Late rhs x-mas present

[raedor 8]

especially in mp this could get hard to do. but we'll see

[ShadowY 0]

sorry, but where do you all see snorkels? and if there'd be some, tank would die as normal in the water.

we didnt discuss this function. do real t-55s/64s have snorkels? maybe we can bring such things in later versions.

Must be one hell off a script and animation to wait a half hour till it`s ready to use

great tanks btw. Sigma did a great job as usual

Now I go wait for the T84-120 OPLOT

[benu 1]

Our units are not, and will not ever be compatible with any config enhancement projects (excluding finnish defense forces, everything works with it). This is including both ECP and GMR. If you experience any problems with either one of these mods installed, we will not help you as it is usually a waste of our time.

I don't understand what would be so wrong in making them ecp compatible as it does not break anything else and is easy to do by just adding the ecp eventhandler class. And you still can overwrite any or all ecp effects with your own if you want too.

I personally think that ecp is a great thing and will be here to stay. As you can have only one config.bin in effect at any time it is a really good idea to make a standardized and enhanced version of the config.bin.

Although i can fully understand that you do not want to "support" uses for your addons that were not intended by you.

[Acecombat 0]

Our units are not, and will not ever be compatible with any config enhancement projects (excluding finnish defense forces, everything works with it). This is including both ECP and GMR. If you experience any problems with either one of these mods installed, we will not help you as it is usually a waste of our time.

Look BD i know what youre saying but its only a one line of code that we can write in ECP which excludes that classname from its explosions thats all i was asking for , if RHS cant give it then i'll just go to the ECP thread and ask someone else there for help i guess.

[Acecombat 0]

Problem solved thanks to RED of ECP see the ECP thread all those who want to retain RHS explo effects with ECP.

[BraTTy 0]

Quote[/b] ]

Well i guess we really could need some more advanced scripters poor reador cant do it all alone, any volunteers who wanna join us in that role?

Advanced? I could be considered adequate..I been wanting to HELP on some modern stuff, I say help in the way that I don't want to do it all,but now you released your stuff and any projects still happening?

I could help with scripting,config,animating,testing and I would be good at implementing new features and brainstorming and such

Just that I have to work on my projects too

[Shadow NX 1]

contact me then

[SNIPER_SKULL 0]

good job Mr.Bean on sandy rocks island

[raedor 8]

those are all bugs you found? c'mon?!

[Wilco 944]

I found a bug, but I haven't read the topic so it may have already been posted:

When I add some units to the cargo of the T55 tanks they start out on the tank, but about five seconds later, they get out. The tank commander then tells them to get in, but they respond with a "negative" and the option to get in the tank doesn't show up on my selection tab. Anyone else have this problem?

[Heatseeker 0]

I found a bug, but I haven't read the topic

You should have read the topic . Default condition for units in OPF is "aware" and that means the gunner will rotate the tower causing units to drop out, tank crew must be set to safe so other soldiers can ride on top. Who would ride on top of a tank if it wasnt safe .

[Wilco 944]

Why thank you

To answer your quesion Heatseeker....I would

[tankieboy 0]

Can someone check this as I am at work (again). Playing with them last night I placed a group (F2) of navy T64's, clicked onto the lead tank changed it to 'player as commander' so I could lead the group and I swear it turned into a T55!

As I said I am at work so cant re-check this so if someone would be so kind...

[Angantyr 0]

Hi,

first of all great work on those tanks. They are really nice.

I found some bugs:

1. The cargo view of the Type 59 and the Type 69-II is bad.

2.The T55 and the T54 wreck look the same.

3.The Enigma can carry soldiers.

[raedor 8]

ok, thx @ all.

update is coming soon.

@tankieboy: yes, that is a bug. some other guys had that, too

[tankieboy 0]

ok, thx @ all.

update is coming soon.

@tankieboy: yes, that is a bug. some other guys had that, too  

Thanks mate. They are really good btw.

[Acecombat 0]

What are the classnames for these tanks?

Are they like SIG_T55AM2 like given in the README as editor names? Its a bit confusing?

I wanna know so i can add them to the ECP's settings.

[MR.Mapper 0]

yeah,that´s the class name.....

SIG_T54 , SIG_T55AM2 , .....and so on

[Johann "onn" Bitsoenn 0]

What are the classnames for these tanks?

Are they like SIG_T55AM2 like given in the README as editor names? Its a bit confusing?

I wanna know so i can add them to the ECP's settings.

We are terribly sorry that the readmes have not been attached to downloads. That was a mistake, everything was i a bit hurry... it was our just first release and some problems occured, but now as we learned about them and we experienced, it will not happen again :]

[Acecombat 0]

Well the Readme was there with the Download in the T-55 atleast , no probs with me there but it would have been better if you guys had defined the classnames specifically it would have cleared up my confusion.

Apart from that the packs fine

Hoping to see a update soon.

[Sigma-6 29]

What are the classnames for these tanks?

Are they like SIG_T55AM2 like given in the README as editor names? Its a bit confusing?

I wanna know so i can add them to the ECP's settings.

Yeah, the tag in the filenames is SIG_*.*

This is because the T-72, T-80, T-90 and etc. . . are supposed to overwrite my previous packs, so if you have those, it might still be good to delete all teh SIG_T-72B.pbo and SIG_T80.pbo and such when the RHS ones come out.

Of course. . . I didn't release a T-55 pack before my work with RHS on these, but hey. . . gotta admit. . . it's good to see my tag on these. . .

[Acecombat 0]

Hehe no probs man after all credit where its due i say you did a fantastic job on the models and textures man , i still use your T-80 and T-72's even though their pre-resistance stuff

[SPQR 0]

Sigma-6, as a true and passionnate armored vehicles lover, I'm always fond of your tanks and IFV since your first beta, T-72, T-80, LAV, Bison,... and now T-55 and T-64 , and your realism seeking work.

But :

- Why do all the shells fly at 2000m/s; from 100mm to 125mm cailber ?

- Why didn't the T-55AM2 fire the 9M117 Basnya ATGM, which would give it a true and realistic advantage over its kin ?

[Johann "onn" Bitsoenn 0]

- Why didn't the T-55AM2 fire the 9M117 Basnya ATGM, which would give it a true and realistic advantage over its kin ?

9K116/9M117 system (which is named Bastion) has been installed on T-55AM2B tank.

[@cero 0]

Damn, I was coming here to do to things, one, report some bugs. No much point on that, they all been reported

Two, to say how much I like this pack, but you allready now that, who don't like it? he/she must be nuts.

I can't wayt for an update.

BTW, in the mission that you guys made, do I supose to stop with the platoon for the rest of the game after I blowed up the M60s?

The thing is, I had an error in the beguining of the mission telling me that the T64( or was it the type 69?) texture was not found, (but this is been addressed allready) so I supose that the mission didn't work how it should work if everything was loaded propley.

I don't think is a problem with the mission, but with the missing things that for some reason couldn't load.

If you need some more info I'll play it again and report anything I find to you guys.

Apart of it, nice, niceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee pack.

@CERO