RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

[Wilco 944]

Ah gotcha, thanks, I got out before that approval and article was released. Bugs me a lot less now haha. 

 

Most victors are using M4's now.  We (LAR) have been using them for years.  

 

One thing that always struck me as kind of curious about the USMCs decision to do this is, again AFAIK, the M4s they are going to be using are pretty much your standard government issue ones of 15 years ago. They will have the RIS but are still using the 3 round burst trigger that the Army has gotten rid of due to accuracy issues / inconsistent trigger pull and are still using the standard thickness barrels unlike the thicker, heavy barrel the Army went with for their newly upgraded M4A1s. My thinking on this is (and I have no way of knowing this is true, just a guess) is that since the Marine Corps is notoriously underfunded, its probably a budget issue. When announcing the switch to the M4, they made a big point in saying that these carbines were already in inventory, they did not have to buy any new weapons to make the switch happen. I think after a time they will launch their own M4 upgrade program by saying "yep, we used it, here's what we didn't like and want to change." Also by doing things this way they won't be shoehorned into just adopting whatever upgrades the Army has decided on. This is just a gut feeling but you may see the USMC go for free-floating barrels for their M4s in the future.

 

We have the burst selection but you'll never see it used.  We used to do a shoot where it included one or two three round bursts at 25 yards but that's long gone.  Recon Battalions still have the A1's with the auto selection on theirs as far as I remember.  

 

Our funding is hurting right now but we are doing as Marines do and making the most of it.

[dragon01 902]

Yeah. It seems that in fact, marines hate the 3-round burst. :) Terminal Lance says it best:

[war_lord 934]

The burst mechanism screws up the trigger pull apparently. As others have said, going for the M4 rather then the M4A1 was probably budget related.

[Will_The_Gamer_PT 25]

This M4/M16 talk made me curious about one think. Will the ACOG sights ever get tweaked, right now they are pretty hard to use at medium to close range, feeling more like a long range scope as the scope image just sticks to the screen, making it pretty hard to aim from non stabilized positions. I think the correct way to implement them is like the RCO from Arma 3 Vannila, making the scope feel more natural.

[ineptaphid 6413]

This M4/M16 talk made me curious about one think. Will the ACOG sights ever get tweaked, right now they are pretty hard to use at medium to close range, feeling more like a long range scope as the scope image just sticks to the screen, making it pretty hard to aim from non stabilized positions. I think the correct way to implement them is like the RCO from Arma 3 Vannila, making the scope feel more natural.

Go to your RHS settings-you can make the ACOG 2D,3D or PIP

[reyhard 2082]

This M4/M16 talk made me curious about one think. Will the ACOG sights ever get tweaked, right now they are pretty hard to use at medium to close range, feeling more like a long range scope as the scope image just sticks to the screen, making it pretty hard to aim from non stabilized positions. I think the correct way to implement them is like the RCO from Arma 3 Vannila, making the scope feel more natural.

Launch mission -> Press Escape -> Press on "RHS Menu Options" -> click on a listbox near Prefered Optic and pick 3d or pip

[Will_The_Gamer_PT 25]

1 done, 50 to go.

Countries in Europe...

Albania

Andorra

Armenia

Austria

Azerbaijan

Belarus

Belgium

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Bulgaria

Croatia

Cyprus

Czech Republic

Denmark

Estonia

Finland

France

Georgia

Germany

Greece

Hungary

Iceland

Ireland

Italy

Kazakhstan

Kosovo

Latvia

Liechtenstein

Lithuania

Luxembourg

Macedonia

Malta

Moldova

Monaco

Montenegro

Netherlands

Norway

Poland

Portugal

Romania

Russia

San Marino

Serbia

Slovakia

Slovenia

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

Turkey

Ukraine

United Kingdom

Vatican City

 

 

1. m163 might make an appearance but don't count on it, same with avenger

2. tunguska was in development, but unfortunately the dev that was doing it has been unreachable for quite some time

3. Strykers, just as LAVs are on the wish list

4. IL-76 no comment

5. MI-28 is actively being worked on

6. T-14 is being develop externally, will be injected in RHS when it is done

7. BMPT terminator - no comment, if ever, it will be present in GREF

 

GREF does not represent the military of a certain country, so it "won't be done" anytime soon. Do no expect other European country forces...

