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.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Volcano

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 02/14/1977

Personal Information

  • Location
  • Occupation
    Game Design
  1. Thanks for the info, we will take a look at it.
  2. 21 APR scenario: TF Deutschland 1978-4004 SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: There will NOT be a draft. NOTES: Avoid studying the enemy's side; only gather intel from the briefing and exposed enemy unit icons (enemy intel), and briefly looking over both sides to figure out which one you want to CO. Anything beyond that ruins the fog of war element. To avoid passwords, open the scenario in Network Session as HOST and choose the side you want to play and go to planning phase. You may briefly look at both sides like this to see which side you want to play or CO on. As CO, once you choose a side, go to that side and create your plan. Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com community rules. TF Deutschland 1978-4004.zip
  3. No worries, there weren't that many helicopters to look at.
  4. Yes, this is known. The vehicle model is about 10 years old. We made a decision not to allow unbuttoning for old models, but eventually it will get updated.
  5. Actually, I just checked - it seems like all air assault should have PL units, except for the Blackhawk (just fixed that though). However, I think the helicopter might have to be created as a platoon formation to get the command element to show up.
  6. This should now be fixed in the next update.
  7. OK, air assault units don't have command elements? I can fix that.
  8. Should be fixed now for the next update. I am surprised this wasn't noticed before in previous versions (nothing changed there)...
  9. OK, yeah I thought it seemed a bit fast. We will look into it.
  10. Ah, OK, just checking to see if it did something we weren't aware of.
  11. One more request - can you take a screen shot of both your graphics card settings (ie. what is overriding SB) and also of the ALT+G graphics dialog in SB?
  12. Right, you have to assign the UAV / UGV to the PL unit of the leg unit (rifle platoon). Actually, you are not even allowed to give them to the squads - the selection will not show up, which is intentional, but you can give it to the rifle platoon's PL unit. It should work if you do that. For mech units, you assign it the vehicle, but the vehicle's PL unit (if it has one) is the unit that is given the UAV/UGV. In both cases, it only is allowed (carried by) for the PL unit. NOTE for all: If a mech unit's vehicle is given a UAV/UGV and the unit has no PL unit, then the error is that the PL unit must be given to the vehicle - in which case someone should report that the command element is missing from the vehicle as a bug report in the support forum. I am sure there are some quite older vehicles that are missing command elements and the idea has always been that they will be added in time as those are discovered, or the vehicles are reworked. I am not saying that someone has to scour the list of mech infantry vehicles to create a list of which ones are missing command elements, but just report them as they are noticed when people are making scenarios and notice them missing. There is a technical reason why the UAV/UGV ownership is done this way and, as mentioned, in the future there will be recon teams which can all be given UAV / UGV with no restriction (although they can still only have one or the other).
  13. OK, I see the problem. Yeah, its nothing new just was never discovered before. BTW, why is the vehicle "OP" when it comes to breaching? The full width plow and lane marking system? If that is what you mean, its not OP, as that would imply that it is not realistic, or is it some other thing we are not aware of?
  14. OK, should be fixed in next update.
  15. Ah, OK. It sounds like it is backwards then. PK should use the 'PK' sounds while the squad MG should be RPK sounds. a_pktcoax.wav is not used by anything at the moment, but will be used for the PKM whenever this is adjusted (ignore the "coax" in the name, its just intended for upclose on a PKx of any type). x_Pkt.wav would be for external - so, more or less swapped.