Welcome to Steelbeasts.com

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

All Activity

This stream auto-updates   

  1. Past hour
  2. I'm not sure if I understand what you're getting at, to be honest. But in any case, as a matter of principle, I like clear-cut and balanced customer/vendor relations. Steel Beasts Pro PE as is represents two decades of work put into it. It caters to a really small market. That's why we set a price that makes it worth our while to keep working on it. Likewise we sell updates from time to time as the PE community's contribution to the continued development. This creates a very transparent situation for every customer with respect to price, and value. You can try out the value with low priced short term licenses. If the quality convinces you, you can support our work with a moderately priced annual subscription, or pay a one-time fee for unlimited access with occasional upgrades. There are no hidden costs. You know what you get, and you know what we're asking for it. I understand that the idea of third party developers stepping in to add playable vehicles, sold separately as DLCs, has a certain appeal. For a number of reasons that isn't going to happen, period. I'm not at liberty to talk about the two most important reasons why it's not going to happen. You'll have to trust me that those reasons are valid.
  3. nice picture
  4. Today
  5. Hehe, wonder if Valero would get mad knowing they "expanded" all over the sim world now
  6. it's good MOD . thanks daskal .
  7. it will still be vehicle centric from the player's point of view; while there will be several units under control, i intend to limit the amount of playable units, one or two per mission max (with perhaps limitations on external views); this gives a different feel for a mission when players are limited to a single vehicle more or less, you lose the vehicle, the mission is over. i want to curb the tendency for players to take artificial risks, and also i think even in my own experiments, i tended to appreciate playing with less chances to mess up, hot seating from unit to unit as tempting as it is also reduces immersion, it comes at a cost. less units under direct, playable influence gives all the more a critical sense of survival.
  8. "IF they were really such crap" Ever hear of the infamous missile gap? Western intelligence tended to not evaluate the actual quality of Soviet equipment. Billions of dollars were wasted chasing after Soviet prortypes. There are numerous examples of the analysts hyping Soviet capabilities that turned out to just that...hype. The IS-3 is a perfect example.
  9. Good point !
  10. Interesting but personally i think steel beasts isn't ideal for these sort of scenarios. In this kind of conflicts Aerial power, and Light infantry forces are more dominant than Armored forces. I think such a scenario would either work better in ARMA ( from point of playable infantry with Combined arms support) or DCS ( Fixed or Rotary winged pilot suporting Ground forces) , because Steel beasts doesnt let you play 1st person as a infantryman controlling every movie, Gunshot etc, not directly pilot a Helicopter from the Cockpit. Worst of all. Fixed wing support In SB is almost non existent save for off map invisible plane coming in for a pass dropping a few unguided bombs.
  11. and yet. in a game Like team fortress 2, the main game is actually free, people pay for Hat dlc's. Youd think it go by that logic of why buy that when Most of the content is here in main game? but hey youd be surprised how many profits are generated from Hat DLC's. Ive actually felt that games where most of content is already offered by BASe price and a few DLC'S ( as they should be) being content that players may want buy to thier own desire, butare not crucial to games enjoyment for the greater playerbase, rather than creating DLC's as necessary to the enjoyment of a game to a thin base game.
  12. Ok fine, the why was incorrect. Doesn't change his answer.
  13. Don't forget, there are plenty of new computers (laptops for example) that don't even have optical drives any more.
  14. But you "why" was incorrect. And i in fact correctly along with another poster corrected you Why it would be possible and not work how you described it. "the guy whose opinion counts" has stated other reasons for not doing so. "Business Model".
  15. Well I didn't buy into the earlier discussion, as I said the guy whose opinion counts said "no" (but more elegantly) and I was just relaying the "why". As I said "IIRC". Anyway the answer was "no", so I'm going with "no".
  16. Yesterday
  17. it was a dangerous dog M103 and Conqueror were built in response to the post ww2 IS series of tanks. and the more recent T10. IF they were really such crap. Nato wouldn't have bothered building Counters. Frankly those Nato tanks were also sort of "dogs" depending on how you look at them and were quickly retired once the MBT philosophy was in full swing and respective countries had the L& 105mm guns and tanks like the M60 , L7 armed Centurions, and the more powerful 120mm Chieftain. TH reason why T10 was the best heavy design from all those tanks was because it actually had pretty good mobility for a heavy. It was hoenstly Medium tank Grade mobility. (and not to mention a good gun). IT out did the T54 in mobility and was more or less matched with T55 and T62in that regard. ONly probelm was its cost, and Fuel consumtion compared to these tanks which meant it needed more logistics and couldnt keep up with those tankss. Even so the T10after relegated to Reserves once USSR had a healthy amount of T64 and T72 tanks.
