RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

[soul_assassin 1750]

20 minutes ago, kibyde said:

You can see it in this video at about the 4 minutes 10 seconds

 

is it where the gunner is pointing or where the laser/some other guidance system is pointing?

[kibyde 64]

3 minutes ago, soul_assassin said:

is it where the gunner is pointing or where the laser/some other guidance system is pointing?

It is the gunner's optic sight to aim the missiles. Not sure if it would also work for the turret gun since the DCS model is a Mi24P which has no turret. But it would be good if it would work in game because there is no feedback from an AI gunner what he is targeting.

[mickeymen 324]

On 7/5/2021 at 6:08 PM, Redphoenix said:

I'm not sure quoting a some random video as "the Arma community" is really the way to go here.

 

 

 

Quote

a some random video as "the Arma community"

 

273,045 users of blastcore standalone ( I use this mod with them ! )

You can see the statistics in the Steam:

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=767380317&searchtext=blastcore

 

Are you most likely sure that all these people have to remove the blastcore standalone in order to use RHS?

Perhaps you, wiseacre are sure in this?

 

As I said above, compatibility between mods for the arma3 community is the best path for all of us.

[Jackal326 1181]

51 minutes ago, mickeymen said:

As I said above, compatibility between mods for the arma3 community is the best path for all of us.

Then why don't you make a compatibility patch like so many other 3rd party addon makers do?

[GordonWeedman 39]

1 hour ago, mickeymen said:

273,045 users of blastcore standalone ( I use this mod with them ! )

You can see the statistics in the Steam:

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=767380317&searchtext=blastcore

 

Are you most likely sure that all these people have to remove the blastcore standalone in order to use RHS?

Perhaps you, wiseacre are sure in this? 

 

Count me out, I use blastcore and I don't care that the smoke is maybe weird.

[klima 54]

Honestly, ignore MickeyMen - He does this in several mod threads: Complains about a small, subjective "issue" - provides walls of text explanations that hardly make sense and seems to only confuse or piss off mod makers.

[Tankbuster 1746]

10 hours ago, GordonWeedman said:

 

Count me out, I use blastcore and I don't care that the smoke is maybe weird.

Count me out too. I've got 3 accounts, all of which are subscribed to Blastcore, but none of them actually use it.

[soul_assassin 1750]

6 minutes ago, mickeymen said:

I feel a complete unwillingness to do anything.

 

here here. And you dont even have anyone annoying you to fix something for free. Honestly if you are unsatisfied all we can say is meh, don't use it. We do our best with what we have. Be it time, engine limitations, compatibility with mods we dont use (or are discontinued), not enough people (you'd be surprised how many developers read comments from parasites like you and decide that modding in free time is just not worth it). You dont have to list any bugs, we have a perfectly working feedback tracker that lists them for us. It has almost 900 resolved (not just closed, but actually fixed) bugs and improvements, so accusing us for being too lazy to improve our work or not listening to the community is just blatantly insulting. but with every 3rd party mod the statement will never change: IF YOU USE RHS WITH ANY OTHER MODS YOU HAVE TO BEAR YOURSELF TO LIVE WITH ANY INCOMPATIBILITY OR ERRORS THIS BRINGS. Full stop, no further discussion. If it unbearable to you, choose yourself which mod not to use. If you choose not to use RHS, fine, so be it. 

[klima 54]

Read the rooms, Mickeymen - You're told this in every thread where you've done this: Submit it to the mods' bugtracker and wait for a fix. Instead you continue to pester and piss off the developers with your entitlement. It's infuriating to read because you never suggest anything concrete, you just post a wall of text demanding something be fixed without considering whether it is actually possible. Whenever you get a response, you respond back in a hostile manner blaming everyone for being lazy.

To avoid derailing the thread further, I won't respond to you again, Mickeymen. I hope you'll take what you've been told into consideration before you decide to do this again. You're being toxic.

Appreciate the work you're doing, RHS Team. I know you deal with this kind of pointless negativity on a daily basis; So thank you for the wonderful mods and work, I have had countless hours of fun and enjoyment with your assets 🙂

[Jackal326 1181]

11 hours ago, mickeymen said:

[...] (I removed the Jungle Book reference as I found it absolutely hilarious. I also wasn't entirely sure if you were being serious or not and honestly don't give two shits what you think of me) [...]

