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.

Trackpin

Members
  • Content count

    63
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Trackpin

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Many thanks to Red, Grenny and others for putting Cold Waters on my radar (sonar?). I have been playing it for few weeks now, and exploring the very good range of mods and DLC that have been created but the community. Very enjoyable game, with a very different pace to SB. No option for any kind of MP play at the moment, but it would be interesting to split the various tasks eg: Nav/Helm, Command/Sonar, Weapons/Decoys. Something along the lines of driver, TC and gunner in SB. Some would be happy with head to head attack-sub duels too. Currently the latest beta is proving a tad tricky, but the previous release is solid. Definately one to watch as the AI and DLC develops. cheers Trackpin
  2. Dune field visuals remind me of the Novalogic Games "voxel" technology of 20 years ago. In its day a great leap forward over contemporary polygon-based terrain graphics. For now, it would be great to lose the rectilinear high colour contrast (almost Minecraft..) look of the near field terrain textures in 4.019. The mid to distant field pallete of subdued colours looks more realistic, certainly for temperate latitudes. Ground detail, especially roads, also seems to pop in and out a lot more in 4.019 when in observer mode on UAVs/Helos. Anyone else noticed this? There was a Norwegian co, Blom ASA, doing a lot of Lidar surveys in Scandinavia a couple of years ago. Eventually all this data will percolate down to the public domain, once the cost has been amortised by various agencies. Trackpin
  3. Marko, Doing a UK skin for the Ulan would therefore create a workable stand-in for both Improved Warrior and Ajax. As, for the player, the turret "office" would look the same. Doing the Barracuda texture would be a challenge, but I recall seeing some great skins for Leos with this feature. The netting would save on a lot of fiddly Photoshop detailing though... Am I right in thinking the Ulan/Ajax carries fewer troops than the Warrior? Can that capacity be set in the mission editor or is it buried in the core code description of the 3d model? Trackpin
  4. Hi Marko Thanks for vote and link. I hope someone will do an OD paint job to match the Chally2. Wardog? Trackpin
  5. FWIW Norinco YW 531 and 750 (medic) were seen in Kuwait/Iraq GW1, but how many survived to GW2 is uncertain. Did they even appear in the OOB's in 2003? Trackpin
  6. Homer, Geometrically spot-on. But Frankie should be pleased that there were other rhomboidal designs. My vote for the "Best eSim Logo Lookalike" is the 1918 Skeleton Tank from Pioneer Tractor Co in the USA. The framework of the letters echoes the tubular struts of the tank, plus the position of the S and the dot of the I mimics the turret and gun. A picture is worth... then again, if it is not a tank, then the logo reminds me of several designs of military collar patches is have seen over the years.. but that will be a whole new aethstetics conversation! Trackpin
  7. Hi, I have done a community search on this subject with no useful result. So apologies if this *has* been covered before. From the current stable of ASCOD-derived IFVs in SB Pro 4.*, which would make the closest stand-in for the Uk's Ajax? Opinions will vary, so please expand on what features are closely modelled? eg protection, performance, FCS, TIS etc etc What changes to loadout, fuel capacities etc would increase verisimilitude? Thanks for any steers on this. Trackpin
  8. Ssnake Many thanks to everyone at Esim for the update. Even if I can't now make towed land-trains of jumpy trucks for bridge crossings...drat! Look forward to the new terrain engine in due course. cheers Trackpin
  9. Great upgrade. Sounds very nice and bassy through my soundbar. Many thanks for taking the trouble to mix and post it! Trackpin
  10. Hi Nate, Paying for a month is definitely a good idea. Recommend your friend watches *lots* of the Steel Beasts 4 content on YouTube to really see how the game is played and looks. Matsimus channel is a good start, if a bit potty-mouthed. Then pay for a one-month timed license to make sure the latest version of the game runs properly on your own system and can be configured to give you the performance you want in a range of real scenarios, rather than demo optimised ones. Going this route is worth every cent. The pay as you play / software as a service model is nothing new (Office 365 and Adobe CS have done if for years) and with SB you can effectively shelve it for a few months and only pay for it again when the mood takes you. This is better than annual subscription where you pay for software even when you don't need/want it! Then again, if you get hooked, you can get the permanent dongle doo-hickey and run it forever (hopefully). Enjoy! Trackpin
