RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

[reyhard 2082]

3 hours ago, MartinBM said:

Hi thanks for update, why AI can't use other hellfires than L version ?

They do use other hellfires

[SnakeDocc 72]

IHADSS is a really cool addition, nice work!

[reyhard 2082]

9 hours ago, RicHornet said:

I want to thank the RHS devs for this latest patch/fix!

 

The Apache is now combat effective at night.

Hellfire missiles accuracy is now better, although I noticed that the Laser Guided version of the Hellfire namely the AGM-114K seems to still miss a lot (although less than in the previous version) so IMO this should be looked at.

The Radar Hellfire (AGM-114L) accuracy issue seems to be fixed now.

 

Finally I have two questions:

- I still can't select the Radar AA mode. What I did was to map the "User 10" to a button of my Thrustmaster HOTAS Cougar and while flying to put the Radar page in one of the MFDs and press the joystick button that I mapped for the "User 10" control but nothing happens.

- The only way that I know in order to change the HMD mode is to select MasterSafe (which selects one mode) and to select a weapon (which selected another mode) but is there any other way to change between HMD modes? 

Thanks in advance for replies.

There is also transition & hover mode which are also handled automatically - there is no way to switch between them manually atm. As for joystick button - did you tried if it's working with any other button? I heard before that some of the keys were not detected by inputAction scripting command and it might be sort of Arma limitation in this case.

 

As for AGM-114K AI accuracy, I think it's pretty satisfactory since when AI misses target it usually make sense like target driving behind obstacle or lost lock because of excessive pilot manoeuvres. Both missiles are using same simulation parameters so if laser guided missile misses it target it most likely caused by laser marker being moved off the target. Of course, if you have some specific examples where there is easy to reproduce situation where missile consistently misses the target then let me know & fill ticket on http://feedback.rhsmods.org/view_all_bug_page.php

 

 In this video for example you can see that first missile hit the building after target moved behind the obstacle - unfortunately scripting of dynamic target change in such case would be pretty difficult and hard to debug at later stage so I sticked to most simply solution & let the missile hit obstacle. Rest of the missiles were hitting target pretty reliable though - both from fully AI controlled vehicles & from pilot seat.

 

[sammael 366]

also I can`t move reticle on SU-25 HUD. no matter which button I defined  in customcontrols ..

[RicHornet 0]

6 hours ago, reyhard said:

There is also transition & hover mode which are also handled automatically - there is no way to switch between them manually atm. As for joystick button - did you tried if it's working with any other button? I heard before that some of the keys were not detected by inputAction scripting command and it might be sort of Arma limitation in this case.

 

First of all, thanks for the reply reyhard.

Ok, I see that the HMD modes change automatically (and also dependent on MasterSafe). I suspected that, however I just asked in order to be sure.

 

Regarding this AA/AG Radar mode switch, yes you are right. I mapped the "User 10" command to my keyboard's numpad  '/' key and it worked fine.

Note however that "User 1", "User 2" which change the left and right MFDs respectively and "User 11" which toggles IHADSS works perfectly when mapped on my joystick. I don't know if this helps?

 

6 hours ago, reyhard said:

As for AGM-114K AI accuracy, I think it's pretty satisfactory since when AI misses target it usually make sense like target driving behind obstacle or lost lock because of excessive pilot manoeuvres. Both missiles are using same simulation parameters so if laser guided missile misses it target it most likely caused by laser marker being moved off the target. Of course, if you have some specific examples where there is easy to reproduce situation where missile consistently misses the target then let me know & fill ticket on http://feedback.rhsmods.org/view_all_bug_page.php

 

I think that I've found the culprit here. From my testings it seems that the Hellfire (both variants) when fired on a profile which dictates the missile to fly in a direct flight path (towards the target) that the missile has an odd spiraling flight behavior, very similar to the Russian Vikhr missile or usually a Laser beam riding guided missile. Since the Hellfire is an Active Laser guided missile it should have a more straight flight behavior. From my testings I believe that such (spiraling) behavior when fired on a direct path makes the missile much less accurate and/or the chances of hitting a non-vital part of a vehicle (specially if it is heavily armored like a MBT) much higher which could also and sometimes gives the idea that the missile is "missing the target".

This seems to concur with further tests that I did in which modes like LOAL-LO and LOAL-HI seems to be much more precise since in these modes the missile doesn't seem to exhibit the "spiraling" flight behavior.

Moreover, the difference in precision that I noticed previously between the AGM-114L (Radar guided) and the AGM-114K (Laser Guided) seems to be "in-line" with what I mentioned on previous paragraphs since by default the AI gunner launches both hellifre variants on LOBL mode but while the LOBL mode on the AGM-114K (laser) makes the missile fly towards the target in that "spiraling" straight flight path, the LOBL mode on the AGM-114K (Radar) makes the missile fly on a "ballistic" flight path similar to what happens on LOAL-LO and LOAL-Hi modes.

 

Anyway, I opened a ticket regarding this issue here (with more details):

http://feedback.rhsmods.org/view.php?id=4473  

 

[deltagamer 612]

I really like the whole airmobile idea behind some of the vehicles you guys have wonderfully done and I really look forward to seeing more development in that area.

