RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

[soul_assassin 1723]

Quick question for the RHS team. I am busy working on an Opfor pack with RHS as a dependency. Do your T-series tanks make use of hidden textures to allow for reskins? I see them on the BMP, BTR's etc... but the T-72's didn't appear to allow it - unless I have overlooked it.

 

Also, do the Russian backpacks have a 'camo' section defined to permit reskins? I see it on the US packs.

 

Thanks.

As of 0.4.0.1 they do not becuase they use proxies and until 1.56 it was not possible to retexture proxies through hiddenselections. This has changed now (there is however slight performance impact) and we will be rolling out some changes in the next update.

[evrik 841]

Great. Thanks for the quick reply.

[bars91 956]

As someone who also plans to work on factions that use RHS kit/vehicle re-textures - TANK YOU RHS! Eagerly awaiting the next update.

[Remi .A 8]

I looked and couldn't find anything in the search so my bad if its been brought up before, do you guys plan on creating the AAV? Would be nice to have some quality amphibious vehicles.

[bars91 956]

I looked and couldn't find anything in the search so my bad if its been brought up before, do you guys plan on creating the AAV? Would be nice to have some quality amphibious vehicles.

 

Theres a standalone AAV-7 on armaholic and CUP has one from ArmA 2. But ATM the tracked vehicles can't swim without some serious scripting voodoo  ;) (and any external scripting voodoo tanks MP performance 9/10 times)

 

The engine side support for amphibious tracks is already implemented on DEV but it'll take some time to reach Vanilla (most likely with APEX)

[Remi .A 8]

Theres a standalone AAV-7 on armaholic and CUP has one from ArmA 2. But ATM the tracked vehicles can't swim without some serious scripting voodoo  ;) (and any external scripting voodoo tanks MP performance 9/10 times)

 

The engine side support for amphibious tracks is already implemented on DEV but it'll take some time to reach Vanilla (most likely with APEX)

 

 

Ya standalone ones aren't to great when it comes to being in the water,  but what you said about the scripting voodoo is probably the reason. Thanks for the answer, hopefully like you said it will be implemented soon :). Can always hope RHS will make new ones after implemented as well :-p their work is great.

[thecanadianvending 24]

Theres a standalone AAV-7 on armaholic and CUP has one from ArmA 2. But ATM the tracked vehicles can't swim without some serious scripting voodoo  ;) (and any external scripting voodoo tanks MP performance 9/10 times)

 

The engine side support for amphibious tracks is already implemented on DEV but it'll take some time to reach Vanilla (most likely with APEX)

 

Amphibious Tracked Vehicles were implemented with EDEN, dude. Check the changelog

[Tankbuster 1733]

I'm having trouble with the BLUFOR VA ( classname rhsusf_weapons_crate ) box and saving and loading in the VA.

 

It often, or perhaps always, refuses to load a saved loadout from a previous session. I saved a loadout that was naked and had nothing and that could be saved and loaded, but when you put gear on him and save the loadout, subsequent load is refused - the load button is greyed out.

 

Also, saving is patchy. Sometimes, the save button is greyed out. But quiting the VA and going back in a couple of times will bring the save button back to life.

 

I've been editing the box contents in the 3d editor (using the virtual tab) as my current best theory is that its the presence of BI gear in there that is causing this. I'm wrong, I know, but I'm bit stuck for better theories right now.

[max171 10]

My CS gas and Flashbang grenades doesn't work.    They explode like normal grenades.

[alexcroox 29]

Is there something wrong with the armour values here or is this expected?

 

 

This only seems to happen with the M240B

[bars91 956]

7.62x51 SABOT?  :D

[ballistic09 241]

Is there something wrong with the armour values here or is this expected?

 

 

This only seems to happen with the M240B

Unable to reproduce on my end. 

 

What mods are you running?

[Vasily.B 529]

Cant reproduce this with M113......

[bkktmkkt 24]

7.62x51 SABOT?  :D

No, just side of aluminium apc

[officeramr 269]

Is there something wrong with the armour values here or is this expected?

 

 

This only seems to happen with the M240B

Yah, the workers went on strike when making that batch of M113's 

[galzohar 31]

I get the below error rather often when playing DTAS. Seems to happen when dying and switching to "spectator" mode (which consists of simply changing camera to a different player for a while).

 

Is this a known issue and/or is there something I can do to prevent/avoid it?

 

Thanks.