 

When i suggested Euroforces a was taking about something a lot more simple, just maybe 2-3 Nations: UK, Germany and maybe France, UK will probably be the easier as they were present in Arma 2 OA, alloying for some asset sharing (with a lot of reworking since Arma 2, and hell, even sometimes Arma 3 is not up to your standards :D ), and some newer additions, mostly on the MBT department. In the other hand Germany (and france) would need a LOT of work from scratch.

 

Also in the Mod scenario This nations would not be so far fetched, since in a USA vs Russia Scenario this nations would be called upon as being the other most powerfull members of NATO

 

Also, No word on the MI-26, as i think it would be and excellent addition for Russia since they lack heavy transport, and if i'm ot mistaken, it was in arma 2 (same for the Tunguska, even has a "simple" port as a placeholder for later re texturing and re modeling)

[Will_The_Gamer_PT 25]

Launch mission -> Press Escape -> Press on "RHS Menu Options" -> click on a listbox near Prefered Optic and pick 3d or pip

Thank you very much :D, sorry for the inconvenience

[dragon01 902]

No, Mi-26 wasn't in ArmA2. ArmA1 (I think) had a Mi-6 (a similarly humongous helo), but that's an old, outdated model and an old, outdated helo, as well. Russia no longer uses that one. A Mi-26 would be nice, but I'd rather see a Russian counterpart to the C-130, ideally with ViV support. RHS has a ton of air-droppable Russian armor, so it'd be of great use to VDV.

[Broseph_Stalin90 72]

Most victors are using M4's now.  We (LAR) have been using them for years.  

 

 

I was in a victor unit myself, although apparently they decided to say fuck it to our unit doing anything except UDP's for the foreseeable future, perhaps that's why we still had M16's.

[ineptaphid 6413]

Thank you very much :D, sorry for the inconvenience

Asking questions is not an inconvenience, it s what the forum is for.

[war_lord 934]

When i suggested Euroforces a was taking about something a lot more simple, just maybe 2-3 Nations: UK, Germany and maybe France, UK will probably be the easier as they were present in Arma 2 OA, alloying for some asset sharing (with a lot of reworking since Arma 2, and hell, even sometimes Arma 3 is not up to your standards :D ), and some newer additions, mostly on the MBT department. In the other hand Germany (and france) would need a LOT of work from scratch.

 

Also in the Mod scenario This nations would not be so far fetched, since in a USA vs Russia Scenario this nations would be called upon as being the other most powerfull members of NATO

 

Also, No word on the MI-26, as i think it would be and excellent addition for Russia since they lack heavy transport, and if i'm ot mistaken, it was in arma 2 (same for the Tunguska, even has a "simple" port as a placeholder for later re texturing and re modeling)

What you don't seem to understand is that something like RHS takes a huge amount of manpower, time and effort. Maybe make fully detailed and accurate representations of three country's armed forces, and then tell RHS it's "simple". 

[wsxcgy 1960]

When i suggested Euroforces a was taking about something a lot more simple, just maybe 2-3 Nations: UK, Germany and maybe France, UK will probably be the easier as they were present in Arma 2 OA, alloying for some asset sharing (with a lot of reworking since Arma 2, and hell, even sometimes Arma 3 is not up to your standards :D ), and some newer additions, mostly on the MBT department. In the other hand Germany (and france) would need a LOT of work from scratch.

 

Also in the Mod scenario This nations would not be so far fetched, since in a USA vs Russia Scenario this nations would be called upon as being the other most powerfull members of NATO

 

Also, No word on the MI-26, as i think it would be and excellent addition for Russia since they lack heavy transport, and if i'm ot mistaken, it was in arma 2 (same for the Tunguska, even has a "simple" port as a placeholder for later re texturing and re modeling)

There is already plenty of mods out there for the big NATO members like France, Germany, and the UK. For RHS to divert their resources to something irrelevant to their objectives and something already done, instead of working on bringing us fancy new toys for the US and RF factions, is just stupid.

