility is a tricky thing. You want ACE, the next guy wants AGM, third guy want BW Mod. Where does it stop? We make the choice to do it our way, and it already takes uncountable hours already to do what we do. Also,most of us don't use ACE and thus have no interest in writing compatibility for something we do not use. Granted we wish the situation was better, but we'd rather spend our free time on doing what we like. But there are things like ACE compatibility which is doing exactly that already. Those guys are doing exactly that work because they use both and want to use them together. Those people are also the best and figuring what parts go where so we are happy with what they are doing.

 

So there you go, I hope it is a little more clear. We are not doing these things to upset anyone.

[Redphoenix 1540]

The first issue that has recently become apparent, is that the "infrastructure" doesn't allow for hotfixes. That seems like a major oversight. As we all know, Arma patches almost always break mods and relying on 3rd parties to create temporary hotfix's for your mod is just wrong. I understand that the current system makes publishing updates much easier for you, but you NEED to have a way to push smaller updates when something breaks.

Says who exactly?.... The thing is: Only because one patch broke something (*hint*hint*which we actually knew and prepared for, but didn't want to rush for *hint*hint*), it doesn't mant that "almost all arma patches do". It's just the nature of how game development works. And if you have to rely on third party mods because we have a major release coming up: That's how it is.

And the second issue is compatibility. While having all your own systems (FCS, Armour system etc.) is great for people that only wish to use RHS by itself, there are a LOT of community's that use other mods that also have these systems *cough* ACE3 *cough* and there have been many of these community's have moved away from RHS due to the fact that RHS has some major issues with regards to compatibility with not only other mods but vanilla assets. I understand that it would be a lot of extra work, but having a "content only" version with better compatibility would be amazing.

Won't even start arguing here as this topic has been dealt with way too many times.

[officeramr 269]

The idea would be to release, in time, the texture templates and make available hidden selection for customization as one sees fit. Otherwise, there won't be a specific german version, due to the fact it is out of RHS current scope.

 

in other news:

Amazing, great work :)

 

Will the Sniper variant be added too?

[heavygunner 179]

That weapon looks really great.

Awesome job!

[PuFu 4600]

Alright, time for some criticism.

 

But to avoid this post being completely negative, I would first like to thank the entire RHS team for the amazing work you've all done. RHS is one of the highest quality mods, not just in Arma 3, but in the history of Arma. The detail in the models and textures, the amazing sounds, all of it is unparalleled and gives a much more rewarding experience.

 

However, there are a couple of issues that make all of the many positives, mute.

 

The first issue that has recently become apparent, is that the "infrastructure" doesn't allow for hotfixes. That seems like a major oversight. As we all know, Arma patches almost always break mods and relying on 3rd parties to create temporary hotfix's for your mod is just wrong. I understand that the current system makes publishing updates much easier for you, but you NEED to have a way to push smaller updates when something breaks.

 

And the second issue is compatibility. While having all your own systems (FCS, Armour system etc.) is great for people that only wish to use RHS by itself, there are a LOT of community's that use other mods that also have these systems *cough* ACE3 *cough* and there have been many of these community's have moved away from RHS due to the fact that RHS has some major issues with regards to compatibility with not only other mods but vanilla assets. I understand that it would be a lot of extra work, but having a "content only" version with better compatibility would be amazing.

 

 

Again, a huge thank you to the entire RHS team for your amazing work. I really do appreciate all you've done.

Let's see about those issues that deny the positives. Read the below as my own stance, rather than RHS, which has been neatly explained by Soul Assassin above before me. if for whatever reason you are the kind that takes things personal for whatever reason, please grab some salt and lemon.

 

1. Against the common commercial notion, mainly because RHS is NOT a commercial enterprise, i don't believe the user (i can't call our users clients since there is no money involved) is always right, or that it should be my own primary concern. On the contrary, i actually care a lot less than i usually show. I spend my free time doing what i do simply because i want to and it gives me a certain pleasure.

 

On the "infrastructure" was designed to simplify a lot of things, but mainly our own development process and test phase. That mean it was designed with us in mind, not you. Even the fact that we can push from repro to public really quickly is also a feature that was design for us to get away from spending a couple of days "prepping the public release".

 

I don't have words to express the amount of gratitude i have for Soul Assassin who put the system together and sheds a lot of the otherwise wasted time doing repetitive shit from everyone in the dev and test team. 