 

I have a question regarding the m1078a1r sov and m1084a1r sov. Are these also considered airmobile? It's an interesting type of vehicle and could potentially be really good especially for airdrops if that's even possible, I saw a slight discussion about it further back but would like to know if the rhs socom versions would be considered capable of lvad. Also is it possible to see an extension to those vehicles, such as having the capacity to carry more troops especially for the m1084a1r sov or even different weapon setups for the m1084a1r sov. I would be happy to help with that if it ain't a priority right now.

 

There's an m240 that can be added to the front of the vehicle from the looks of things:

 

As of now some trucks have issues with loading into aircraft so I made a ticket: http://feedback.rhsmods.org/view.php?id=4477

[armyinf 33]

Hi, so I am trying to do a historic campaign, and making life easier for the mission makers, have it so the USMC M1A1 tanks spawned via a new faction I am creating using the right company/ platoon symbol. Example of what I am doing 

 

	class MEU_M1A1_SA_TUSKi_d_1: rhsusf_m1a1fep_d
	{
		displayname = "Titan 2-1 D";
    	faction = "meu_faction_d";
		crew = "rhsusf_usmc_marpat_d_rifleman_m4";	
	};

Note that is from a 3rd party config.cpp internal to this project, nothing of RHS was opened or touched aside from the base class call. 

 

Whats the best way to force that specific one to spawn with say  2nd Platoon 1st Tank, platoon symbol.. even if spawned via zeus mid mission. 

[Ivanoff.N 61]

Hey.

Does anybody know, how to put AI in russian tank NSVT seat via scrip ?

I can`t seem to find this anywhere.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

14 hours ago, deltagamer said:

such as having the capacity to carry more troops especially for the m1084a1r

No. M1084s are specifically cargo support trucks, not troop carriers.

Hence why they have a crane on the back, rather than a folding tailgate

[reyhard 2082]

3 hours ago, Ivanoff.N said:

Hey.

Does anybody know, how to put AI in russian tank NSVT seat via scrip ?

I can`t seem to find this anywhere.

params["_vehicle"];

private _commander = commander _vehicle;

_commander action ['TurnOut', _vehicle];
_commander action ['moveToTurret', _vehicle, [0,1]];
[_vehicle,[[0,0],true]] remoteExecCall ['lockTurret'];

[this] execVM "nameOfScript.sqf"

 

If you want to have rest of the crew turned in then switch behavior of vehicle to combat mode - commander should stay on his seat.

18 hours ago, RicHornet said:

 

Note however that "User 1", "User 2" which change the left and right MFDs respectively and "User 11" which toggles IHADSS works perfectly when mapped on my joystick. I don't know if this helps?

Could you write down which exactly key are you using for it? (Joystick #11 or something like that?)

 

11 hours ago, armyinf said:

Hi, so I am trying to do a historic campaign, and making life easier for the mission makers, have it so the USMC M1A1 tanks spawned via a new faction I am creating using the right company/ platoon symbol. Example of what I am doing 

 

	class MEU_M1A1_SA_TUSKi_d_1: rhsusf_m1a1fep_d
	{
		displayname = "Titan 2-1 D";
    	faction = "meu_faction_d";
		crew = "rhsusf_usmc_marpat_d_rifleman_m4";	
	};

Note that is from a 3rd party config.cpp internal to this project, nothing of RHS was opened or touched aside from the base class call. 

 

Whats the best way to force that specific one to spawn with say  2nd Platoon 1st Tank, platoon symbol.. even if spawned via zeus mid mission. 

Put following parameter to you config

rhs_decalParameters[] =
{
	"['Label', cM1PlnSymPlaces, 'ArmyPlt_Abrams_D']",
	"['Label', cM1BarrelSymPlaces, 'BarrelArt_Abrams_D']"
};

Syntax should be very similar to old AFRF system http://www.rhsmods.org/w/afrfdecals

 

Example of CHDKZ vehicle cfg

    rhs_decalParameters[]=
    {
        "['Number', cBTR3NumberPlaces, 'Handpaint']",
        "['Label', cBTR2SideRoundelPlaces, 'Army',22]",
        "['Label', cBTRPlnSymPlaces, 'Platoon',5]"
    };

List of all possible Army labels is here

rhsusf_decals\Data\Labels\ArmyPlt_Abrams_WD\index.sqf

[evrik 843]

Are the two usaf patchless spc vests - 'Light' and 'Radio' - the only two? Is there a basic vest - without pouches or radio - which is also patchless? Just wondering in case it is tucked away somewhere in the config and I've overlooked it. Just need a standard simple vest without the USMC patch so that I can reskin and add a series of afghan patches without the USMC coming through via the _nohq. Thanks.

 

If those are the only two, I'll still put them to use. :)

[deltagamer 612]

6 hours ago, da12thMonkey said:

No. M1084s are specifically cargo support trucks, not troop carriers.

