Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Probably problem with a fact that RHS does not base vehicles damage on hitpoints, but is mostly based on penetration, helicopters might not be done properly in that manner. More tests are probably needed.

All helicopters seem to have this issue, it takes 4-8 stingers/iglas to shoot them down. Also found that "rhs_weap_mk14" class name gives you no weapon at all but "rhs_weap_m14ebrri" does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are taking one word "balanced" out of context of my post and add an entire tirade of how balancing in general ruins the game, boiling down to the good old "if you don't like it get out" argument. Granted it does saves you the trouble to adress the suggested points and reply in a constructive way (i.e. explain why you think the variant would be bad for game play, maybe propose alternatives etc.).

I never talked to balancing out the factions and vehicles so they all have the same weaponry and capabilities etc. like the Battlefield series. When I used the word "balanced" I was referring to balancing out the choices mission makers have to create diverse scenarios to vary up the experience of the player base. Having an Abrams / Bradley choice that won't be able to utilise the zoom camera will not ruin the game, it just gives players more choice in how to approach a scenario. Nobody says we should get rid of the zoom cameras for balance sake, those variants can and should have a firm place within RHS and vanilla.

Adding more choices in vehicle variants is always appreciated by mission makers and players alike. Whether or not the suggested variant is useful / makes sense from a game play stand-point is definitely open to debate.

I am sure the RHS team would agree with me and would say - NO.

Do you understand that point of this mod is realism? So if vehicle have such and such features in reality they will be if possible modeleled in the mod, if some features are not existing, then they won't be in the mod. Deal with it, it is that simple.

Besides this I don't understand what you not like in optics for vehicle commander? This is how it works in reality.

Not to mention, that if you would pay more attention to vehicles themselfs, you would see that some vehicles, have worse optics for their commanders than other vehicles.

For example M1A1AIM have just simple optics for commander CWS cupola, these optics does not provide great level of zoom compared to M1A2SEPv1 commanders CITV panoramic sight, however in both cases there is tradeoff. M1A1AIM might not have great optics for commander, but CWS cupola mounted MG can be fired from under armor protection, on the other hand M1A2SEPv1 have better sights for commander, but his MG is mounted on a pintle mount, requiring opening hatch, and exposing TC head and torso to operate this MG.

Something for something, like in real life.

Same goes for Russian tanks, we have for example T-72B tanks, which have better basic armor than T-80B series, on the other hand T-72B sights are complete crap compared to T-80B sights.

I said it many times, learn about vehicles, both the ones in the mod and their real life counterparts, how they behave, what features they have or not have.

Besides this wait for next versions releases, many bugs will be fixed, a lot of new stuff will probably be added. In the end you might be surprised (in very positive way). From my own experience I know, that RHS team will deliver the best they can, and really kudos for their incredibly hard work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Adding more choices in vehicle variants is always appreciated by mission makers and players alike. Whether or not the suggested variant is useful / makes sense from a game play stand-point is definitely open to debate.

I would prefer that the RHS team were guided entirely by authenticity and mission makers created balance via numerical or positional advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would prefer that the RHS team were guided entirely by authenticity and mission makers created balance via numerical or positional advantage.

Fully agreed. If its felt that the US tanks are beating the Russian ones too easily on a 1-to-1 basis, then the mission designer should be using a good bit of preemptive 152/122mm fire to make sure the 1-to-1 basis isnt as 1-to-1 as it'd first seem :) When you've got such a big arty advantage in throw-weight, its a sin to ignore it! :P

Edited by Nerdwing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fully agreed. If its felt that the US tanks are beating the Russian ones too easily on a 1-to-1 basis, then the mission designer should be using a good bit of preemptive 152/122mm fire to make sure the 1-to-1 basis isnt as 1-to-1 as it'd first seem :) When you've got such a big arty advantage in throw-weight, its a sin to ignore it! :P

Actually if new improved armor models will be avaiable for next update, I suggest to first familirize with vehicles, test them, find weak and strong sides of each vehicle, remember them, and then adjust tactics.

