alessiomoreno

Greetings :) Yes, @R0adki11l, now that you mention it, I did play around quite a bit with your pack, and the whole of NAF. I remember! Quite some time ago ;) That's been exactly what I was talking about when I wrote that there were well others besides Vilas. So now on to the question - Roadkill, would you hypothetically give your permission for somebody to port the vehicles, not just to A3's, but also RHS' standards? And since I for my part really can't help out at the moment, @keeway are such tanks, further versions of the T-55, something you, 1) would be interested in, 2) something either you or some one else on the team, might have the time and ressources to port, if you were allowed to? At least in my perspective such older Soviet tanks, which despite their age, are still seeing wide spread usage all over the world, are really something I miss in ArmA right now, especially since RHS only offers more modern tanks and their configurations. I could see a number of factions benefit from them. Any one else on the topic? Best regards, ~

So French weapons will be then used by Germany, so no Free French or Vichy France troops? Or perhaps even early French Army? Anyways, I'm more so interested in the weapons than a whole faction anyways. In regards to Westwall, since they only portray late war action (44-45)(at least as far as I am aware of), I did not think/ even assume, they would have the French for anything but perhaps Freedom Fighters, Anyways - I know nothing - we'll see! (At least first Westwall release will not have any French; the only thing I do know for sure.) ~

Hi folks! Congrats on the latest update! Real good :) Also I am glad to see you guys chose to include GREF, definitely the right choice IMO, since probably most people who'd use RHS mods will use GREF as well, or might otherwise miss out on quite a bit, if I may say so.. On a completely different note, talking about T-55s and such something came to my mind recently: Is there any interest and manpower, I'm just throwing ideas on the table, to perhaps port other vehicles than those already done? This is really just an idea - maybe contact some folks back from A2 Project '85 http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=17822 Namely perhaps, Vilas and Ryugugu for their models of T-55 variants, T-62 (for like Afghan troops, they're using them now http://www.armyrecognition.com/customer/thierry/afghanistan/t62m_01.jpg ), and M60 tanks (certainly some factions uses some). What d'you think of that? Might it be possible to contact the authors and ask whether they'd give permission to port the better quality models (such as T-62 and M60), perhaps with minor alterations where necessary? It would then of course, be a lot of work to do as Reyhard did with the T-72M, T-55, and T-34 and make them as much compatible with RHS' work as possible. But first of - what's the opinion on this one? Has anyone heard of any incident where somebody contacted Vilas for A3 ports? I think I read of some instance somewhere, but for the life of me cannot recall where it was and in which exact context! Maybe somebody else knows more! Anyways - just food for thoughts - once I'm through with exams, might be able to lend a hand! Best regards, and thank you for your hard work, Keeway and co,! ~

So I mixed mods up, really? Oh, I am sorry! I recently checked all of the WW2 mods and I thought I had seen the French weapons on here. My bad! ~

Greetings! Love your work. Pumped to see everything comming along nicely :) Though as stated above AA/AT guns and I assume armoured vehicles as well, are way out of scope as for now, I nonetheless wondered; If you - in the future - get to a point where AVs and shaped charge warheads will become relevant, will you incorporate the armour and damage system from RHS? That is, broadly speaking of course, will your assets then be "compatible" with the RHS damage/ armour system? Hope I am not stretching my arm out too far! I wish you well on your journey, gentlemen! Best of luck :) ~

Thanks a lot for the answer PuFu, exactly what I wanted to hear. Pity about the PMM model, but that's just how it is! [Gsh-18 does sound nice indeed ;)] Why exactly is the PMM a joke? I have no idea of how resupply of the Army works. All I know 'bout it is from Wikipedia. Keep it up guys! :) ~

Hi there :) Will your mod, that is your infantry weapons in specific be compatible we ACE, e.g. Advanced Ballistics? Do you intend on adding Type38/ Type38C/ Type44 Rifles and Type 96 LMG for the Japanese faction? When you eventually add French troops, will they benefit from the APEX French Radio protocoll? Love your work, keep it up and be proud of what you're doing - it's making other people smile :) ~

Hi there folks (: Had a couple of questions I just wanted to drop here: First - in regards to the "new" soundscape feature I wondered how many of the NIArms Weapons already got their fair share of polishing in this department? In very rough figures, how much has been already done? The last RHS Update brought us custom muzzle flashes for almost all of their weapons, hence I've been wondering, whether that's something you've considered for your modpack as well? I read some where on this thread (or the old one), that a couple of weapons, those where the underlying base model was not originally created for the ArmA Engine, could, in large(r) numbers, potentially, dampen FPS rates. Now, since I use a lot of NIArms weapons in my missions, but would at times like to equip the AI with NIArms loadouts as well, I wanted to know, whether there is something like a list of which weapons exactly fall under this category, or whether we could have one. Has anyone ever run into a frame-rate issue, potentially, caused by this? Is it a even thing? And lastly, as always, thanks a lot for you stellar work Toadie, you're mod pack really elevates the whole ArmA experience! [To quite some degree ;)] Sincerely hope you're doing well :) ~

