Jump to content

Trackpin

Members
  • Content count

    67
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Trackpin

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Spintires Tank mods.

    Yes, I can see where you are coming from with the displaced vegetation idea, but I was trying to move the conversation on from effects that Nils views as impracticable with current computing power, to a smaller specific visual cue based on what is already in the game. Perhaps this belongs in the the "wishlist" thread as it is now more about SB than Spintires anyway. Appreciate your comments. Trackpin
  2. Spintires Tank mods.

    Colossus, The softness of the ground (wet or dry) forms part of the underlying definition created in the Map Editor, so I don't see a connection with the "ground clutter" settings. In addition, the dust trail modelling can be seen well beyond the cut-off distances of ground clutter. I do not know to what extent areas of boggy ground have been manually placed, randomly generated or derived from geographical data sets. If this feature is the result of hours of pixel pushing by eSim's map-makers, then my sincerest thanks goes out to them. The fact that any section of the opposite bank of a river may be too soft to climb out of makes a detailed recce of crossing points worth carrying out. Even amphibious assets in the game can be defeated by combinations of bank inclination and softness. This is just one of the little details that makes SB such an interesting simulation. The suggestion of mud spray would provide a visual cue to something that is already built in to the product. Trackpin
  3. Spintires Tank mods.

    Fair enough. Would anyone else like to see clods (lumps) of mud thrown up by tracked vehicles in SB when on muddy terrain? Currently the dust trails look accurate over dry ground, but the only way to see if vehicles are straying into boggy ground is to jump to them and examine their flotation performance from the outside view. Not always possible. If the particle system code for dust generation could be extended to mud spray I for one would be very happy. This effect is present in the Spintires clip and in DCS Combined Arms, and probably others. if implemented in SB, it would have value as realtime feedback as to field conditions and suitability of wheeled versus tracked AI assets to push in a given direction. Becoming something more than just 'eye candy'. Looking forward to the new terrain engine, along with everyone else! Trackpin
  4. Please comment

    "Mouton aux Trois Rois" or ISIS EOD team? Trackpin
  5. Cold Waters

    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
  6. ITEC 2017 Rotterdam.

    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
  7. Ajax IFV stand-in?

    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
  8. Ajax IFV stand-in?

    Hi Marko Thanks for vote and link. I hope someone will do an OD paint job to match the Chally2. Wardog? Trackpin
  9. Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

    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
  10. eSimGames logo is iconic and brilliant

    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
  11. Ajax IFV stand-in?

    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
  12. 4.019

    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
  13. Leopard 2 Updated Sound Pack

    Great upgrade. Sounds very nice and bassy through my soundbar. Many thanks for taking the trouble to mix and post it! Trackpin
  14. Demo?

    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
  15. Destroyed bridges?

    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
×