 

So i disagree, we don't NEED to have such a system in place, it would be nice to have but it's not worth the time that would need to be invested

 

2. No one is stopping anyone from making "compatibility patches" for whatever mod you wanna use besides RHS. For some reason you expect RHS to do it, and that is something i personally don't understand where it is coming from. We don't allow reverse engineering, repacking and redistributing the data we provide. BUT we actually said that anyone can do whatever external configs they see fit without even asking us for whatever permission.

So the question is, if there are so many people within this community that use other mods, why aren't they doing anything about it?

 

Amazing, great work :)

 

Will the Sniper variant be added too?

There is no such thing as sniper variant of AS VAL, there is however the VSS which is planned, as well as the S3RM

[mdtorch 39]

Alright, time for some criticism.

 

But to avoid this post being completely negative, I would first like to thank the entire RHS team for the amazing work you've all done. RHS is one of the highest quality mods, not just in Arma 3, but in the history of Arma. The detail in the models and textures, the amazing sounds, all of it is unparalleled and gives a much more rewarding experience.

 

However, there are a couple of issues that make all of the many positives, mute.

 

The first issue that has recently become apparent, is that the "infrastructure" doesn't allow for hotfixes. That seems like a major oversight. As we all know, Arma patches almost always break mods and relying on 3rd parties to create temporary hotfix's for your mod is just wrong. I understand that the current system makes publishing updates much easier for you, but you NEED to have a way to push smaller updates when something breaks.

 

And the second issue is compatibility. While having all your own systems (FCS, Armour system etc.) is great for people that only wish to use RHS by itself, there are a LOT of community's that use other mods that also have these systems *cough* ACE3 *cough* and there have been many of these community's have moved away from RHS due to the fact that RHS has some major issues with regards to compatibility with not only other mods but vanilla assets. I understand that it would be a lot of extra work, but having a "content only" version with better compatibility would be amazing.

 

 

Again, a huge thank you to the entire RHS team for your amazing work. I really do appreciate all you've done.

In before freetimeunpaidand.... oh...wait...

[EricJ 763]

Alright, time for some criticism.

 

But to avoid this post being completely negative, I would first like to thank the entire RHS team for the amazing work you've all done. RHS is one of the highest quality mods, not just in Arma 3, but in the history of Arma. The detail in the models and textures, the amazing sounds, all of it is unparalleled and gives a much more rewarding experience.

 

However, there are a couple of issues that make all of the many positives, mute.

 

The first issue that has recently become apparent, is that the "infrastructure" doesn't allow for hotfixes. That seems like a major oversight. As we all know, Arma patches almost always break mods and relying on 3rd parties to create temporary hotfix's for your mod is just wrong. I understand that the current system makes publishing updates much easier for you, but you NEED to have a way to push smaller updates when something breaks.

 

And the second issue is compatibility. While having all your own systems (FCS, Armour system etc.) is great for people that only wish to use RHS by itself, there are a LOT of community's that use other mods that also have these systems *cough* ACE3 *cough* and there have been many of these community's have moved away from RHS due to the fact that RHS has some major issues with regards to compatibility with not only other mods but vanilla assets. I understand that it would be a lot of extra work, but having a "content only" version with better compatibility would be amazing.

 

 

Again, a huge thank you to the entire RHS team for your amazing work. I really do appreciate all you've done.

 

I use AFRF along with other mods and not seeing much to no issues with my stuff.

 

And yeah the RHS crew said what they said.

 

But knowing me...

 

Modders are not contractually obligated or legally bound to provide any kind of mod or service for anything related to BIS or any other company for that matter given the open mod structure that BIS grants us to play with.. I.e. as PuFu and Co. said, they don't have any reason to work to anybody's schedule other than their own. I see it on a lot of topics, and the simple fact is that us modders are only bound by the EULAs (the game and for the Tools) so we don't have any obligation whatsoever to do shit for anybody. As they said, we take time out of ours to provide you with various mods, and of course in varying levels of  quality, but other than doing things legit we don't have to do shit for you. Nor does BIS contract us out to do mods for their game. And in saying that you the player has very little authority in determining anything for any sort of projects that are posted here.

