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.

Marko

Members
  • Content count

    2,670
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Marko

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 03/28/1965

Personal Information

  • Location
    Dublin
  • Interests
    Military sims
  • Occupation
    security guard
  1. I Recken its this. LoL
  2. I may be biased but i have always considered SB a very easy simulation to manage control wise compared to some other simulations in my collection.
  3. I think we would all like the complete SB stable to be playable but its not really a realistic option there's just to many Vehicles As per my other post about turret interiors, yes eye candy is nice but IMO give me Substance over style anytime.
  4. Like most armour enthusiasts i enjoy the highly detailed interiors on some of the playable AFV's modeled in SB The M-60. BMP-2. CV 90. But after the initial release and admiration of a job well done i very rarely use the functional buttons modeled From time to time i do just jump in to the commanders position and just look around i enjoy spotting the little details the geek side of me enjoys hitting The buttons and there's no doubt it adds to the Immersion and i am sure it has training value for esims military customers But when i am in the thick of virtual combat my key board is a lot more efficient and quicker. As we all know a split second can make the difference between killing or being killed even in virtual combat So this got me wondering how many of you guys actually use the modelled functional controls in the highly detailed turrets In virtual combat anyway. I asked this question before a few years ago but the community has grown since then. Would you prefer a fully detailed and functional turret or more models like the CR-2 where you just basically have the sighting systems But this would mean more playable vehicles (in theory anyway not saying Esim would or should) but it takes a lot of resources to model the turret to say the level of the M-60 and its not cheap to do it from what i gather PS If anybody can run a poll on the question i would be greatful I am unable to do so. It would be interesting to see the results.
  5. As armour sim enthusiasts/players were very lucky to have as many playable AFV types as we have currently modeled in game With a few exceptions we have nearly every MBT since post WW2. (But are french and italian members could use some more love.) This in its self makes me wonder what will be Esims future focus will be after the terrain engine update. Obviously Esims military customers will dictate a large percentage of new content. (Got to pay those bills) I seem to remember Ssnake saying a complete new engine at some stage is on the cards That in its self will be time consuming and expensive to implement. And will probably take a couple of years of just bug fixing. I still hope a large military body like the indian army or French /British etc would spend some big bucks. And we would get some more highly detailed AFV interiors there not the be all and end all but Do make for nice eye candy.
  6. Used to be a big lego fan back in the day. Been to legoland a couple of times some amazing creations. till that movie was released my granddaughter watched it over and over again that song drove me to the point of insanity ( everything is awesome) LoL But good luck to the guy its a good model a little pricey though.
  7. Hedge the price of new AFV designs have sky rocketed. Let the military professionals agree what there requirements are going to be gun size engine size etc force the designers/ manufacturers in to fixed price contracts and keep the bloody politicians out of the whole process as much as Possible. As things stand the whole process of tendering is a joke do you really think the french would buy a completely german design when they have the ability and skilled work force. To do it themselves same goes for the germans english etc Hopefully lessons were learned from the euro fighter co-op debacle the unit cost of the euro fighter was far to high
  8. Leo, i am your father.LoL
  9. Move out the way Boy.
  10. I have always believed there should be a Nato research facility for new weapons development. Share the costs and expertise etc But There's a whole myriad of reasons Nato nations don't. Defence contracts mean jobs and big investment.
  11. Excellent video. The passion showed by the restorers impressed me there's a vehicle very similar to the Tankette in Bovington Tank museum. When most people see an old AFV wreck rusted and battered they probably think its only fit for the scrap yard Wheres a real enthusiast will see a piece of history. Also the reenactment was very well done.
  12. Ran the mission using M2/M3 and M1A1s Again just for the hell of it i went up the centre surprisingly i took as many casualties as i did in the original mission. I used the same tactics and route as i did when i ran the mission in the CR-2s and warriors. The bradleys tow launchers were effective and the M1s better fire on the move capabilities showed I like to test different AFV capabilities in missions and analyse the results. .
  13. I completed the mission took the OBJ but as I expected causality's were very high over fifty percent. The mission score stated it was a major defeat probably due to the high casualties I would not have normally attacked straight down the centre just wanted to experiment. The rolling Arty did work to a degree. But my co-ordination could have been better I made a stupid mistake that cost my mech inf they cut to pieces in a Arty strike. All in all a very tough mission your fighting the terrain and obstacles as much as the enemy. Kudus to the mission designer he anticipated a player trying to use the main road very well placing obstacles and kill Zones. As Gibsonm stated some nasty surprises along the way. Enjoyed the mission.
  14. Have just downloaded the mission. I was considering using a rolling smoke/ HE barrage and trying to steam roller my way up the middle to the OBJ. Casualtys will be high, but speed and smoke mite just give my forces the edge. Will let you know how it went.
  15. Enjoyed the video. You asked for ideas for future videos. One of the things I like to do when I have successfully completed a mission is edit the mission. Changing the vehicles for more advanced types. IE instead of T55 add T-72 or even T-90 give the BRDM ATs more advanced missile types etc. Then replay the mission. Its very unlikely the mission will run the same way as the first attempt did.