RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

[sharkster1 7]

55 minutes ago, bek said:

In case you missed my sneaky-breeki link on page 414:

 

 

 

[Pan Samogon 197]

Early AKS-74... absolutely great.Something tells me you guys also include Night version.

But I should ask - is there any chance of late AKS-74?I mean plum plastic furniture isntead of wooden.

[road runner 4344]

31 minutes ago, Pan Samogon said:

Early AKS-74... absolutely great.Something tells me you guys also include Night version.

But I should ask - is there any chance of late AKS-74?I mean plum plastic furniture isntead of wooden.

sounds awfully like a request

[Pan Samogon 197]

20 minutes ago, road runner said:

sounds awfully like a request

 

Since requesting are pointless... it's a question.

And since furniture on late AKS-74 are absolutely same as on AK-74M such question makes sence.

Anyway - everything I wan't to request are already planned.I know that from old information leak and exploration of configs by myself. 

[bek 744]

There won't be any other aks-74 versions in 0.4.2 other than the wooden one. It was actually intended for 0.4.3 but I was able to complete (well, still setting some bits up like icons & folded version) it in time for inclusion in 0.4.2. There's always a chance the next version(s) will add them though as I'd like to; but nothing's guaranteed. I'm more likely to do the wooden stock to make an AK-74 before doing the plastic furniture.

[eh chaser 285]

@RHS Team... 

 

you guys are doing an awesome job with your mod(s)...anyone who is complaining about "missing" content should delete all RHS files and should move to another mod with all the actual and missing stuff...

oh damn...there is none...

 

We at the Taunus team handle people like this like "you asking for something and when it will be FINALLY finished? Okay, release delayed for another 3 months..."

 

Keep up your great job with all the awesome content and try to ignore everyone who has no idea "how easy it is to stay on track after 3 hours"

 

Regards

 

Chaser

[arkhir 135]

1 hour ago, bek said:

There won't be any other aks-74 versions in 0.4.2 other than the wooden one. It was actually intended for 0.4.3 but I was able to complete (well, still setting some bits up like icons & folded version) it in time for inclusion in 0.4.2. There's always a chance the next version(s) will add them though as I'd like to; but nothing's guaranteed. I'm more likely to do the wooden stock to make an AK-74 before doing the plastic furniture.

[oyyy blins internally]

 

Man, thank you. I logged in just to type that. I know you probably don't give a damn, but I was really missing older 74's in RHS. Absolutely amazing, please keep us updated with AK-74 WIPs whenever they'll appear. Can we please get an in-engine shot of that sexy AKS? :D

 

Will there be an option to fold the stock with ctrl+C like with the rest of them?

[bek 744]

 

Still some shadow lod issues to fix it seems :|

[temon 131]

bek, will be AKS-74 with GP-25 ?

[bek 744]

Probably not in 0.4.2, but hopefully later on.

[fingolfin 1972]

A bit of an odd question, but will the 4.2 version support the 64-bit update recently released on the dev branch?

 

Quote

 

For modders, too, there are some things to keep in mind. If your scenario or mod uses a call extension, the extension has be to provided both in 32-bit and 64-bit versions now. Otherwise, your game will most likely not work as expected. Unfortunately, there is no flexible way for us to work this around for you behind the scenes. 64-bit processes can only load 64-bit shared libraries (*.dll on Windows, *.so on Linux) and therefore it is expected that content creators provide them. This process should be rather straightforward, though, and we do not expect any major complication on our talented community's side.

 

To make the transition as transparent for you as possible, we at least made it so that no changes to scripts will be required. All you need to do is build a 64-bit version of your extension and name it <yourExtension>_x64.dll on Windows (or <yourExtension>_x64.so on Linux). In other words, you add the "_x64" suffix to the name. Similarly, mod creators relying on hacking repurposing DirectX libraries will have to dust off their skills once again and perform their magic on 64-bit version of these libraries in similar a fashion as they did on their 32-bit counterparts back in the day. Of course, it is also worth mentioning that you should not forget to whitelist your new libraries with BattlEye!

 

https://dev.arma3.com/post/oprep-64-bit-executables

 

Since I don’t know much about scripting/modding, I can’t estimate the amount of work that needs to be done.