I just want the mods in arma mods to be without problems, the most popular mods for Arma3 (which includes RHS, ACE, Blastcore) to have compatibility without any problems, without tonns of external compatability addons.

My wish - Is this such a bad wish?  Or a reason to ignore, to take up arms against me or a reason to ridicule?

That is not a bad wish at all. However, the way you're going about trying to realise that dream is...

RHS has always been very open about their intentions with regards to addon/mod compatibility with other 3rd party content.

The simple fact is; if you want mods X, Y and Purple to work with RHS content, YOU are the one that needs to do the leg work and make a compatibility patch yourself.

Its all right there on the RHS FAQ...

[redarmy 422]

I dont envy the nonsense Modders need to put up with these days. I dont use RHS nor ever will because i am a fan of vanilla and its less of a headache to use than modded content(And already contains enough headaches just by itself vanilla),but RHS ,when i watch youtube creators FE running the assets,i gaze with awe.

 

Theres alot of work gone into RHS without it needing to be said and even if it was a very small addon the mod creators arent obliged to make it compatible with absolutely anything.Nothing wrong with requesting it but take no for an answer and be understanding.

 

I wouldnt even bother replying to insults towards your hard work tbh.

[guidaguida 6]

Hello rhs team. Just wanted to say I am really enjoying the new content on dev branch and I really appreciate the teams dedication to realism and authenticity 👍

 

It is something neither independent or AAA developers strive for with the exception of Eagle Dynamics with DCS. In my humble opinion rhs is the best thing to happen to ArmA and we do not deserve all the work that goes into the mod especially me who has not donated anything due to my lack of income so i just want to say thank you to all the programmers, modelers and moderators that who have made the mission of returning ArmA to it's sim roots possible and I cannot thank you enough. I do plan on once i have a stable income to donate to the rhs team because if anyone deserves it, it would be you guys.

 

Best wishes.

 

guidaguida

[Sgt.Makarov 19]

Going back from whatever that was to the threads topic - is the Mi-24 pilot viewing gunners aiming reticle suggested above possible? 

[reyhard 2082]

8 minutes ago, Sgt.Makarov said:

Going back from whatever that was to the threads topic - is the Mi-24 pilot viewing gunners aiming reticle suggested above possible? 

Yes, it would be possible to incorporate it as some sort of toggle. I guess it could be automatically switched to this mode when pilot activates mastersafe for instance - otherwise it would conflict with CCIP since same reticle is used for marking rockets impact point.

[Sierra-G339 'Digger' 19]

Hey, I got question; How much do you see people or countries still using the Mi-24A? With the older green house canopy, and single barrel 12.7mm? And would too much to ask for a version this brought to GREFOR?

[kibyde 64]

Only about 200 Mi-24A were built and that was in the late 1960s/early 1970s, so it is unlikely there is still an army that uses them.

There is mod for it already but it uses CUP instead of RHS.

 

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1440194894

[spooky lynx 73]

1 hour ago, kibyde said:

Only about 200 Mi-24A were built and that was in the late 1960s/early 1970s, so it is unlikely there is still an army that uses them.

There is mod for it already but it uses CUP instead of RHS.

 

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1440194894

Vietnam used this Hind model until 2010's. And Ethiopia - until 90's.

Vietnamese Mi-24A

Ethiopian Mi-24A

[da12thMonkey 1943]

Hind-A would probably be a bit of a stretch for GREF.

Chernarus was canonically part of the Soviet Union, where production had switched to building Hind-D before most Hind-A were delivered to Soviet forces and were put in service just 3 years after the Hind-A to replace them. So very few Hind-A were actively used by the Soviets and even fewer kept to the end of the Cold War. A good chunk of those produced, ended up exported to foreign nations like the above mentioned Vietnam, Ethiopia as well as Algeria, Libya, rather then being used all across the USSR. And it's those foreign ones that had some longevity to their service.

I think Ukraine kept a couple of Hind-C trainers (there's two in museums that bear Ukranian air force markings instead of Soviet ones), but otherwise you don't really see much evidence of them continuing in former Soviet republics. If there are examples of any in e.g. Kazakh, Belarusian, Georgian, Armenian etc. colours I am yet to see it.