  18. I'm with stavka maybe two options DVD or Blu-Ray (with shipping cost) + download (with some kind of server cost for download) Of course 100% free is better but if that is finally a no go... I will pay my download. Thanks for the details Ssnake!
  19. Theres another team behind that. ED as the core team has be consistently busy with the Usual stuff ( hornet ( as well as developing new ground Radar Technology for it), Nevada, 2.5 Merge, future maps like straight of Hormuz, bug fixing, as well as supporting 1.5 and 2.0 alpha) IT didnt fail. Simply the kickstarter was a scam. The guy who promised ran off with the money. Frankly kudos for ED for going along with it. even though they didnt have to. IT made many people happy.
  20. No it would make sense. your jsut thinking of it the wrong way. Players would see X model, but merely would be able to physically control from crew roles. Just via map for eg. Purchasing it would allow you to physically crew it with fully detailed interiors and modeled FCS as other ESim vehicles. simple. Who owns what wouldnt be an issue Really as there are still many standard models from ESim to chose from and custom content that could still be left to AI command or physically ordered via Map.
  21. Some people here don't mind to pay for a download, please think to add that option also! A storage for big data being available to download, even TB, is more cheaper than DVDs+Handling+Shipping, not to mention the risk of post service stolen, vat (here is 23% without minimum limit), custom fees, etc Exist multiple large storage solutions: google cloud, amazon s3, microsoft azure, dropbox, ....... only to mention a few My internet speed that is very common here is +120Mb/s, from my ISP, the newer solutions are around 200Mb/s, so big downloads its not a big deal. If people have internet issues they have the DVD solution, but for others that have very good internet, paying more to vat, taxes, etc and with multiple risks associated is a bit frustrating. Some time ago I got a peninsula Iberia scenery for xplane flight sim, it was +300GB, in modern times no one will send it on DVDs, if you use the dual layer DVD 8.5GB it will be 35 DVD that's completely non sense to send them. Today if the size is small is almost cheap or even cheap to send it through internet, if the size is huge, is more cheaper through internet than a tradicional DVD, not to mention that many times is impractical like the example above for very large amount of data. If the total maps are huge, I'm fully open to spend a small fee to help pay the cost of an online storage to have that data available through a download ;P Thank You!!!
  22. Also additionally I was not arguing against the fact of how we fight wars. But this is part of the problem. This is actually worse. You send a few cruise missile to hit a target, or A laser guided bombs from a drone, and you have collateral damge you only multiply "terrorism" Dunno about you but if a A Foreign nation started bombing Supped extremist in your nation only to have your innocent fellow friends and family members die from Collateral Damge youd pick up arms and want nothing put to kill as many of these " foreigners" as possible. Especially if they had a Physical military pretense in your country. I know I would feel that way, and amny others would if they image thier own country being subjected to something akin to that. Frankly Some people dont understand psychology or have the ability to think from the other person shoes, and simply lump such people as Primtives, OR "terrorists", when its simply Human Psychology. Nation building doesn't work either if the foreign nation citizens don't want you there to begin with. "IT is well that war is so terrible otherwise we should grow to fond of it"
  23. i wouldn't dispute you here- technology does not win wars: that is, there is no script that wins all wars. there is no single ingredient that you can always rely upon to do that. wars are always evolving, situations are always changing. my point however is generally that we should accept more or less that we aren't always going to be winning clear cut wars as such, the best we can do is to make them bearable. given that we can expect to be involved in open ended wars for the forseeable future, the best scenario is not to play the body count game. this is even the sort of thing that osama bin laden had stated his goal was to lure the united states into a slow bleed because of what that predictably does: if victory were resolved to a single epic battle were all the deaths were tallied up and at the end of the day you can play taps and then throw a victory parade the next day, that would be one thing. it's over and done with it and has different psychological schema; it doesn't have the same effect on morale as draining the same amount of will over a long period of time, which tends to wear out patience. it may seem like it shouldn't make a difference, all things being equal, but it does, mainly for the reason that it makes it look as though we simply combine being stubborn with a lack of imagination given the amount of time some alternative could have been worked out. it's like the difference being out in the elements on one horrifically cold day and being over and done with or just outside in drizzle and mud for weeks or months on end. the misery sets in...