H there :) Just three little questions: I read some where here, couple of pages back I suppose, that the PMM had to be removed from the mod since you weren't able to contact the original author, as I really liked it, I've been curious, whether it'll return one way or another in the future? Has this issue, with respect to your usage of SteamWorkshop, affected any other moddels, I've so far apparently not been aware of? And last but not least, is there any specific reason as to why the PP-19 hasn't found it's way into the mod? Or is it just that nobody's gotten around making one? At the end of the day, thank you guys, loved the last Update, especially the Mi-28N is exactly what I've been waiting for in a long time! And the Zenitco AKs are pure gold, love 'em! ~

Hi there :) Just came across your project, keeway - and I gotta say: Great job, thank you a lot !!! If any lunch break could start with an insta up-lifter like this :D Now, I have hundreds thousands of questions though (figuratively) and would also like to add my 2 cents to the discussion.. Guess I'm gonna go with my thoughts first: I feel like you'd be on the right track with making the PR:OpFor GREF dependent; since you already need AFRF and USAF and factually your modification basically is a sort-of extension to GREF, rather than having anythin to do with the other two. Besides that RHS is (hopefully) going to update and improve on GREF continously and as always with that excellent quality we're all looking for - so that being said - GREF would make your life infintely more easy in regards to the ArmAverse factions; which I suppose can only be considered a good thing? As for factions: I think an obvious choice for an additional faction would be the Syrian Arab Army (SAA). The faction could be fairly well represented with material avaiable in AFRF, GREF and really does belong to the whole ME scenario, as well as a true OpFor faction to justify some Russian boots on the ground on those lovely ME maps ;) Vehicles would entail older Urals; GAZ-66, UAZs, Datsuns; BTR-60, 70, 80(A); BMP-1(P),2,[3 (early)]; BRDM-2/ ATGM variant; T-90; as with T-72s and t-55s however, I guess, as of now, it'll be difficult, since there are no proper (that is RHS compatible) T-72(M/M1M//A/AVs) or T-55(A/AM) (yet?). Hence except for those T.90s heavy armour would be, at least for now, 'a bit' troublesome. As for aircraft though I'd think the Su25 should do fine; MIG21/23 would be nice too, but 're just not avaiable; further on Mi-25 are basically delivered with the GREF CDFs' Mi-24s (excluding the Mi-24G of course). As for weapons, it'd be AKM(S)s for the infantry, with GP-25s and some older scopes for spotters; SVDs for snipers and AK(S)-74(M)s (perhaps) for special forces and finally AKS-74Us for vehicle crews. Anti-Tank weaponry would very well be delivered by the launchers included in RHS:AFRF. And if you do later expanded on to an Iranian faction, as mentioned on armaholic, their Militia units would fit right in with the SAAs' NDF. As with documentation I could only point you to Wikipedia and countless YouTube videos; but I reckoned you could do that yourself and it might rather come across as an insult of some sort, if I posted such blatantly obvious stuff here - I do not have any inside scoop or special source though; only what I would gather from Wikipedia and by following the news some what. So what you think, keeway; what does anyone think of SAA? Other than the SAA, I think Boko Haram, as somebody else already mentioned on here, would be my sure bet and well-deserving contender to serve as Duala machine gun fodder. Edit: I just happened to remember, that, perhaps, this: http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=26169, could come across as handy for the Peshmerga faction; what d'you think? Oughta be put to some use this addon; it'd be a shame if it existed, but, well stopped at that. Plus I remembered all of a sudde, that there was somebody, I think I remember, who already started on doing SAA repaints of basic vehicles - just treid to find it, could'nt find it though; but maybe some one else remebers, maybe it was taken down? Gotta get me something to eat now; 'll come back here later. Thanks a lot; 'll keep following this closely!! ~

Greetings! Some time ago I asked a modding related questions which was I either inappropriate and nobody 'pointed' it 'out', or it simply got lost in the way. Here another try though: As a long time fan of your project, and tank-fanatic I wondered how much time went into creating a proper tank modell for A3 (as such I regard your works). My estimation would 've been at around 360h alltogether. Does that come close? Besides, now that there's been a lot of talk around GREF, do you plan on creating new assets for GREF in terms of vehicles or will you resort to ports? [Excluding those HMMV variants you been writing about earlier. (Which I think would be some awesome additions!)] Many thanks in advance, and if inappropriate for this thread please remove or delete! ~

