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.

peXmo

Members
  • Content count

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About peXmo

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    Spain/Sweden
  • Occupation
    Game artist and designer
  1. Doubt that the server can take a screenshot showing your reshade effect? If you change textures sure, but reshade? Can that really be done...
  2. I am not stating that one should make the other disappear. Most of the time, especially when travelling or fighting in more open terrain I would neither ever feel the need to micromanage AI positions. But at certain Battle Positions the AI will pose a greater threat if they can by guided, there is where this feature would come in handy. Also in smaller missions with fewer vehicles involved I see a greater need for the micromanagement, and there it is also not an insane task.... well at least if the mentioned features were in. As you mentioned you regularly script Brigade level activities. At that scale I would use this very little as well, BUT I would still use it some cases if the position just would not work well with any of the preset formations. This is more a request for fixing those moments where the AI does not give the behaviors needed without having to code more complex AI routines and cases. The AI would still be doing its job when fighting from a specified position, as always but sometimes the need to specify that position in detail is needed. Lastly I do recognize that I am asking from my perspective, that is one of a civilian, but I am asking for a feature in a civilian product. I design scenarios in SB as I would design scenarios in any other game, mod or professional. I do feel the need to playtest and break the scenario until it breaks no more. I am looking to have a mission editor that lets me create both large scale and really small scale scenarios, as apart from the VUs out there aren't that many (well the player base is not that big anyhow) groups of friends, sim-gamers, that play in groups of 6+ people all the time. As I mentioned, the smaller scenarios can suffer more from micro level shortcomings, that is were I feel the need to be able to go in and clear it up. For example, if one is to play SB Pro PE as a single player in command of a single vehicle at least the rest of the players platoon needs to act well on a micro level at occasions (this is something that I do create to get people into SB PRO PE and it works). Wall of text complete hehe.
  3. Thanks for the replies. As I solve this at the moment is using single vehicles from the start. One does loose a bit of that formation AI though, but it works. Where it gets messy though is syncing everything up. Just to sync. the movement with 3 vehicles one has to setup a few conditions, as if a vehicle gets unable to move or is destroyed it should be ignored. Then one has to account for the behaviour of the formation if one of the three vehicles goes missing. And after all that work, at least to my knowledge there is no way I can really say to the AI that "disregard vehicle 2 if it is unable to move". All I found is that I can create sets of conditions that checks if a vehicle is destroyed/not present and if it has damage to any mobilty part of the vehicle. So what would help in creating scenarios where the AI move more like ehat you see from player guided platoons is 2 things (imho): The ability to set: if unit x is unable to move, as an option in the embark if setup. The ability as i stated above, to split off a vehicle from its formation via a route the rejoining when the routes merge again. In the same manner as one does with setting up dismounts to move after they have dismounted (i know its prob not as ease as dismounts are individual units from the start) Why do I think that it would help in scenario design, apart from the ease of use? Well, it would be great to be able to utilize both the nice AI that SB pro pe already has when it comes to formation behaviour etc and the quite unique ability that a scenario designer is given in the editor, to micro manage AI behaviour. Edit: one example would be when setting up bounding overwatch and such within the platoon. At the moment it seems that I have to one. To my layman eyes this woild serve the professional market as well as they would have an easier time to setup more precise training scenarios, or? Edit: well i guess that everything is manned in this case anyway. Anyhow, there I have asked for it. I hope it gets in one day.
  4. Hello. Does anyone have a solution for the following: I want to have a platoon start all attached, moving from point A to point B in formation via a route. Then at B I want to be able to split up the platoon, guiding each separate vehicle to their assigned battle position via their personal routes Then later I want the platoon to form up again at C and move out, as one attached unit again, in formation to D. The issue is that I can do this with the dismounts by just using "embark if this unit is X" but as the vehicles start as one unit, they can not be assigned this functionality. If I have the unit fully divided at start and move them with waypoint synchronization etc, It is really really complex to setup a behavior similar to what the units use if they are as one unit in formation when needed. How would you deal with a similar situation? If this is not possible I guess that I can wish for a detach at way point switch that would treat the formation as if the detached vehicle is no longer a part of it, thus it can be assigned its own routes until it is attached again at a waypoint.
  5. Thanks for the great explanation. I just asked for this under the basis of how reality is depicted from within the sim, that the gunner can infact drive blindly from his gunsight using the wasdx. So i thought this was simulating him requesting movement from the commander or something, thus the refinement i wished for. All is well doable as is anyway. Scratch that wish hehe
  6. Of course that is why I state that I am a lay man, BUT it does give that feeling of really interacting that is impossible for me to get otherwise. So yes, for me the detail fidelity is important like that. I would not mind to play less detailed vehicles but if I could choose I do go for the more detailes over more vehicles. For me it feels like quality over quantity.