22:17:16 Error in expression < select _i);
};
}foreach _a;
 
while{(_a select _i) in primaryWeaponItems _p}do
{>
22:17:16   Error position: <select _i) in primaryWeaponItems _p}do
{>
22:17:16   Error Zero divisor
22:17:16 File rhsusf\addons\rhsusf_c_weapons\scripts\acc_combo.sqf, line 26
22:17:38 Error in expression < select _i);
};
}foreach _a;
 
while{(_a select _i) in primaryWeaponItems _p}do
{>
22:17:38   Error position: <select _i) in primaryWeaponItems _p}do
{>
22:17:38   Error Zero divisor
22:17:38 File rhsusf\addons\rhsusf_c_weapons\scripts\acc_combo.sqf, line 26
22:17:38 WARNING: Function 'name' - w22 has no unit
22:17:38  - network id 25:66
22:17:38  - person CommanderOwned
22:17:38  - dead
22:17:54 WARNING: Function 'name' - k1cken is dead
22:18:15 WARNING: Function 'name' - Wolf is dead
22:18:31 Error in expression < select _i);
};
}foreach _a;
 
while{(_a select _i) in primaryWeaponItems _p}do
{>
22:18:31   Error position: <select _i) in primaryWeaponItems _p}do
{>
22:18:31   Error Zero divisor
22:18:31 File rhsusf\addons\rhsusf_c_weapons\scripts\acc_combo.sqf, line 26

[EricJ 724]

M113 armor isn't very thick.... If my mind serves me correctly 7.62 Russian has no problem (or even NATO) going through what is basically aluminum (and defintely 12.7/14.5mm). The M113 is not something that would be called "armored" at all.

[inlesco 233]

M113 armor isn't very thick.... If my mind serves me correctly 7.62 Russian has no problem (or even NATO) going through what is basically aluminum (and defintely 12.7/14.5mm). The M113 is not something that would be called "armored" at all.

You're actually right, as this thread suggests: https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-7-62mm-Machine-Gun-rounds-can-penetrate-a-M113-personal-carrier

[mistyronin 1181]

M113 armor isn't very thick.... If my mind serves me correctly 7.62 Russian has no problem (or even NATO) going through what is basically aluminum (and defintely 12.7/14.5mm). The M113 is not something that would be called "armored" at all.

It's a "battle-taxi", meaning it's not meant to withstand combat, but to provide a basic and limited protection for troops on their way to the combat zone.

Light armor usually means that can protect against the most basic assault rifles bullets and shrapnel, nothing more.

In fact with any HMG (for instance the .50 cal) you can disable or perforate most armored vehicles.

[Vasily.B 529]

It's a "battle-taxi", meaning it's not meant to withstand combat, but to provide a basic and limited protection for troops on their way to the combat zone.

Light armor usually means that can protect against the most basic assault rifles bullets and shrapnel, nothing more.

In fact with any HMG (for instance the .50 cal) you can disable or perforate most armored vehicles.

*From the period it was made...

[khaosmatical 237]

Hey RHS gents, Blackpixxel recently released a fix on TF47 launchers that solved the Spotting Rifle backblast issue that occurred when using ACE. Is this fix also going to be applied to the RHS versions in the next update? As right now the SMAW is pretty much unusable with ACE :( 

(Without extreme caution of course)

[reyhard 2082]

https://github.com/acemod/ACE3/releases

"Fix RHS Compat fix for SMAW spotting rifle backblast (#3050)"

 

@alexcroox - try to reproduce without ACE/other mods

[khaosmatical 237]

https://github.com/acemod/ACE3/releases

"Fix RHS Compat fix for SMAW spotting rifle backblast (#3050)"

 

This issue still seems to be present, Blackpixxel mentioned about how it had to be fixed for the actual weapon as well as ACE allowing it to work.

[EricJ 724]

It's a "battle-taxi", meaning it's not meant to withstand combat, but to provide a basic and limited protection for troops on their way to the combat zone.

Light armor usually means that can protect against the most basic assault rifles bullets and shrapnel, nothing more.

In fact with any HMG (for instance the .50 cal) you can disable or perforate most armored vehicles.

 

When i was in I was Heavy (as in Heavy Division, was in 1st Cav and then 1ID before going Light in '07) from '98 to '05 and was in a FIST-Vi, a derivative of the M901 nee M113. It;s a piece of shit and frankly felt better on my feet then in that. I've only been working on some stuff so I know what it is, just was distracted at the time.

[zagor64bz 1225]

 M113. It;s a piece of shit and frankly felt better on my feet then in that.

Positive!!!

I served in the Paratroopers and got the chances to actually see that POS from inside, and got the feel of it: NOTHING YOU WANNA BE IN IF SOMEONE IS SHOOTING AT YOU!!! Metal coffin at its best!