RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

[munger 25]

21 hours ago, da12thMonkey said:

Commander's positions with RWS etc. use the vanilla FCS (because they just have a rangefinder or simple MG), while gunner positions have a scripted FCS that's far more realistic in terms of laying the main gun. So they operate differently in general and that's why you have a disparity between gunner position on RHS tanks and things like BI's tanks.

 

Is this an issue for you using the RHSDEV mods, or current 0.5.6 stable release?

 

At this moment in time, the RHSDEV mods requires Arma 3 dev branch because the mod's keybinds are being transitioned to a new feature that BI are adding to Arma 3 where mod keybinds can be set in Arma 3's controls menu, independently from standard game controls or fully scripted keybinding systems. The binds through "RHS - Game Options" menu are being phased out and FCS scripts rewritten; so you need to have Arma 3 Dev Branch and set your binds through Options>>Controls>>Show: RHS - FCS keybindings dropdown.

The default lase key is [T] under the new keybinding system. Not inherited from A3's "lase range" action.

^^Eventually this will be the case with stable releases, so it's worth everybody noticing^^

Infantry weapon laser/light attachment, stock folding, safety-catch etc. script binds are likewise getting this treatment. You can bind things to mouse button actions now too.

 

If you're using RHS's stable release then I can only guess that something is blocking the FCS scripts from running. Like an addon/mission conflict or corrupted rhs(usf)_optics.pbo or rhs(usf)_main.pbo

 

Thanks for the detailed response.

 

I can confirm that I am using 0.5.6 stable and the latest stable Arma 3 version. No dev versions.

 

In the end I unsubscribed from all four RHS packs and then resubscribed on Steam. Upon trying again with only those mods and CBA loaded the rangefinding still didn't work, but after messing about with the RHS options I finally managed to fix the issue by changing the lase control by scrolling the list down to one of the 'user defined action' options, exiting options, reopening options and reverting the lase control back to Tab. This fixed it. I can only assume that the config wasn't recognising the key and it needed to be 'prompted'. Seems odd but there you go.

 

I have not tried the dev version as I tend to stick to stable releases but the new version that you describe sounds promising and more user friendly. Looking forward to it.

 

Thanks again for the support.  

[da12thMonkey 1943]

4 hours ago, Jackal326 said:

Though its addition is not without added work-load for you guys I imagine, what with having to re-do what you've already done

Not entirely.

reyhard's was already in the process of MASSIVELY overhauling the FCS and optics on Russian tanks, so it seems to be quite fortunate timing in some ways. As an observer it appears to have streamlined expanding the feature set a little  - like being able to add actions to dump range or go to a battlesight zero on appropriate FCS, and not having to worry about how players should interact with it, where it fits in with the existing Arma 3 control scheme, or how it's tucked away in a menu somewhere. Everything can be there in one organised RHS - FCS Keybindings subset of controls specifically for interacting with the FCS.

 

It's also motivated refinements to the weapon/attachment interaction scripts. For a start they work equally on secondary and pistol slot weapons as well as primaries now. reyhard doing that has in turn allowed me to config the picatinny rail slots on the SMAW, MAAWS and M72A7 to be open to more attachments (in fact can use the same universal joint-rails type slots we have on rifles), instead of having a limited "whitelist" of optics and lasers masking things that were obviously not functioning the same as they could on a rifle.

Simplified additional binds offered room for expansion of the system to have both previous and next states in attachment cycling. So it's a bit smoother to cycle directly between states on attachments that have more than two modes: Like the AN/PEQ-16 or AN/PEQ-15+M952V combo now that they have an additional IR illuminator setting on top of the existing IR laser and white light (that's another thing BI have added on the A3 dev branch in recent months: IR flashlight/spotlights).

Again, all this is in its own little RHS - Weapon Keybindings nest in the keybinds menu, so folks hopefully have a better idea of where to look to tweak it to their liking.

[GordonWeedman 39]

Is there by any chance a hiddenSelection for the camo fabric on the SVDM (Camo)? Looking in the config I can't find one, and I would like to reskin it.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

19 hours ago, GordonWeedman said:

Is there by any chance a hiddenSelection for the camo fabric on the SVDM (Camo)? Looking in the config I can't find one, and I would like to reskin it.

Thought it already had one, just not configured in the config.cpp for the RHS rifles to be honest since there was already a "cloth" selection in the model for those parts.

Have added it to the model.cfg sections[] array now

[PuFu 4600]

 

[zukov 490]

The camo version is really pretty cool

[chops 111]

Jeez, you blokes never stop! 👍

[Tankbuster 1746]

8 hours ago, zukov said:

The camo version is really pretty cool
 

It is a lovely thing, that..