[jone_kone 158]

 

2. Compatibility is a tricky thing. You want ACE, the next guy wants AGM, third guy want BW Mod. Where does it stop? We make the choice to do it our way, and it already takes uncountable hours already to do what we do. Also,most of us don't use ACE and thus have no interest in writing compatibility for something we do not use. Granted we wish the situation was better, but we'd rather spend our free time on doing what we like. But there are things like ACE compatibility which is doing exactly that already. Those guys are doing exactly that work because they use both and want to use them together. Those people are also the best and figuring what parts go where so we are happy with what they are doing.

 

So there you go, I hope it is a little more clear. We are not doing these things to upset anyone.

 

I´ve been trying to dig up some info on how the RHS damage model differs from the vanilla one and run across this thread (mainily to figure out tank and body armour weak spots :) ).

 

What was the original reasoning for doing a separate damage model for the units? It would seem that this is something that requires a lot of tuning for every new unit, especially each time BIS changes core functions? I´m no modder so I have little understanding of how the damage model works. The vanilla model might be a bit simplistic, but seems adequate...or?

[kaukassus 5]

I´ve been trying to dig up some info on how the RHS damage model differs from the vanilla one and run across this thread (mainily to figure out tank and body armour weak spots :) ).

 

What was the original reasoning for doing a separate damage model for the units? It would seem that this is something that requires a lot of tuning for every new unit, especially each time BIS changes core functions? I´m no modder so I have little understanding of how the damage model works. The vanilla model might be a bit simplistic, but seems adequate...or?

 

IIRC It's based on this concept (Someone correct me if I'm wrong here):

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Damage_Description

[Vasily.B 529]

Jeezus.... again complaining about compatibility. RHS team told everything i wanted to say, but there is one thing more.
I use following mods (sorry for long post):
- RHS Escalation
- ASR_AI3 or Bcombat (depend of mission i wanna play)
- CBA A3
- CUP_Terrains pack
- Dyna Sound from Laxemann
- Mao anims sway fix (Weapon swaying)
- MRG unit SFX (Characters are screaming when they're wounded, falling body makes sounds etc.)
- Kunduz Afghanistan
- Smarter Tanks (addon for AI in tanks)
- Rudygier Liability Insurance (Ai dont ride tanks on friendliy infantry)
- Personal Arsenal
- WW ai menu
- VTN core Russian Dubbing (temponrary, untill RHS resolve some problem on their end)
- RuPal RHS armor fix (fix for VESTS armor, temponrary until RHS resolve last update "collision")

Now, since around 6 months back (or even more), i didnt meet any serious bug, more - everything was flawesly. Only since famous 1.54 update which brings many changes, lot of things are messed.
Off course every have diferent taste - for me ACE interaction is little too much time consuming, but movement, weight in inventory, stamina, etc are something that this game must have - but i meet compatibility problems as well - but (Let me write this specially here, as i see lot of peoples are using ACE 3 and they may dont look on ACE Thread, then they write about compatibility HERE) ACE 3 is modular mod - that mean if you see some not working module (For example ace_scopes or ace_fcs - rounds from RHS tank are flying in diferent place, rounds from SVD are going more to right) just delete those 2 files and problem is gone! You can delete all modules you dont like and it will work, but dont forget about depedencies of some modules - all is on ACE 3 wiki.
Now Back on thread of RHS.
They was (are) first so serious content modders that started to make so big mod in arma 3 (there was VTN as i remember) so they designed their systems for THEM MAINLY, beacuse there wasnt so famous mods using together with RHS, RHS was (for me) the replacement of already maded mods about Russians and USA, so who need more M4 or AK addons/mods if you have it in RHS? Off course there are weapons/vehicles/CONTENT not present in RHS you may love - but is there sense to download some addon/mod just for 2 weapons that will break the gameplay joy, compatibility, and overall whole functionality of RHS?

[PuFu 4600]

I´ve been trying to dig up some info on how the RHS damage model differs from the vanilla one and run across this thread (mainily to figure out tank and body armour weak spots :) ).

 

What was the original reasoning for doing a separate damage model for the units? It would seem that this is something that requires a lot of tuning for every new unit, especially each time BIS changes core functions? I´m no modder so I have little understanding of how the damage model works. The vanilla model might be a bit simplistic, but seems adequate...or?