[neodyn 14]

I remember reading that the updaters can lead to issues. I'd probably dl the torrent and try to reinstall. I've been using RHS with ACE and around 50 other mods and haven't had any issues with it.

 

Yes in my case made an full reinstall of RHS and now everything works great.

Thx

[Will_The_Gamer_PT 25]

Well, guys, sorry if you misunderstood my thoughts. When i say "simple" its when compared to other work required and by itself is a very hard task, that's why i used the inverted commas.

Second I was never Intending to Euroforces as a top priority scenario, just as possible project if the RHS team wants to make a new pack, not even needing to be during Arma 3 lifespan

[dragon01 902]

There's no point, really. European armies are being worked on by other teams. French (OFRP), Spanish (FFAA), Fins (FDF), Swedes (SFP), Germans (BWMod), Italians (Pedagne) and Poles (PAF) all have their own, big mod teams dedicated to their armies. I'm pretty sure that there are more "national" mods I don't remember now. It'd be much more sensible to let them handle it. If they ever need anything from RHS, they're free to negotiate with the team about asset sharing. In fact, RHS used to be the Russian "national mod" until they decided they wanted to do US units, too. In ArmA2 neither USAF nor GREF were a thing and AFRF was just called RHS (at least IIRC).

[Will_The_Gamer_PT 25]

There's no point, really. European armies are being worked on by other teams. French (OFRP), Spanish (FFAA), Fins (FDF), Swedes (SFP), Germans (BWMod), Italians (Pedagne) and Poles (PAF) all have their own, big mod teams dedicated to their armies. I'm pretty sure that there are more "national" mods I don't remember now. It'd be much more sensible to let them handle it. If they ever need anything from RHS, they're free to negotiate with the team about asset sharing. In fact, RHS used to be the Russian "national mod" until they decided they wanted to do US units, too. In ArmA2 neither USAF nor GREF were a thing and AFRF was just called RHS (at least IIRC).

well, no problem with that, sorry for the trouble

[andersson 285]

Your point about european nations did bring up a question for me to RHS:

 

How difficult is it to make compability configs between other mods and RHS? I have worked alot with configs in earlier games (made my own full conversion for OFP in 2003 and has always tinkered around, only released material was MarkXIIs HiFi soundmod for armed assault where I did all configs), so my question is more about how much is done differently and what is not possible with config changes (any changes in p3d regarding damage as an example)? I know you did go your own way and most other mods follow BI compability.

I would guestimate that, say for example, a compability patch for OFRP and RHS is quite a task. But how much must be changed (ammo, weapons, units) or is it maybe even impossible for a 3rd person without full access?

 

Reason for my question is that RHS is the backbone of A3 for me. No RHS no game. But in the future it could be nice to add a new faction from all the nice mods that are created.

[megazogg 14]

Hello, RHS guys!

First of all, I'd like to thank you for continuous work on the mod, the latest addition - GREF is really interesting. But I have some questions:

1. Will you add in the future the ability for AFRF troops to ride on the armor of BMP(BMD) 3(4), like you did with older versions of these IFVs?

2. Can anyone explain to me were can I find any tutorial of how I can replace default gear and weapons for soldiers (for example - vest or helmet, and I am not talking about replacing gear for player or any particular squad, but for the entire faction) with the script (if such thing is possible at all)?  

[zagor64bz 1225]

 

2. Can anyone explain to me were can I find any tutorial of how I can replace default gear and weapons for soldiers (for example - vest or helmet, and I am not talking about replacing gear for player or any particular squad, but for the entire faction) with the script (if such thing is possible at all)?  

Hey mate...ever see this? 

https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/164627-shocks-redressing-script/

Hope it help, as this is a brilliant script.

Ciao.