Hi there :) @Rabbit35 - Many compliments from my side for actually caring about about compatibility, especially with ace3. It seems a lot like, very much unfurtunately, most mod-creators seem not to care much, if at all, about cross-community compats, and that right there I regard as a real shame. Lots of missed opportunities. Good to see you chose to walk a different line; especially in regards to the tank/ armour configuration. I really don't see why people completely disregard all the effort and work put forth by Olds'; like, at least in my humble view, in regards to projects centred around modern assets - I feel like they ought to care that their respective (tank) models are actually properly useable - I mean of course everyone is free to do anything they want, their work, their time, their choices - no compromises on that! - but I feel so much more could be achieved when people would choose to collaborate more. Enough rambling though. Can't express how satisfied I was, upon reading that it's different with your project and that you actually do care! So good. That sort of attitude and endeavor really doesn't get enough appreciation I feel.. I can assure you though, that there are many, many more people out there, who think like me :) I shall be very much looking forward to the fruits of your efforts, guys - looks so promising! @welshstalker - Glad to be able to employ some well-done Ppsh, finally :) That weapon to me seems like something, that should've already been out there for quite some time now. Takes good foresight to see this though, I might add ;) Keep up restoring my faith in this modding community :) Hehe ~

Then I would like to wish all of you folks some good summer vacations! Take care :) ~

@Rabbit35 Awesome! Thanks for answering this quick, I'm honoured ;) As for how RHSs' Armour System: First of all: I must apologize for that I am not 100% up to date with all of this... lost a bit of the tiny insight I used to have; though I cannot promise anything, for various reasons (that would be very much unfair, tbh), I will see to it once I have spare time as I've had today! Eventually I would like to wrap my head 'round this stuff. On the topic now: As far as I remember it was this link with which it all started: https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Tanks_Config_Guidelines Than this is Olds' thread - you'd probably find this one yourself, but I am certain somewhere in there is some sort of link to some sort of Wiki on how to configure tanks that way.. otherwise I'd ask Olds; shall I do that? https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/161885-real-armor-mod/ This is certainly related; it's from Olds after all: https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Damage_Description Blog by Damian90, - can't remember whether it really is useful for you, interesting though, I guess? (It sure was for me.) http://www.rhsmods.org/b/5 Official RHS statement on their implementation of RAM: http://www.rhsmods.org/w/afrfarmor Hopefully any of this helps.. I sure would like to help more if I could, but... just let me know if you got something, I'll do what I can do.. I am just not experienced with any of this stuff, unfortunately :huh: ~

Guys, gentlemen, oh my dear, I shall say: Just stumbled up on this thread, this is all news to me - I am blown away. Awesome! Nah.. I do have to ask this though, and please don't get offended, I am stoked to see what you got; but I have to ask this nonetheless: Will you/ Have you put equal effort in portraying USMC and IJA/ IJN // UKAF/ USA and Heer/ SS ? Or are you more focused on representing the Allied side of the conflict first of all? (That is in terms of first and formost quality and then quantitiy/ composition of content.) Latter interpretation is something that is most common in pretty much every video game; I would argue it to be the case even with the, in this regard, much esteemed RO2:RS! I am asking this, since the latter interpretation is what I remember from ol' A2 HiP & Inv44 back in the day. I do understand where they were coming from, paying more attention to detail on the Allies, since that's what you'd end up playing most of the time, especially considering that most people primarily and understandibly play ArmA for the Coop-experience. However as being some one who has always been wired just a tad differently, I am secretely hoping that, with this new era of WWII mods in ArmA, you may put aside such thing as 'inequality of potrayal'. That is of course not to say you ever did!! - Don't get me wrong, please. Ahh... I so much wish I could help you guys out on anything... Let's see what I can do about that :unsure: Ahh.. and excuse another pesky question of mine: Do you have anybody to help you with Japanese Radio protocolls? Take care everybody, and take my best wishes, will you? ~

Hi there :) I just recently discovered this modification, and I must say I am really looking forward to this project!! Looks very interesting, especially in the light of Tanoa now being officially avaiable; though the theoretical location wouldn't be necessarily 100% accurate it yet comes close enough as apposed to any other map (with the exception of Lingor perhaps; Icebreakr :rolleyes: ). Got three silly questions though: 1) How serious do you guys take things like ballistics and weapon behaviour and such? Or let me put it in other words; how important do you regard realism (excluding textures and the like; gameplay-realism if you so will)? And in that context; don't get me wrong - I'm simply asking out of sheer curiosity - do you consider making ballistic data for your rifles ACE compatible? Love me some sniping with that M1903A4 :ph34r: (Will there be some Type99 Sniper variant?) 2) Your tanks; will they use Vanilla Damage Values or will they be configured after Olds/ Bakermans RAM (RHS)'s System? 3) Now that APEX officially grants us Chinese radio protocoll,; which must be like Christmas for you guys, do you have anybody to come up with Korean radio/ voice protocolls? Unfortunately I can't help with the latter, but such would be awesome, huh? Keep up your noble efforts, you brave men ;) Looking forward to how this story proceeds! ~