[soul_assassin 1723]

Just now, fingolfin said:

A bit of an odd question, but will the 4.2 version support the 64-bit update recently released on the dev branch?

 

 

Since I don’t know much about scripting/modding, I can’t estimate the amount of work that needs to be done.

We do not use any compiled extensions so there is no need for a x64 specific version of the mods.

[fingolfin 1972]

25 minutes ago, soul_assassin said:

We do not use any compiled extensions so there is no need for a x64 specific version of the mods.

 

Thanks!

 

The AKS-74 will go along nicely with these:

 

Chernarussian Special Police forces after a raid in Vybor, december 2008

[zeealex 2029]

11 hours ago, milosv123344 said:

I am 100% sure that some people working on RHS, will at some point use it on their resume as a way to find a real job in the future.

Okay so lets shoot this one down straight away. 

 

A a good majority of people in RHS have 'real jobs' already, heck a good couple of them are or at least were military. I myself work externally for a game developer outside of college. I wont do a who's who because theres nothing to prove. And at least one of us is an architect.

 

Well done for kind of assuming we dont though. We're not all glasses clad nerds with too much time on their hands as you seem to believe. 

[Pan Samogon 197]

glasses clad nerds... wake up,it's 20162017 already.

 

edit: ah still glassed...

[bek 744]

6 hours ago, temon said:

bek, will be AKS-74 with GP-25 ?

 

6 hours ago, bek said:

Probably not in 0.4.2, but hopefully later on.

 

Good news; I lied:

 

[OlegAckbar 47]

can't

wait

[temon 131]

bek, Thank you for your great work. You're so fast , maybe you can make wooden stock for it in remaining time ? :-D

[ineptaphid 6413]

3 minutes ago, temon said:

bek, Thank you for your great work. You're so fast , maybe you can make wooden stock for it in remaining time ? :-D

I think you should contact this guy-

[jerminhu 25]

I tried RHS 2 years ago when it was on 0.3.x. My first impression is the poly count and texture resolution of majority of vehicle cockpits and some weapons are way too low. I updated the mod to the latest version tonight. To my surprise however, they are still same after 2 years. Did I miss something or are there any high resolution texture/model pack?

[soul_assassin 1723]

8 minutes ago, jerminhu said:

I tried RHS 2 years ago when it was on 0.3.x. My first impression is the poly count and texture resolution of majority of vehicle cockpits and some weapons are way too low. I updated the mod to the latest version tonight. To my surprise however, they are still same after 2 years. Did I miss something or are there any high resolution texture/model pack?

Can you be more specific? If you mean the 2 cockpits out of 50 vehicles that were not finished and the 3 arma2 port weapons that we havnt got to updating then no. They will get updated when we get there.

[jerminhu 25]

I just tried Su-25 (Various versions), A-10 (CAS), T-50 (2013 I believe), Mi-24 (AT), F-22 (can't remember which version), AH-1Z (Multi-Role), C-130J, Ka-50 (ordinary version), M-240, Barrett M109. All of them are of very low poly count and low res textures. Is it caused by my mid to low video settings?

 

I just watched some RHS videos on Youtube and their cockpits look much  better than mine.

[dragon01 902]

Setting you video settings too low can cause everything to look ugly. I've got them on the high end and things look OK. If your settings are in medium/low range (in particular the object and texture details settings), then don't expect to match the quality of a YouTuber running everything on Ultra.

[fingolfin 1972]

29 minutes ago, jerminhu said:

I just tried Su-25 (Various versions), A-10 (CAS), T-50 (2013 I believe), Mi-24 (AT), F-22 (can't remember which version), AH-1Z (Multi-Role), C-130J, Ka-50 (ordinary version), M-240, Barrett M109. All of them are of very low poly count and low res textures. Is it caused by my mid to low video settings?

 

I just watched some RHS videos on Youtube and their cockpits look much  better than mine.

 

This is how the Su-25 cockpit looks for me (using high but playable settings):

 

[jerminhu 25]

Yes. It's the video settings. I was running standard settings because I was afraid my 2GB vram was not enough for ultra even high settings with 4km viewing distance.

 

Now, what is the version 0.4.2 you guys talk about? Where can I get it?