Addon Suggestions

    Please suggest new modifications to be added to our repository in this thread.

    Please include the following information when doing so:


    1. Addon Name

    2. Addon Size

    3. Description

    4. Link to Addon

    5. Test Notes (If/when applicable)

    Suggested addons will be considered for testing. Alternatively, applications can be individually tested by the person suggesting the addon, or other volunteers.

    Council will decide over fully tested addons in a majority vote.


    Of course you can also request certain addons to be replaced or removed.



    Quote from Filth

    Add request: CUP Vehicles

    Would have to add back units and weapons as those are dependencies for vehicles.


    Quote from Filth

    Removal request: Enhanced Movement

    I'm still up for giving this another go, this time knowing to enforce certain restrictions. As far as I remember this was removed after 1 training session. If it goes well great, if not easily gotten rid of

    Quote from Filth

    Add request: CUP Vehicles

    Based on its irreplacability and variety, particularly regarding use with enemy forces.

    (Would also go along way in keeping old ops playable)

    Could you please write down some Vehicles you think that will disappear with this mod change so I can let you know exactly which ones you'll actually lose? I think a lot of stigma comes from not knowing the latest RHS updates on the Independent (Guerrilla) side, basically adding those things that were missing before such as BRDMs, T-34s, T-55s, PKT Technicals etc. When I saw these vehicles actually existed in RHS I was surprised myself and it's the only reason I would ever say yes to removing CUP Vehicles.


    So please line up a few and I'll check if they're in the pack, and let see if I can convince you :)

    Quote from Oksman

    BRDMs, T-34s, T-55s, PKT Technicals

    I'd like to stress once again the variety of CUP. Of course we'll have soviet stuff, obviously, provided it does in fact work which isn't all that likely. It's RHS after all.


    What about these though.

    • Non-wreeee M113s
    • Non-wreeee Strykers
    • BTRs not made of paper that will actually work when spawned through script
    • LAVs
    • M60s
    • Land rovers
    • Jackals
    • Boxers
    • Improvised technicals
    • Vodnik 30mm

    To name a few. Don't have time to check the full list now.

    Simply put, variety of available vehicles will take a big hit.


    Not to mention the countless camos these and more vehicles come in, allowing us to apply different variants to different factions.

    Not to mention the utter brokenness of many RHS vehicles.

    Not to mention the turrets and heavy weapons.

    Not to mention the testing effort that will have to go into figuring out damage balance.

    Not to mention that the AI simply does not work with many RHS vehicles (BMP gunners will dismount and engage us with their rifles, for instance).


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    We use CUP first and foremost for use with enemy forces. Lower quality of CUP has been proven to be benefitial for performance when used with enemy forces.


    Performance is an important concern for many GOL members who aren't playing on cutting edge systems.


    I'm not confident we can build working, balanced, well performing missions without CUP vehicles.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    GOL mod history in a nutshell:


    Add CUP vehicles.

    Remove CUP vehicles.

    Add CUP vehicles.

    Remove CUP vehicles.

    Add CUP vehicles.

    Now we remove them again.


    No one in their right mind would remove CUP vehicles. It's essential.

    We already know that we can't do without. This endless back and forth speaks for itself.


    Please learn from past mistakes, even though they may not be your own.

    Having once again received welcome news on our new setup, I've taken another look at the preliminary Modset.

    I have to admit that I'm worried about the direction it's taking.


    Previous administrations have made a strong point of the need for minimalism in terms of which mods we use, how many, what size they are, and whether we really (really) need them.


    Many of the skilled editors, scripters, and tech pros make an equally strong point about using as few mods as possible because of performance concerns, potential errors, conflicts, and in favour of those of us not playing on cutting edge systems.


    Now, looking at this one again I'm seeing loads of fluff, tack, and emblazonment contrary, or at the very least indifferent, to these arguments:

    • Two sets of advanced movement mods, where one would be enough to constantly break immersion and foster abuse, as I previously pointed out.
    • Two trench packs where we currently have one perfectly adequate one that doesn't even see any use.
    • A standing static line pack, where we already have a perfectly adequate system built into our framework, which I assume will carry over to the new one (please correct if I'm wrong).
    • An active protection system which I think you could make many strong arguments against along several lines (realism, immersion, necessity, and has it even been tested?).
    • Something called "true breaching". As if ACE wasn't complicated enough, with a majority of players failing to even use basic keybinds to their great advantage.
    • More weapon stances, as if we didn't have enough already, which the majority of players don't make any use of.
    • More weapon swap animations. Do we really need this?
    • More NVG animations. Do we really?
    • More captive animations. Do we?

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dear top bollocks. Please let's stick to what really matters. Let's stick to what's tried and true where we can.


    I'm petitioning you to remove the addons named above.


    I'm reluctant to start work on missions using this, what seems to me, bloated mess with several layers of Kitsch. Nothing good can come of it.