We don't have a separate damage model for units. For 1.54 the way damage model work for units has been changed, and since we have a lot of custom models (from units/camo to vests, helmets etc) we had to update those all. Inheritance works only for configs, not models, but even for configs we don't simply inherit from the vanilla base classes or individual classes.

have a look here:

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Soldier_Protection

IIRC It's based on this concept (Someone correct me if I'm wrong here):

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Damage_Description

Yes, it is, for everything related to armored vehicles or vehicles in general

[sunrrrise 14]

If you refer to the operative units, then no, now you have the Raiders' teams. Which are the ones we are planning to implement in the future.  :pistols:

 

Can't wait for that!

[SAS_Raptor 30]

Off course there are weapons/vehicles/CONTENT not present in RHS you may love - but is there sense to download some addon/mod just for 2 weapons that will break the gameplay joy, compatibility, and overall whole functionality of RHS?

Actually there is a good reason, namely if you want to play/simulate a country other than Russia or the USA. For example the German Arma community is pretty big and there are many clans playing as German Army ("Bundeswehr") with modded German tanks and anti-tank weapons. For those clans the lack of compatibility with RHS is a major issue, and a serious argument for other mods with lower quality assets like CUP. Now I get that the RHS developers don't own us anything and that they can't/won't provide compatibility with other mods. However the problem persists, and at times when there is no compatibility patch available, some communities must make a tough decision for or against RHS :(

[ruPal 143]

However the problem persists, and at times when there is no compatibility patch available, some communities must make a tough decision for or against RHS :(

Or make compatibility mods by yourself and publish it on Armaholic. There is no any other solution in the world of free to play mods.

[kaukassus 5]

Or make compatibility mods by yourself and publish it on Armaholic. There is no any other solution in the world of free to play mods.

 

 

The Issue mentioned (Tanks from other Addons vs RHS Tanks) can't actually be resolved trough compatibility mods, as it requires changes to the model's Fire Geometry to properly work, which can't be done since Neither MLOD's are released, nor is that permitted in the RHS License Terms.

 

I have tried several ways to compensate for this, like Adjusting hitpoints of RHS vehicles or Damage of non-rhs Launchers/Cannons, but down the road these changes do more harm than good and lead to unknown behavior.

I would have loved to have a solution using a config patch.

[ruPal 143]

The Issue mentioned (Tanks from other Addons vs RHS Tanks) can't actually be resolved trough compatibility mods, as it requires changes to the model's Fire Geometry to properly work, which can't be done since Neither MLOD's are released, nor is that permitted in the RHS License Terms.

 

I have tried several ways to compensate for this, like Adjusting hitpoints of RHS vehicles or Damage of non-rhs Launchers/Cannons, but down the road these changes do more harm than good and lead to unknown behavior.

I would have loved to have a solution using a config patch.

Have to agree in that.

[rekkless 240]

Can anyone shed some light on what exactly is so uncompatible with RHS and other mods?

 

Our group uses a lot of other weapons and uniforms mods and have never had any problems or at least nothing game breaking.

We currnetly use:
RHS

SMA

RH Pistol Pack

Euroforce

Csat Snow Tigers

TRYK Multiplay uniforms

all with ACE, (AGM before it)

 

and in the past we have use Massi Vehicles and Weapons

 

at no time was anyone not able to kill another player or AI unit.

We have used Titan rockets against T-80s and RPGs against Hunters really without any problems.

 

So what is the big issue people have with RHS and other mods? And why is it so game breaking? Why has RHS been built this way when so many other mods can work together so well?

[kaukassus 5]

Can anyone shed some light on what exactly is so uncompatible with RHS and other mods?

 

Our group uses a lot of other weapons and uniforms mods and have never had any problems or at least nothing game breaking.

We currnetly use:

RHS

SMA

RH Pistol Pack

Euroforce

Csat Snow Tigers

TRYK Multiplay uniforms

all with ACE, (AGM before it)

 

and in the past we have use Massi Vehicles and Weapons

 

at no time was anyone not able to kill another player or AI unit.

We have used Titan rockets against T-80s and RPGs against Hunters really without any problems.

 

So what is the big issue people have with RHS and other mods? And why is it so game breaking? Why has RHS been built this way when so many other mods can work together so well?

 

First some background infos.

 

I run with a group that prior to switching to CUP Vehicles used RHS. We also used CUP Weapons (For Launchers as an example), ACE and Various other addons like HLC...

We usually mix around different kinds of Factions and Vehicle types to not play the same factions over and over.

 

When I talk compatibility, I mainly mean the Vehicle Damage System of RHS in this context.