  7. I like to use as much of the interiors as possible, for example I try to only bind what I deem (as a layman) like things the gunner for example could reach and do without exiting his sight to hotkeys, the rest I do as much as possible with interacting with the 3D buttons etc. I do always go out to eye view from one sight and click the other etc. For me this is a way to learn and somewhat feel something I can not do otherwise, I can somewhat interact with the "real" vehicle. This for me is what sims are all about. So I do prefer more detailed and fewer vehicles than more with less details. This is why I realy like flying the blackshark in DCS for example. It "feels" right with the detail it has.
  8. Yes the CTRL is a good subtitute... not sure it works from the gunner does it? Anyway if it does you have to rotate away from what you are looking at, look at the point - that might just be 10m ahead bcause you can not look directly at the spot behind that bump in the terrain, then turn back to scan where you were, while all you wanted was to advance in the direction the tank chassis/body is pointing for a while until you can fully have scanned what you wanted. quality of life thing for sure but I wish for it as it is within what the game already supports and would make quite a big difference for me. Maybe just for how I play but still EDIT: Aaaand all along I forgot the true benefit of this - the shift+x being the same but a fast retreat route That one is really hard to do otherwise, and just telling your driver to get the F*** out in reverse would be great with that command.
  9. Yes that I do, I plot a route. But one could "drive" with AI assistance doing it as I pointed out. Another use would be to shift+w fast route. then jump to the map and plot your more detailed route, when you are given the order to move up in formation with you platoon leader for example. Would feel more realistic (as you tell the driver to start driving in his postion in the formation) and much more fluid. EDIT: The whole thing is about utilizing what is in the game to give the best of the two things of driving from your prefered postion without for having to leave your view, WHEN you know where you are going if you go straight ahead, just like planning a route straight ahead.
  10. In response to my own last wish here, I will add this request that might be a good remedy. Not sure how it would work with how the simulation is intended. Could a "Quick route straight ahead" command be added? With this I mean the following: By pressing W you take the control away from the driver and go straight ahead without any AI interfering. This is really good in many situations but works less good in others. The other option often used is to fastplot a route on the map to move with your formation, under AI driver "protection" as he drives smartly on his own, all while you are free to scan with the thermals or what ever. Now could a quick route command be implemented here to address some of what I wrote in my last wish? Yes I think so. The AI drives ok on his own when you give him a route so why not make for example shift+w auto plot a route straight ahead for X meters or something? This would lead to you being able to turn the tank fast in the direction you want to go in a forest or where ever and just push shift+w and off you go. No need to hop into the map to fast lay a route. jut to be able to move ahead with the AI driving while I am scanning. One might then ask, well if that route then takes me to where I do not want to go? Well that is about situational awareness isnt it? If you are ok to go straight ahead for at last (what ever the X meters are set to) you can use this shift+w command. One can always just stop the vehicle when ever you like. Would do wonders for driving in towns and forest while being the gunner or the TC. Just like giving and order to the driver to just go foreward and the mechanics are already all in there.
  11. +1 on the driver AI needing improvement. As I see it if you are in the gunner or the TC position and give the order to drive straight ahead - by pushing the direct vehicle controls, doesnt that simulate the driver getting the order to do so? If a tree then shows up straight ahead one should expect that the vehicle, by the action of the driver, would at least stop or? Not head straight ahead into a tree, house or a huge lake. One could state that yes, you should be looking around, but if you "drive" from the gunners position isnt it so that then the driver AND the TC is looking around and guiding the vehicle really? I am no tank gunner/driver/commander not even close in real life, but even I can see that having to teleport between vehicles and driving in the magic f8 view just not to die against the most dangerous foe known to man, the trees... just cant be that much like real tanker life, or? just having the driver pause, if he can not be given the right to turn around obstacles would be great. It is harsh to have to baby sit and teleport around ai units, it does kill some of the feeling of being there that sims, SB for sure, gain so much from. Well thats my cents on the topic of yes better driver AI is on the wishlist. Edit: It is fine and also good that the AI makes mistakes but they should be able to at least try to get out of them. And ramming head on into a tree, that just seems to stupid Still the driving AI is great overall and this is a wishlist so i wish
  12. Catfight
  13. I ran into a key binding issue today. I have rebound my keys for selecting ammo1-ammo4 to the keys 1-4 (normal not numpad). This works great while I am controlling the luchs or marder vehicles, but when I get into a leopard type tank this stops working. I have removed the keys 1-4 from any other control visible in the screen where you change your controls, still this does not work. If I bind the ammo1-ammo4 back to their default keys again it works. What am I doing wrong here?
  14. Thanks for the information. Got the keys, now I just need to get used to them.
  15. Hi, just recently got back into SBproPE after a few years of a pause. No big issues with getting up to speed on most of the vehicles I used to control etc but yesterday I tried out the Marder and the Luch..... and I hit a wall. Does anyone here have a guide for these two vehicles? What controls are used etc would be great to know. For example: I found the Range dial in the commanders eye view, following the video "mechanized infantry" on the official youtube channel. But is there a way to adjust this from the gunner OR the commander while "in sight" view? Also... how do you search these forums? Thanks, and it is great to back in the sim again! /Peter "peXmo"