[megazogg 14]

Hey mate...ever see this? 

https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/164627-shocks-redressing-script/

Hope it help, as this is a brilliant script.

Ciao.

Thanks, will try it out at once!

[21bcharlie 14]

Loving the mod after the apex update. Especially the sounds. Very immersive! While rhs always had decent sounds these new ones set the bar IMO for the rest of the modding community. Nothing stops me from playing a mod quicker than terrible sounds. Really love the attention to detail the team has. Rhs is what arma 3 should have been from the start. Looking forward to the next update. Fingers crossed for a scar-h, marine amphibious vehicles, maybe a sv-98 for the ruskies? :p

One thing I would like to point out is the AK74u skin seems a little too clean compared to the rest of the AK family skins. Especially considering its age and no longer being manufactured. Small gripe and I'm sure the team has more important stuff to work on.

There's no point, really. European armies are being worked on by other teams. French (OFRP), Spanish (FFAA), Fins (FDF), Swedes (SFP), Germans (BWMod), Italians (Pedagne) and Poles (PAF) all have their own, big mod teams dedicated to their armies. I'm pretty sure that there are more "national" mods I don't remember now. It'd be much more sensible to let them handle it. If they ever need anything from RHS, they're free to negotiate with the team about asset sharing. In fact, RHS used to be the Russian "national mod" until they decided they wanted to do US units, too. In ArmA2 neither USAF nor GREF were a thing and AFRF was just called RHS (at least IIRC).

Those are all decent mods but RHS is the pinnacle of the modding community for arma 3 IMO. Unfortunately, at least for me, RHS is so good that it's ruined every other unit mod out there. Since the latest release I've DL'd project Opfor, BAF, French, Swedish, Chinese, and Thai mod packs, hoping to have some different factions to play with in conjunction with rhs. Loaded them up played them for 10 minutes and then deleted them all except POpfor (no surprise being its mainly rhs content).. Mainly as I stated earlier is because of the sound quality in those mods. RHS has spoiled me for what I expect from mods now. BAF has pretty good stuff, now if only it used RHS sounds. Might try the BW mod again, maybe it will stack up. Lol

[dragon01 902]

Well, complain to the other mod authors, then. :) Unfortunately, this outstanding quality is exactly why RHS isn't very suited for expanding its scope even more. Making assets this amazing takes a lot of time and manpower. They're already working hard on things currently in scope. I agree that some improvements to sounds would be called for in those other mods, as well as (optional) configs balancing them for RHS armor and such, but this has to be done by these other teams.

 

I'm going to get around the problem by simply having the player always use RHS stuff in my missions, with Project Opfor as enemies. If you cast lower quality mods as enemies or non-playable allies, its less jarring than when the player has to use their gear.

[Bitesrad 481]

As I was browsing imfdb I came across the arma 3 section and was surprised to find that RHS has a page dedicated to it as well. Still has a lot of empty entries though, anyone bored enough to help fill in the blanks?  :D

[21bcharlie 14]

Well, complain to the other mod authors, then. :) Unfortunately, this outstanding quality is exactly why RHS isn't very suited for expanding its scope even more. Making assets this amazing takes a lot of time and manpower. They're already working hard on things currently in scope. I agree that some improvements to sounds would be called for in those other mods, as well as (optional) configs balancing them for RHS armor and such, but this has to be done by these other teams.

 

I'm going to get around the problem by simply having the player always use RHS stuff in my missions, with Project Opfor as enemies. If you cast lower quality mods as enemies or non-playable allies, its less jarring than when the player has to use their gear.

 

Oh i understand it completely.  And when its all said and done id much rather have in depth and well polished units and equipment from the factions already present in the mod than a bunch of half assed or incomplete ones from varying nations. Since im a US army vet anyway my favorite faction is already present, and if i had to choose one thats what it would be. I think a lot of people ask for such things just because we know the quality work and effort that the rhs team put into the mod, and we just want to see that done for other units and factions. Short answer is those other mods need to step their game up! But thats in a perfect world and being realistic about it people have lives they need to live too.