 

So We had one OP some months ago, which was about Hamas vs IDF. Hamas had Technicals, RPG's while the IDF had Namer's (Vanilla) and HMMWV's.

After playing for a while we noticed that RHS RPG's literally no damage to the Namer IFV.

 

When the mission ended, I did conduct some tests with the RPG against the Namer.

I have given up on trying after I spent some 20 PG-7V Rockets into the Back of the Chassis, and the Namer was still good to go.

 

I continued compatibility tests with RHS Vehicles, Mainly Comparisons with RHS MBT's aginst Vanilla MBT's. Vanilla MBT's required far more ammo to kill RHS MBT's due to what I assume is that they don't penetrate RHS Armor for the most part due to different configurations.

 

RHS And Vanilla Rocket and Cannons are 100% compatible agianst Unarmoured vehicles. APC's work most of the time, and IFV's and MBT's soemtimes work. However required far more Ammo to reach critical damage.

 

There's more I probably forgot but this is some of the things I experienced when Mixing Vanilla and RHS Armour and Launchers.

 

I do not condemn RHS for their decision. Reversing the damage model would not make sense and the effort would be too large for something that was done by-design.

For this reason my group uses CUP Vehicles as opposed to RHS, due to better compatibility with Vanilla and other vehicles, which is the main reason we used RHS . I myself still use RHS Alongside CUP

since I do like certain assets of it and simply use whichever assets work best in certain scenarios. This does not mean that RHS is bad. The work they have done is quite impressive. It simply didn't fully fit into our use-case.

 

Edit:

Forgot to mention that I did these damage model tests with RHS Only to verify that no other component could have an impact in it.

[PuFu 4600]

Actually there is a good reason, namely if you want to play/simulate a country other than Russia or the USA. For example the German Arma community is pretty big and there are many clans playing as German Army ("Bundeswehr") with modded German tanks and anti-tank weapons. For those clans the lack of compatibility with RHS is a major issue, and a serious argument for other mods with lower quality assets like CUP. Now I get that the RHS developers don't own us anything and that they can't/won't provide compatibility with other mods. However the problem persists, and at times when there is no compatibility patch available, some communities must make a tough decision for or against RHS :(

again, no one is stopping anyone from that pretty big german community to create their own compatibility addon between RHS and whatever other mod they use (if it is the BWMOD, then there shouldn't be any real issues last time i've tried it worked really well).

 

The Issue mentioned (Tanks from other Addons vs RHS Tanks) can't actually be resolved trough compatibility mods, as it requires changes to the model's Fire Geometry to properly work, which can't be done since Neither MLOD's are released, nor is that permitted in the RHS License Terms.

 

I have tried several ways to compensate for this, like Adjusting hitpoints of RHS vehicles or Damage of non-rhs Launchers/Cannons, but down the road these changes do more harm than good and lead to unknown behavior.

I would have loved to have a solution using a config patch.

well, the main issue is not with our own addons tbh. The main issue is that pretty much no one else actually follows this in their addons https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Damage_Description(written by Olds). I mean everyone is simply copy pasting BI's way, which is very shallow when it comes to armored vehicles. The ideal solution would be to have BI actually fix all the buffed out values for their bullet configs, bisurfs etc. I don't even wanna go to the fact that everything in vanilla is simly hitpoint based, although the system is in place for a better aproach (ie: you can take out anything out using a pistol and enough bullets). If you calculate some of these values yourself, the RHA vanilla values are insane.

some prefer more detailed simulation (including us). Some prefer to mix-match every other addon out there, or simply add addons that represent their countries. We only have control on our own content and work.

 

That being said, i am not sure how we could fix the other vehicles you are talking about, since only their owners have access to their MLODs, so neither us or you can do anything about it...

 

Can you be more precise when you say Tanks from other Addons?

 

Case of point: we cannot, and we don't aim to please everyone, mainly because it is absolutely impossible in the current context

[kaukassus 5]

again, no one is stopping anyone from that pretty big german community to create their own compatibility addon between RHS and whatever other mod they use (if it is the BWMOD, then there shouldn't be any real issues last time i've tried it worked really well).