HI there folks, and thank you very much, RHS-team, for the 4.1.1. hotfix - very nice of you and I shall say well paced! :) :) Thanks A lot :) I have a question though that might be difficult to answer, but I'd be glad if some one would share their experience nonetheless: How much time does it aproximately take to create a vehicle for ArmA 3 from scratch? And is there any difference concerning work necessary between, lets say, creating an APC or a tank? My guestimation 'd be at - 360h? How close is that? Have a good time, will you? :) ~

Hi there! In the lights of recent events [2016-06-06]; I as well, would wish to read some, at least humbly detailed, status report concerning 'Leight's OpFor Pack', and how, and if the issue surrounding the accusation(s) and according ban of the author, have been resolved. After all the mod is still downloadable and in use with many, on one hand and while stealing is indeed inappropriate and nothing I'd support in any way or shape; on the other, I do must state, that to my, admittedly limited knowledge, a single port of mentioned size, should easily be either erase- or replaceable; or am I wrong on that assumption? Anyway clarification would be (very) much appreciated. (Much) Thanks in advance to whom any condescends to deal with this pesky topic! [Pesky - in the sense of that some one even dares to ignore such simple and essential rule as to a) ask authors for their permission b) not crediting them for their work and last but not least c) hence rendering an otherwise seemingly solid mod effectively not useable.] ~

Love it! Youu guys are great, and if you read this, thank you Yura :) Awesome news, awesome stuff, awful lot of dread comming some bad guys' way ;) Got one question here - no request, just out of curiosity - is there any particular reason why there's no T90AK or T72 Commander Version? What would be the most appropriate vehicle to fill this role and do modern tank formations even need such Command-Vehicle; Russians in specific? ~

Hi there! I will apologize in advance for my question might be a bit off-topic, but maybe you can come up with a reasonable answer nonetheless! So: In the 0.4.1 version RAM will be intergrated, with the aim of achieving comparabilty between RHS and Vanilla Armor/ Warheads (HEAT only?), correct? With this in mind - as I don't know how much RAM itself was able to actually change the armor of the given BIS assets - how are things going to change for vehicles using the Vanilla 'armor system' (:D), like CUP, BWMod, (RDS?) and the like? Are such vehicles (and corresponding AT weapons) from such other modfications going to be affected as well, and if so, how (roughly)? Thank you for your efforts, and in specific, thank you for having the guts to implement RAM as a standard, I presume this step alone must have been an enormous amount of work! And last but certainly not least, even more thanks for being the only ones who actually take the combined arms aspect of ArmA serious!! Best regards as always ~

It's that kind of comment that I'd call scary. Beautifully scary though. And vague. (Is it?) I'm definitely keen to find out - got some nice little kopfkino going on already ;) ~

I will admit I hadn't actually planned on them specifically, but if there's a demand, I'd certainly consider it. . Hi there folks, greetings master toadie! Blessing be onto you, simply for making ths remark! Hallelujah! For ArmA has never seen an adequate or worthy FG-42 modell - never. There have been some attempts - some were better, some less so - but no one actually quite nailed it. Such model from your mighty hands though, would be not just be worthy, but, I dare say,astounding enough to be declared as one of the wonders of the modern world. I could do this all day long. Enough praise though: Yees, there is demand for a worthy FG-42 modell. Take my blessings and stay well, sir :) ~

And this is how some one can bring joy into the world ;) (Or death to their virtual enemies :D :D) Only adds to a good day, wish you guys one too :) :) ~

Hi there :) The question might seem a bit obsolete; but just out of cheer curiosity: Somewhere in the updates I read that the T72M4 had been looked through by RedPhoenix, who is, as far as I understood, with RHS as well, hence my question: Has by any chance the T72M4 been configured to be compatible with the RHS/ RAM armour system? Are effects dealt by RHS RPGs, for instance, as intended? Same goes to T72B variants vs. CZ version. How would the czech ERA etc.(?), stack up against T72B variants anyhow? And last but not least, does anybody here have further insight in what actual night fighting & targeting capabilites the T72M4 has? Very best regards, and, something that is never going to be obsolete: Thanks a lot for your work ;) ~ Alessio

Hi there, lads =) Just curious: What's that british WWII toy pack doing? And did you consider doing a Boys Rifle for it? Hope you're doing good, & sending my best regards from across the sea ;) ~