It will definately be very interesting to see how improved armor models will work out in game. I spent a lot of time preparing proper data for Reyhard, and I must say at some point it was a hard task to complete, especially for Russian tanks turrets, their geometry don't help in creating proper armor model, hopefully Reyhard figured them out. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry if this has been already asked, but there will be any armed hmmvw in the next release?

Yep, there will be. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am really enjoying the mod so far and is a major addition to ARMA 3. Thanks alot!

Just a quick question, would you guys consider making a HLC compatibility patch/mod? Replacing the Russian weapons with the HLC ones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ummm no we will not be making replacement configs for other mod's/addons. Contact them to perform this work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wanted to bring this to the table. I was just testing the helicopters with the new update and advance flight and when I spawned myself in as a pilot to any of the US RHS birds I was clipped into the ground. Tired it with an empty bird and when I jumped into the pilot seat I clipped into the ground. This wasn't an issue prior to the new DLC and update for Arma 3 so I'm guessing that is the issue but just wanted to throw it out there. Keep up the great work and looking forward to your updates!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes we know. Bis changed something between devbranch and dlc that we couldnt take into account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to first congratulate on what an awesome mod you guys have made and released, really enjoying it so far, especially the russian BTRs:cool:.

I just want to throw a suggestion if it hasn't already been mentioned yet, I'm sure you guys have a lot to do and work on currently but I just want to put this out there.

The cannons on helicopter gunships by default in Arma 3 aren't accurate while moving, there is no compensation for the rounds when shooting.

I remember playing with ACE in Arma 2, there was a way to turn on the laser designator on the apache and whilst moving, shooting the 30mm would still land where the crosshairs aimed, that way I could still circle an AO 1.5 clicks out and still have my gunner use the 30mm when needed.

Was wondering if you guys have already or could consider looking into a way for any similar fix to this?

Thanks again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks, makes sense. Will go over to Toadie and bother him :)

He has already made a file for the RHS M4's to replace the sounds and reload anims, which should uploaded soon, and I have requested he does the same for the RHS AK's as well, as RHS currently (as far as I have heard) still don't have an animator so reload anims might take a while (is that a correct assumption?)

I don't think a replacement pack would be that useful, the only ones you can do really is the Aks-74 as it has a gl version as well, or a ak-12 version to represent Ratnik supplied soldiers, if the AK-12 (and not the Aek) is adopted, but that lacks a gl version

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

At first, nice job!!!

I've encountered a bug on the a10 at dedicated, when you get in as pilot plane exploits instantly. In single player all is fine.

Are you going to add AK47 7.62 to RHS?

Thanks!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perchance could you remove the Air Data Boom from the Ka-52?

I mean this thing:

KYlL4dd.jpg

It always bothered me that it was there on the Arma 2 model, since the probe is only on the early prototype aircraft rather than production airframes that would be used in combat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi,

At first, nice job!!!

I've encountered a bug on the a10 at dedicated, when you get in as pilot plane exploits instantly. In single player all is fine.

Are you going to add AK47 7.62 to RHS?

Thanks!!

Its a problem with clafghan airport. I solved it using zeus.

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perchance could you remove the Air Data Boom from the Ka-52?

I mean this thing:

http://i.imgur.com/KYlL4dd.jpg

It always bothered me that it was there on the Arma 2 model, since the probe is only on the early prototype aircraft rather than production airframes that would be used in combat.

Regarding the RHS KA52 - yeah it is bis a2 model which is a prototype version of KA52 , got the Flir pod on top while new serial ones got those new noses

http://www.worldwide-military.com/Military%20Heli's/Attack%20heli/Links/Ka-52_EN.htm some of them are painted http://x3.cdn03.imgwykop.pl/c3201142/comment_ZbXHDWLTkiSfhaSdToqUeV3Nr6uBGyWo.jpg

also there is some with other "nose" > http://sfw.so/uploads/posts/2010-05/1274705511_1509764.jpg + the older top flir style > http://sfw.so/uploads/posts/2010-05/1274688746_1269108.jpg

even older Ka50 has a new flir pod > http://sfw.so/uploads/posts/2010-05/1274703520_0920840.jpg

so later in next rhs versions it will be corrected

Edited by RobertHammer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could the M4's which are default on the Multicam US soldiers be replaced with the M4a1 PiP? Considering that despite it being available the mod isn't really using them, and it is realistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could the M4's which are default on the Multicam US soldiers be replaced with the M4a1 PiP? Considering that despite it being available the mod isn't really using them, and it is realistic.