Hence why they have a crane on the back, rather than a folding tailgate

 

Would it be possible to have the m1084a1r sov cab on the chassis of the m1083a1p2/m1078a1p2 for troop carriage then? No idea if that's a thing but would be great to have. Also cheers for sorting out my ticket.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

6 minutes ago, evrik said:

Are the two usaf patchless spc vests - 'Light' and 'Radio' - the only two? Is there a basic vest - without pouches or radio - which is also patchless? Just wondering in case it is tucked away somewhere in the config and I've overlooked it. Just need a standard simple vest without the USMC patch so that I can reskin and add a series of afghan patches without the USMC coming through via the _nohq. Thanks.

 

If those are the only two, I'll still put them to use. :)

Light and radio are the only patchless ones we have configured, but they use the same .p3d as the patched ones.

Only difference with the patchless ones is what is assigned to hiddenselections

[evrik 843]

Thanks for the response. I was after a way of reskinning the vest and 'patch' on a basic vest - without all of the magazine pouches - but removing the USMC from shining through as it is on the _nohq layer. I was hoping there was a patchless version of the basic vest. If no, no problem. I'll reskin the two patchless ones and will perhaps leave in the existing basic version and just have to live with the _nohq issue.

 

I'd prefer to use these vests on the units rather than using further reskins of the AAF vest.

 

Thanks again.

[wsxcgy 1960]

46 minutes ago, evrik said:

Are the two usaf patchless spc vests - 'Light' and 'Radio' - the only two? Is there a basic vest - without pouches or radio - which is also patchless? Just wondering in case it is tucked away somewhere in the config and I've overlooked it. Just need a standard simple vest without the USMC patch so that I can reskin and add a series of afghan patches without the USMC coming through via the _nohq. Thanks.

 

If those are the only two, I'll still put them to use. :)

I think you should be able to add in a hiddenselectionsmaterials section into your config for the vests and then use any model of the vest you want and just have them point to the patchless SPC rvmats. thats how I got the special normal maps I made for the crye AC and MBAV working. formats basically the same as any hiddenselectionstextures entry but you're putting in the pathway to the rvmat you want for the hidden selection rather than a paa.

 

[evrik 843]

Thanks for the replies. I'll give that a go.

[tacticalchubz 32]

Noticed that the M113 apc seems to get blown up in 1 hit from all AT weapons, even the pg7 hitting the side of the crew area. Is this a problem on my end?

[reyhard 2082]

31 minutes ago, tacticalchubz said:

Noticed that the M113 apc seems to get blown up in 1 hit from all AT weapons, even the pg7 hitting the side of the crew area. Is this a problem on my end?

1 hit usually disables M113 & kill it's crew but it's sometimes possible to have 1 shot kills

[evrik 843]

Cheers guys. That worked a treat. No more USMC in the bottom right of the patch. Happy to remove the hidden image. Done.

 

 

[PuFu 4600]

a bit selfish self promo ^^

unrelated - please keep using the feedback tracker for reporting bugs

[kilo-bravo 84]

That's a tease just missed the patch and hotfix. does the stock fold like the AKs? 

 

[painlesshadow 8]

Ugh I need these!

[Ivanoff.N 61]

Spoiler

21 hours ago, reyhard said:

params["_vehicle"];

private _commander = commander _vehicle;

_commander action ['TurnOut', _vehicle];
_commander action ['moveToTurret', _vehicle, [0,1]];
[_vehicle,[[0,0],true]] remoteExecCall ['lockTurret'];

[this] execVM "nameOfScript.sqf"

 

If you want to have rest of the crew turned in then switch behavior of vehicle to combat mode - commander should stay on his seat.

Could you write down which exactly key are you using for it? (Joystick #11 or something like that?)

 

Put following parameter to you config

rhs_decalParameters[] =
{
	"['Label', cM1PlnSymPlaces, 'ArmyPlt_Abrams_D']",
	"['Label', cM1BarrelSymPlaces, 'BarrelArt_Abrams_D']"
};

Syntax should be very similar to old AFRF system http://www.rhsmods.org/w/afrfdecals

 

Example of CHDKZ vehicle cfg

    rhs_decalParameters[]=
    {
        "['Number', cBTR3NumberPlaces, 'Handpaint']",
        "['Label', cBTR2SideRoundelPlaces, 'Army',22]",
        "['Label', cBTRPlnSymPlaces, 'Platoon',5]"
    };

List of all possible Army labels is here

rhsusf_decals\Data\Labels\ArmyPlt_Abrams_WD\index.sqf

Thanks.

But now the obvious question, how to get him back ?

I tried _commander action ['moveToTurret', _vehicle, [0,0]]; but it did not work.

[reyhard 2082]

30 minutes ago, Ivanoff.N said:

 

I tried _commander action ['moveToTurret', _vehicle, [0,0]]; but it did not work.

You have to unlock commander turret first & lock NSVT one

[Ivanoff.N 61]

13 minutes ago, reyhard said:

You have to unlock commander turret first & lock NSVT one

Yes it works, thanks.

 

Funny moment though, if anyone wants to try this for themselves, note, that once inside NSVT that bot is not the tank commander anymore and variable "commander _vehicle" does not apply to him.