[ducphuli 33]

Sorry to disturb, hello kind brothers.
I often play RHS infantry, Do you have any short code to help RHS infantry soldiers use AK guns to fire 2 rounds at a time?
Instead of having to listen to the soldier in battle shoot each bullet 1 😔
Thanks 

[gatordev 219]

My apologies, I've tried to search the topic and I'm not coming up with the actual code...  Is there something posted somewhere (here or on the RHS site) that has the code to have a weapon (like the AK74) folded.  At some point, I remember doing this in the editor, but I've apparently lost that knowledge.

[cry me a river kids 7]

I've done a penetration test for the 5.56x45mm and 5.45x39mm ammunition types. Using shoothouse panels spaced one meter apart, I shot multiple rounds of various ammo types from 5 meters away from the first panel.

In order from left to right, the M249 was tested with M855A1, M855, and M995 cartridges. The M855A1 penetrated seven panels. The M855 only penetrated four. The M995 penetrated ten. 

Up next was the M4A1. In the same order as before, the M855A1, M855, Mk318, Mk262, and M193 cartridges were used. This time around, the M855A1 only penetrated six panels. The M855 again only penetrated four panels. The Mk318 and Mk262 also penetrated six panels; the M855A1 had the most energy after penetrating the sixth panel, followed by the Mk318, and then the Mk262. The M193 penetrated five panels. I'm wondering if the discrepancy in M855A1 performance between the M4A1 and the M249 is related to muzzle velocity. So I tested the M855A1 with the M16A4.

Theory confirmed. The M16A4 offers slightly better performance, and this gives the M855A4 enough energy to defeat the seventh panel.

 

In the same order, we have the 7N22 armour piercing round, the 7N6, 7N6M, 7N10, and the 7U1 subsonic round. The 7N22 penetrated nine panels. The 7N6 and 7N6M both penetrated two panels, but interestingly enough, the 7N6 carries a bit more kinetic energy after exiting the second panel than the 7N6M (note how the red lines cut off earlier for the third column); the 7N6M should have better penetration, so perhaps a slight tweak is in store. The 7N10 penetrated six panels. The 7U1 penetrated none.

 

Plans for tomorrow include testing 7.62 rounds and the newest APFSDS rounds for tanks using a similar setup but with concrete walls sitting in for the shoothouse panels.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

We use these for testing and calibrating penetration

Set of targets that use the game's "armor" material in different thicknesses, so one can work out how many mm of RHA steel an Arma 3 projectile penetrates

 

I would have recommended them for your AFV ammunition tests since they're a bit easier to analyse than thick concrete blocks. However the download link there no longer seems to work. Perhaps @x3kj has mirror available

[Valken 622]

4 hours ago, cry me a river kids said:

I've done a penetration test for the 5.56x45mm and 5.45x39mm ammunition types. Using shoothouse panels spaced one meter apart, I shot multiple rounds of various ammo types from 5 meters away from the first panel...

 

Excellent to know this. It is great to understand ballistics so long as the mod sets stays confined within itself. 

 

If we begin to mix mods say RHS + ARMA 3 or RHS + GM or other DLC/cDLC, then the ballistic characters create confusion over weapon performance.

 

I would like to ask if you have tested with Universal Ammo System:

 

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1809369854

 

It's a mod that basically unifies the ballistics performance based on caliber of the ammunition. There is a companion mod AAPM to it as well for infantry balancing. 

 

You can then compare it against similar yet vanilla ARMA 3 weapons with the same magazines. 

[cry me a river kids 7]

13 hours ago, da12thMonkey said:

We use these for testing and calibrating penetration

Set of targets that use the game's "armor" material in different thicknesses, so one can work out how many mm of RHA steel an Arma 3 projectile penetrates

 

I would have recommended them for your AFV ammunition tests since they're a bit easier to analyse than thick concrete blocks. However the download link there no longer seems to work. Perhaps @x3kj has mirror available

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll send the guy a DM asking if he has a mirror somewhere. I do these tests more for the benefit of us plebs who merely use the mod so people have a better idea of the ammunition they are using. Would love to see the M995 AP ammo be made available for the M16A4 and M4A1, as I did not find any compatible magazines for them.

[cry me a river kids 7]

12 hours ago, Valken said:

 

Excellent to know this. It is great to understand ballistics so long as the mod sets stays confined within itself. 

 

If we begin to mix mods say RHS + ARMA 3 or RHS + GM or other DLC/cDLC, then the ballistic characters create confusion over weapon performance.

 

I would like to ask if you have tested with Universal Ammo System:

 

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1809369854

 

It's a mod that basically unifies the ballistics performance based on caliber of the ammunition. There is a companion mod AAPM to it as well for infantry balancing. 

 

You can then compare it against similar yet vanilla ARMA 3 weapons with the same magazines. 

I have decided not to do this. The reason is that vanilla ARMA 3 is set 20 years in the future, so it only makes sense that its ammunition performs better than mods for present-day weapons. I've already tested the RHS rifles against vanilla analogs and the vanilla rifles performed better every time, barring the use of AP ammunition. I'll only post comparisons of RHS guns in this thread because other mods are outside the realm of relevance for the RHS mod thread.