M4A1 are only used by spec forces and few designated units that are supposed to "manage" better the bullets and be involved more in CQB.

---------- Post added at 18:11 ---------- Previous post was at 18:10 ----------

I was just testing the helicopters with the new update and advance flight and when I spawned myself in as a pilot to any of the US RHS birds I was clipped into the ground. Tired it with an empty bird and when I jumped into the pilot seat I clipped into the ground.

As Soul Assassin said we are aware of it.

To "correct" that temporally you can switch to the standard fly model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
M4A1 are only used by spec forces and few designated units that are supposed to "manage" better the bullets and be involved more in CQB.

Not exactly MistyRonin. US Army currently is in the process of modernizing all it's M4's to M4A1 variant, which means that M4A1 will replace both M4 and M16A4 in regular wide spread US Army and ARNG service. USMC also adapted M4A1 although replacement pace is slower and I think USMC will probably keep both M4A1 and also upgrade M16A4 (I supsect they will replace 3 round burst with full auto and also there were some informations they want to replace solid fixed stock to collapsable stock from M4/M4A1).

Also do not confuse the old M4A1, with new M4A1 PIP wich is also included in RHS. ;) And both rifles differs a bit from each other, for example M4A1 PIP have ambidextrous fire selector, while old M4A1 had it mounted only on one side.

Actually I talked about this with Reyhard or Gurdy, don't remember, and I advised to give M4A1 PIP to US Army soldiers in OCP, while these in UCP should retain older M4, to represent difference between US Army prior and after 2014/15.

However it was not changed as there were more important things to do, and we never discussed that later again.

Edited by Damian90

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah as said above is true:

WASHINGTON (Army News Service, May 22, 2014) — A thicker barrel will absorb more heat in the new M4-A1 carbine, should a Soldier need to flip the selector to auto, according to Soldiers overseeing the new configuration now being added to the M4.

While shooting in the automatic mode is less efficient and not as accurate as firing in bursts, it has its place on the battlefield, explained Command Sgt. Maj. Doug Maddi, Program Executive Office Soldier, Fort Belvoir, Va.

“Soldiers need automatic capability while providing suppression fires during fire and movement,†he said, noting that Soldiers deployed to Afghanistan asked for that and are now getting it, an option absent in the M4, which only fired in semi-automatic and bursts. A new drop-in trigger allows the A1 to function with the automatic setting.

Maddi and others spoke May 21, during a media roundtable, marking the milestone of the first Army unit to receive the beefed-up carbines, 1st Infantry Division, out of Fort Riley, Kan.

The beefier weapon is not unknown to the Army. Soldiers in U.S. Special Operations Command have been using M4-A1s since 1994.

The tradeoff in weight and performance is something Soldiers gladly accept, Maddi said, noting that the M4-A1 weighs 7.74 pounds, compared to the M-4’s 7.46. The weight comparisons include the back-up iron sight, forward pistol grip, empty magazine and sling.

Another feature that’s new on the A1 is an ambidextrous selector lever, something that’s especially attractive to Maddi, who said he’s a lefty who often gets left out when it comes to equipment design."

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/05/27/army-converting-m4-carbines-m4a1/#

http://soldiersystems.net/2014/05/23/army-begins-upgrade-m4-carbines/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might have missed it but I'm busy building an ALiVE mission using the Excellent Russians factions. However I noticed that only 3 of the "sub-divisions" (sorry no idea what their official designation is) will work in ALIVE; VDV TV and MSV. In themselves a nice balance of forces BUT no Aircraft or Chopper support So I can't call them using ALiVE unless you can think of a way ?

EDIT ! oops just spotted some choppers with the VDV... playing now :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we get a rough ETA on the next release? Nothing specific, I don't want to rush anyone - just if we are we talking about days, weeks or months... would be very useful for our repo planning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×