  24. The coming update for 4.019 (new terrain engine) will be free. It was always intended to be part of the initial 4.0 delivery, but we had to pull it and go back to the drawing board as our initial UI concept for handling the (much larger) map data turned out to be impractical. What's being discussed right now is how we're making the map data themselves available. This depends a bit on how much there will be, in the end. If the amount of data are too large for making a download impractical - mind you, I don't expect this to happen - we may be forced to offer it as a DVD set, and producing and shipping those DVDs costs money. You COULD convert all the legacy maps by your own for free. But it would take a few days of computing time (like, all CPU cores at full blast for an entire weekend, plus possibly running out of disk space). So, that's not really what we recommend either. So, depending on the practicality a DVD set at the cost of material, shipping & handling (and nothing else) might turn out to be the solution. HOWEVER, I have to repeat that, I expect us to offer the map installer as a separate download, for free.
  25. yes however Technology alone doesnt win wars. Superior Technology didnt save the Germans from Russian Onslaught. Panthers and Tigers were feared by the allies and by historians also considered one of the best tanks made during the war in terms of technology. on a 1vs 1 basis compared to allied tanks they were really good. Much better. But that didnt matter there were simply so many more T34's For Eg that Higher #s of simpler tanks ( but still relevant) overwhelmed them. Cheaper tanks, simpler to mass produce, won again, more advanced, but smaller number of more expensive to produce tanks. Soviets also had a huge pool of manpower in action to significant armored forces compared to the Germany army. Even had US or other western allied not intervened acorss North Africa, and Europe,With Lend lease, the SOviets still would have won. simply at a even higher costs, and a longer duration of warring. It worked for Vietnamese when they first kicked out the French, then Again a second time they Finally reuninted North and SOuth Vietnam after US had to scoot by achieving" peace with honor" 3 years later. SUre in the Field of battle US defeated the NVA and VC in every major engagement, But in the end they still won, as hoCHi minh had Predicted ( Refer to quote in prior post) People protested the war. AKA grew tired first. So in the end they still won vs political Victory. Iranian Fanaticism. prevented Iraqi forces from taking over Iranian Oil rich territories in the west alongside thier borders despite them being much shorter on logisitics and Armor after the 2nd year on the war compared to Iraq, that was supported Financially and Equipment from the get go by the Oil Monarchies and the west. It was not an easy land grab as saddam had though thinking IRanian forces would be in shambles still so quick after their Revolution. ANd frankly many Nato Commanders who served through out Post ww2 to end of cold war are glad Cold war never went hot. Many did not feel confident, even with 1 tank crew being trained to take on up to 10 tanks at a time, it would have been very possible that Soviets would have overwhelmed nato in mainland Europe by sheer numbers ( IN a sceanario where nukes arent used). Within a Certain period from about 1970 onwards Soviets also had Superior Armor ( T64, and folowed on by the cheaper, and much more mass produced T72 tanks) whilst up until 1980/81, Nato had venerable tanks compared to those types. Again Conflicts without clear objectives or those that may contain too many political restrictions that may interfere with potential victory Should be a avoided but thats another matter. yes and it has a greater impact on eceonomy. A general rule of thumb should be if you are willing to send drones or machines where you arent willing to commit any Conventional ground troops, then you should not commit to War or Violent action against another all to begin with. This is the problem Technology is causing more conflicts actually. frankly itl be far more dangerous, because soon enough the Big players will get more aggressive because of the mentality of " . OH whats the harm of war now? its just Machines destroying other machines and not Humans"
  26. Why don't we help the guys from Si89 Studios with constructive ideas There's a lot off expertise on this forum when it comes to armour I don't think there will be a conflict of interests if we discuss it on this forum but its probably best if any contributors join Sim HQ And discuss it there
  27. From reading earlier posts I was if the impression it was meant to have been included in the last paid update but because of issues it got pulled. Is this not the case?
  28. Not sure why you would think it would be free. It's not a patch, it is a significant update that has taken years of work.
  1. Load more activity