[cry me a river kids 7]

Sorry lads but life has gotten in the way and I haven't been able to conduct any tests today. I'll aim to have them done as soon as possible as student life is taking over once again.

[ballistic09 241]

On 8/22/2021 at 6:19 AM, Valken said:

I would like to ask if you have tested with Universal Ammo System:

 

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1809369854

 

It's a mod that basically unifies the ballistics performance based on caliber of the ammunition. There is a companion mod AAPM to it as well for infantry balancing. 

 

You can then compare it against similar yet vanilla ARMA 3 weapons with the same magazines. 

 

I can categorically recommend that you not use that.

 

IIRC from the last time somebody posted about problems with RHS ammo while using that mod, the author seems to have some kind of fundamental misunderstanding of how Arma calculates armor penetration and uses config values for caliber that are way too high. Ammo from that mod typically penetrates about 2-4x as much as it should and results in situations like having certain types of 5.56 being able to shoot through heavily armored IFV's that can normally withstand 30mm AP rounds, and some of the .50 cal rounds can even shoot completely through both sides of a T-90... Using that mod will seriously compromise the balance/realism of your game.

[Valken 622]

1 hour ago, ballistic09 said:

 

I can categorically recommend that you not use that.

 

IIRC from the last time somebody posted about problems with RHS ammo while using that mod, the author seems to have some kind of fundamental misunderstanding of how Arma calculates armor penetration and uses config values for caliber that are way too high. Ammo from that mod typically penetrates about 2-4x as much as it should and results in situations like having certain types of 5.56 being able to shoot through heavily armored IFV's that can normally withstand 30mm AP rounds, and some of the .50 cal rounds can even shoot completely through both sides of a T-90... Using that mod will seriously compromise the balance/realism of your game.

 

Interesting comments. I have never had this experience of penetration yet I do use it UAS without the AAPM advanced armor plate companion mod so that probably has skewed some effects. I would not use UAS without AAPM though due to possible unbalancing.

 

Even GM mod has ballistics penetration higher than default ARMA 3, which it appears to be claimed is higher than RHS already. 

 

If you do not mind, I will forward the mentioned link from BIS to the creator of UAS for his comments. This was not meant to derail RHS but was a question when mixing RHS with vanilla and other mods to have "relatively" , not necessarily "uniformed" ballistics characteristics against each other.

[reyhard 2082]

4 hours ago, Valken said:

 

Even GM mod has ballistics penetration higher than default ARMA 3, which it appears to be claimed is higher than RHS already. 

Seems like a lot of people confuse actual ballistic penetration & personal protection (character uniforms, vests/helmets, etc).

 

Ballistic protection aka penetration resistance is defined by caliber parameter - it influences how much bullet can penetrate. Higher caliber value means you can penetrate more mm of material. There is formula to calculate RHA armor

 

Personal protection is on the other hand handled via hit & armor parameters (which are influenced by typicalSpeed, caliber, indirectHitRange, explosive & advanced armor simulation coefs to certain degree) . This system relies strictly on abstract hitpoints numbers - there is no exact formula how to calculate that personal protection levels so people are usually trying to mimic vanilla configuration.

 

Afair GM has lower, more realistic penetration values, similar to RHS. They had though lower typicalSpeed which influenced hit value at point blank range, meaning that bullet could deal much more damage to personal protection.  This was changed in recent patch though -

 

As for UAS - yes, I took a quick look at it and caliber values are really wrong so I would definitely wouldn't recommend using it.

[x3kj 1247]

On 8/22/2021 at 11:20 AM, da12thMonkey said:

 Perhaps @x3kj has mirror available

I reuploaded it

[cry me a river kids 7]

On 7/30/2021 at 3:14 AM, reyhard said:

Always report issues without any 3rd part mods. In this particulary case, I would say it's ACE compats error - https://github.com/acemod/ACE3/issues

Yup, and they've posted a patch that fixes it. If anyone else has the same issue and doesn't know how to install the patch, I can help

[cry me a river kids 7]

The T14 Armata currently has an active protection system (APS), but the other vehicles don't. For the sake of balance, until the dev team decides to give the M1A2 a representation of the Trophy system, feel free to use my script for an APS: 

 

[AbwarriorG 0]

Does anyone have external mirrors for the latest RHS packs? They don't have anything on their website other than the steam community link.

[soul_assassin 1750]

55 minutes ago, AbwarriorG said:

Does anyone have external mirrors for the latest RHS packs? They don't have anything on their website other than the steam community link.

You should not need anything other than the steam community link

[AbwarriorG 0]

Another question, Are there any plans to make modern SAMs like the S400 or Patriot systems with their radars and fire control systems? Would be pretty cool.