[kibyde 64]

On 7/13/2021 at 8:30 PM, reyhard said:

Yes, it would be possible to incorporate it as some sort of toggle. I guess it could be automatically switched to this mode when pilot activates mastersafe for instance - otherwise it would conflict with CCIP since same reticle is used for marking rockets impact point.

While the CCIP for rockets is not really useful for rockets given their spread it is useful for dropping bombs.

Would it be possible to add a MFD camera highly zoomed in to visualise what the AI gunner is currently aiming at? Maybe with an angle indicator displaying how much left/right from the craft's heading. I could imagine this would be very handy for all sorts of vehicles with AI gunners.

[reyhard 2082]

15 hours ago, kibyde said:

While the CCIP for rockets is not really useful for rockets given their spread it is useful for dropping bombs.

Would it be possible to add a MFD camera highly zoomed in to visualise what the AI gunner is currently aiming at? Maybe with an angle indicator displaying how much left/right from the craft's heading. I could imagine this would be very handy for all sorts of vehicles with AI gunners.

I don't agree it's not useful for rockets. As for MFD, there is no such thing in Mi-24D/V/P

[kibyde 64]

3 hours ago, reyhard said:

As for MFD, there is no such thing in Mi-24D/V/P

I don't mean MFD in the cockpit model but the HUD MFD like the slingload assist. Similar to the slingload assist such a camera view can provide a feedback to the player that the AI gunner is verbally not able to do.

[reyhard 2082]

1 hour ago, kibyde said:

I don't mean MFD in the cockpit model but the HUD MFD like the slingload assist. Similar to the slingload assist such a camera view can provide a feedback to the player that the AI gunner is verbally not able to do.

I think you misunderstood me - there is no such MFD in those Mi-24s which I've mentioned so such functionality is not an option. We are trying to avoid as much as possible using UI elements (with only exception being vehicles without interior) and only add features which are present on given vehicles. This way you can appreciate how technology had changed and made crew life easier.

[kibyde 64]

52 minutes ago, reyhard said:

I think you misunderstood me - there is no such MFD in those Mi-24s which I've mentioned so such functionality is not an option. We are trying to avoid as much as possible using UI elements (with only exception being vehicles without interior) and only add features which are present on given vehicles. This way you can appreciate how technology had changed and made crew life easier.

Fair enough. I wish there would be a way to improve the communication with the AI so it does not feel like your gunner is deaf and dumb.

[spooky lynx 73]

On 7/17/2021 at 6:43 PM, da12thMonkey said:

Hind-A would probably be a bit of a stretch for GREF.

Chernarus was canonically part of the Soviet Union, where production had switched to building Hind-D before most Hind-A were delivered to Soviet forces and were put in service just 3 years after the Hind-A to replace them. So very few Hind-A were actively used by the Soviets and even fewer kept to the end of the Cold War. A good chunk of those produced, ended up exported to foreign nations like the above mentioned Vietnam, Ethiopia as well as Algeria, Libya, rather then being used all across the USSR. And it's those foreign ones that had some longevity to their service.

I think Ukraine kept a couple of Hind-C trainers (there's two in museums that bear Ukranian air force markings instead of Soviet ones), but otherwise you don't really see much evidence of them continuing in former Soviet republics. If there are examples of any in e.g. Kazakh, Belarusian, Georgian, Armenian etc. colours I am yet to see it.

Hind-A had been used at least by the 280th helicopter regt during first months of the Afghanistan war. Also I've read some rumors that Azerbaijan's army used few ones taken from one of the storage bases during 1991-1994 Karabakh war.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

18 hours ago, spooky lynx said:

Hind-A had been used at least by the 280th helicopter regt during first months of the Afghanistan war

Yes they were flying the Hind-As that the Soviets were supplying to the Afghan air force. The helicopters delivery was accelerated after violence in Herat, and there weren't sufficiently trained Afghan pilots.

It's understood that Soviet advisors flew missions in VPAF Hind-As during the Vietnam War, and Ethiopian Hind-As during the Eritrean War of Independence as well