 

well, the main issue is not with our own addons tbh. The main issue is that pretty much no one else actually follows this in their addons https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Damage_Description(written by Olds). I mean everyone is simply copy pasting BI's way, which is very shallow when it comes to armored vehicles. The ideal solution would be to have BI actually fix all the buffed out values for their bullet configs, bisurfs etc. I don't even wanna go to the fact that everything in vanilla is simly hitpoint based, although the system is in place for a better aproach (ie: you can take out anything out using a pistol and enough bullets). If you calculate some of these values yourself, the RHA vanilla values are insane.

some prefer more detailed simulation (including us). Some prefer to mix-match every other addon out there, or simply add addons that represent their countries. We only have control on our own content and work.

 

That being said, i am not sure how we could fix the other vehicles you are talking about, since only their owners have access to their MLODs, so neither us or you can do anything about it...

 

Can you be more precise when you say Tanks from other Addons?

 

Case of point: we cannot, and we don't aim to please everyone, mainly because it is absolutely impossible in the current context

 

Well, with Tanks from other addons I guess was pretty much aimed at Vanilla for the most part.

 

I do agree that the best fix would be for BI to fix their models and configs, which in turn would be motivation for addon makers to implement this change into their addons as well (Just like the recent changes to the vests for example).

 

I do also agree that the Vanilla Damage system as it currently is is not the most optimal and I would prefer the Damage System RHS uses. However I do somewhat prefer compatibility over realism. But thats my use-case, and I do compensate this trugh using only using assets that work well with each other.

 

And yes, I am aware that this is something not worth fixing, since it is intentional after all and is a change that is initially done on the model level, so it's up to the Indivitual Addon maker or BI itself (For Vanilla assets) to apply these changes.

 

Personally I'm Happy with how things are right now on my side. My post simply described the problems (or rather somewhat impossibility) with writing a compatibility addon for the damage system.

[officeramr 269]

AS VAL and VSS are pretty much the same thing (in terms of its looks)=, i couldn't think of its name

 

Will the VSS have a wooden stock? 

[Redphoenix 1540]

Will the VSS have a wooden stock?

Tell me then, what it would be with one out of metal.

Oh.

Wait....

[bakerman 247]

@kaukassus

One quick google could have saved you a lot of trouble. The RAM mod makes RHS's HEAT/armor simulation compatible with virtually all other content. http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=24451

 

@officeramr

A wooden stock is the only option you have with the VSS.

[maquez 141]

Alright, time for some criticism.

 

But to avoid this post being completely negative, I would first like to thank the entire RHS team for the amazing work you've all done. RHS is one of the highest quality mods, not just in Arma 3, but in the history of Arma. The detail in the models and textures, the amazing sounds, all of it is unparalleled and gives a much more rewarding experience.

 

However, there are a couple of issues that make all of the many positives, mute.

 

The first issue that has recently become apparent, is that the "infrastructure" doesn't allow for hotfixes. That seems like a major oversight. As we all know, Arma patches almost always break mods and relying on 3rd parties to create temporary hotfix's for your mod is just wrong. I understand that the current system makes publishing updates much easier for you, but you NEED to have a way to push smaller updates when something breaks.

 

And the second issue is compatibility. While having all your own systems (FCS, Armour system etc.) is great for people that only wish to use RHS by itself, there are a LOT of community's that use other mods that also have these systems *cough* ACE3 *cough* and there have been many of these community's have moved away from RHS due to the fact that RHS has some major issues with regards to compatibility with not only other mods but vanilla assets. I understand that it would be a lot of extra work, but having a "content only" version with better compatibility would be amazing.

 

 

Again, a huge thank you to the entire RHS team for your amazing work. I really do appreciate all you've done.

 

you know what ...

if you so urgent need compatibility with ACE or any other mods/addons download notepad ++ and learn how to write addon configurations/script language,

then do it by yourself instead of annoying and bother the RHS Developer Team again and again

 

you should be happy and grateful towards them that they made us so an outstanding armory piercing system...

not very long ago you could destroy a BI tank with a rifle ...

 

patience is not your strength it seems ... whats the problem with download this fix https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/186368-rupal-rhs-armor-patch-bonus/

and wait until they fix it ???

 

holy crap ...

[kaukassus 5]

@kaukassus

One quick google could have saved you a lot of trouble. The RAM mod makes RHS's HEAT/armor simulation compatible with virtually all other content. http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=24451

 

Yeah I'm actually using it since a few months, It does improve things quite a lot in that regard (Actually forgot that I was using that, and that it was a thing. I haven't played arma in a while.). Still had occasional cases where I needed multiple ATGM's to take down an MBT. These don't really occurr on a regular basis tho.