  11. FUBAR, Thank for your glib, but inaccurate, observation. All of the points discussed above are not in the linked "Bridges" wiki page; 1) My original post asked about inserting the visually accurate "damaged" bridge sections in the Map Editor. SBWiki states "Scenario designers wishing for a "damaged" bridge with a gap spannable by AVLBs should manually create the desired gap in the map editor." This would suggest that the broken span and pier objects were available within the Map Editor and I asked here if this was the case or if the broken parts were the product of damage modelling. Grenny and Gibsonm helpfully confirmed that the latter was correct, hence damage to bridges can only be seen in the Test phase of the Mission Editor. 2) The subsequent discussion about path-finding while crossing AVLB laid bridges (we did not expand this to contested/uncontested situations) is catagorically not in SBwiki, as "Crossing Damaged Bridges. WIP" is the existing entry. Therefore the advice to use Assault or Breach crossing AVLB bridges is new information, for which I am grateful. 3) Some experimentation is taking place to ascertain if it is possible, by careful placement, for IEDs to remove a single span in the middle of a long bridge, leaving the correct damaged parts. Certainly the first or last spans can be dropped by placing the IED at the appropriate end of the bridge. 4) As the position of the piers cannot be seen in the map view, tweaking the IED position is an iterive process, and would have to be done for each bridge. but no-one here says designing detailed scenarios is a quick business. What I figure out, I will share. Others can decide if it is worth adding to the SBwiki. It was the existance of a single dropped span on the long road bridge SW of Aladari (4050,1650) in ArchAngle7's epic "Sovereign Shield 4.3" that got me looking at damaged bridges at all. Thank you for updating it, Sir. Any tips on achieving identical legacy damage to a bridge (so not using airstrikes!) most welcome. Trackpin
  12. Mark, Thanks for the tip. Will try it out, but I was under the impression that Assault automatically actioned a change to Line formation. Bearing in mind published tips for preventing AI from mindlessly driving full tilt into the nearest body of deep water, in what order should I set this up from a Halted, March order, Column formation (wide)? Is it: Assault; Slow; Column, Wide; or Assault; Column, Wide; Slow? Is the crux of your advice that "Assault" somehow over-rides the "keep-right" or "keep-left" on-road driving code? If so, halleluja! I would far rather the default road "path" AI was "Drive Straight Up The Bloody Middle, Mate, There's a War On"; and just slow and swerve around obstructions/oncoming traffic (me Tank, you Trabant; make my day!). How often has anyone in SB met a friendly column coming down the opposite side of an MSR in the FEBA anyway? Will experiment further.. Trackpin
  13. Hi Mark, Yup, Yup, Yup and Yup! Have spent last couple of hours doing each of the above in that very order. Airstrikes bracketed bridge, so FAC laser designation is probably not in SB. Yet. Have done some dissimilar double bridging too. The Biber trackway is significantly wider than the MT-55 scissor bridge. Still find the AI path-finding wants to jink to the right before the vehicle has cleared the treadway, ie as soon as it is back over the edge of the remaining span. The need to manually drive the lead vehicle of each platoon across the mobile bridge rather dampens the tempo and makes a simultaneous move hard to co-ordinate in solo play. Makes me appreciate the work that goes into the scenarios SB users kindly share! Thanks for the comments. Claymores...what was I thinking!? Trackpin
  14. Grenny, Thanks. That worked a treat and completely destroyed both spans the stone two lane, class 3 bridge. Particularly if you just can't "hold your peace". Very Tarantino! If you only wanted to drop a single span, so it could be bridged with a Biber for example, is the trick where exactly to position the IED or should I use some other munition? Would multiple claymores do the trick? How many? Trackpin
  15. Hi, Reaching out to mission designers... Have seen dropped bridges in some scenarios, but cannot find the damaged pier or roadway parts in the Map Editor to make my own look as nice. Is this a damage modelling product, so each bridge has to be actually blown as the scenario loads? Or is there a hidden library of damaged objects in SB? Just leaving out a span works, but does not look as good. Advice appreciated! Trackpin