    Oksman  Blu.


    Edit: Oh, and what about CUP vehicles? Any news on that debate?

    Keep in mind that yes this is a preliminary modset and that the majority of these are due to change, I've tested them is basic cases and I'm already considering removing True Breaching as it's in alpha and doesn't support the things we use.


    The GGE stuff however is rather good with the weapon swap being actually tactically useful. Now in arma it is faster to swap to your pistol than to reload. The captive animation just adds an animation to the player while moving hostages, but not required as well as the nvg one.


    I agree with you on the weapon stances, they may be very good and allow some good ready stances, however, the key binds used are a bit confusing and conflict with the likes of TFAR.


    There's 2 enhanced movement mods as the renewed one is dependent on the old one which has been discontinued since 2017 I think. However, more disipline will be put in place to moderate this and use it in it's intended case. I'm aware of the abuse it had a while ago but I'm hoping that these guys aren't gonna go climbing up a 3 story to machine gun down 4 dudes 1.5km away.


    Trench packs I haven't tested I'll get back to you on that one.


    The standing static line as the name describes allows for a more precise static line with non steerable parachutes, this does require people to stand up and hook up, though this can still be used in conjunction with our parajump button.


    The APS mod is apparently a real thing (so I'm told) on some IFVs allowing interception of ordanance before it contacts the armour. The upside of this extending the longevity of our vehicle crews though friendly infantry may need to be a little further away, up for discussion.


    CUP Vehicles is still up for debate amongst NCOs alike, I can't really make the decision on my own, however as I stated before the dependencies of Vehicles requires the Units and Weapons packs. And yes, this does exceedingly increase the size of the modpack. Still people are invited to comment.


    One you haven't mentioned and I though I might is the BettrIR mod, great thing and will make night ops a lot more bearable. Allows us to have IR emitters on our helmets which provide some light for our NVGs which are really good.


    I haven't linked the optional modset as I believe there's a lot to be considered there but will update you guys once progress has been made.

    Quote from Blu.

    Now in arma it is faster to swap to your pistol than to reload.

    That has always been the case. No news. No mod required to achieve something that is already the case.

    Quote from Blu.

    weapon stances [...] key binds used are a bit confusing and conflict with the likes of TFAR.

    This is complete news to me. Which TFAR keybinds tie into WASD?


    Even if what you say is correct, which I dispute, it can be solved individually. I don't want to load a mod, learn a new system, adjust more keybinds to tackle this, what is to me an absolute non-issue.

    Quote from Blu.

    more disipline will be put in place to moderate this and use it in it's intended case.

    Same thing here: load a new mod, have our own machines as well as the server struggle with handling it, adjust keybinds, plus ultimately changing the behaviour of people, seems to me like the least optimal solution we could possibly think of.

    And for what? Do we really miss anything?

    I'd argue no, we rather clearly don't, and we can do without the performance impact and the work required.


    Quote from Blu.

    more precise static line

    Could you elaborate? In what way is it more precise?

    We continue in the same line: You have to make a case. Please don't be cryptic. You'll have to properly convince me here.

    Load a new thing, have it impact performance, learn new systems...

    Why?


    Quote from Blu.

    The APS mod is apparently a real thing [...} up for discussion.

    I've already spoken with Oks about this.


    The few vehicles we can at all use for mechanised or armoured operations are already extremely survivable. Making vehicles that are in terms of quality already sub-par and therefor unusable for us more survivable is - fluff. It's not worth our time. Our harddrive space. Our RAM usage. Our poor old server.


    Many more arguments could be made, such as that none of said vehicles with the exception of the Namer and the T-14 use APSs in real life. Such as the very unrealistic proposition of this thing being effective against kinetic rounds, which is at this point merely an unconfirmed rumour spread by the Russians. For reasons.

    And even if it were true - do we want complete invulnerability for 5-10 enemy rounds? Aren't our tanks already overpowered enough?


    Let's not let wishful thinking guide us here.


    And this is what I'd ask, alternatively, as what you're saying to me sounds like a firm "no" to my petition of removal. Could we not at the very least build a solid set of things that we know we want and actually can use? And then a second set in which we put all our wishful thinking and experimentation, to be discussed, tested, solved and implemented at a later date.


    That's the least we can ask for in the interest of quality, as well as ease of transition. Please don't shove all this down our throats. It doesn't bode well for my motivation to make missions, or to keep playing missions for that matter.


    Quote from Blu.

    CUP Vehicles is still up for debate amongst NCOs alike, I can't really make the decision on my own, however as I stated before the dependencies of Vehicles requires the Units and Weapons packs. And yes, this does exceedingly increase the size of the modpack. Still people are invited to comment.

    I've made my comments. CUP vehicles is something we simply cannot do without.


    As for everything else, I remain unconvinced. And ultimately alarmed with regards to the attitude behind building this set that is guaranteed to not do us any favours.