The List grows again

[Hell_Hound]

Just thought of this.

Could the Grid Reference display on the map be attached to the realism setting, so it doesn't work on high realism?

I try to ignore it and read the grids off the map for practice, but I'm weak when I'm in a hurry. If I could turn off the grid, I'd be forced to climb the learning curve. :cool:

[Lone*star49]

Just thought of this.

Could the Grid Reference display on the map be attached to the realism setting, so it doesn't work on high realism?

...

Couldn't you have that for the Miltary version and leave the civi version as is.. I have enough problems without losing the grid reference...lol

While we're here, I ask again that SB2 be givin all current updates, ie M1 sights.

In brief: I have had and purchased 4 copies of SB1.. two as gifts, but my main complaint still is that with all the time I have invested in this sim, and you know I totally love it, I still have very high frustration-level, in that when I played the 1.17 version, I never knew, that you had (or were supposed to) dump the lead after any shot, esepecially a moving target shot..

Is there no way you could use the 1.17 version of the sights (they didn't move) and keep the wider screen view of Gunners Position?

As an option, the die hards that relish the realism of the M1 1A could have their cake and eat it too, while the rest of us, could have the latest feel of the M12A sights, and so many that choose the Leo for just this reason could battle in either tank, not because of this issue, cause they do..

I lose 1 - 2 sec.. almost every shot, cause I have too dump the lead after a lase (on a still target) cause it takes too long for the sights to settle down.. and if the tank moves just a hair, without doing this (dumping the lead) you talk about losing time or missing the shot.. its way too frustrating...

IMO.. I feel that if SB1 could hold the audience as long as it did.. I know that SB2 with the lastest in M1 2A and the latest LEO.. would do the same, unitl SB3 comes out.. say, around 2006..

Thanks for your ear (again)..

LS :yltype:

[Hell_Hound]

As cool as the M1A2 is, I fear it wouldn't have any decent competition without Challenger or Leo 2A6, and I'd get sick of 2A4 vs M1A2 scenarios in a big hurry.

I'd much rather see the original M1 - you could do some nice M1 vs T80 scenarios and make the yankees sweat a little. :D

Would any of the interface for M1 (original mark) be different from the M1A1, or would it just be a matter of making a model and giving it crappier armor and gun?

PS: It would of course be best if we had the option to selectively disable various crutches like the grid display - I don't want to inflict my preferences on everybody else, but would love to get fast at map reading before I do my junior leadership course. :)

[Lone*star49]

[/quote]

IMO.. I feel that if SB1 could hold the audience as long as it did.. I know that SB2 with the lastest in M1 2A and the latest LEO.. would do the same, unitl SB3 comes out.. say, around 2006..

Thanks for your ear (again)..

LS :yltype: [/quote]
...

Just for the record (see above).. I wouldn't think it right or fun if it where M12A vs LEO 2A4..

I just didn't know the model number for the newer Leo Version.. 2A6.

YES.. modern versions of both .. (a must)

LS ;)

[twobravo]

I'd like to see the T80's gunnable or a smarter enemy AI. No one keeps rolling into a kill zone after the Regt'l recce and FSC goes boom and you see burning tanks and twitching bodies If 50% recce dead in location XXX XXX, then go around.

Aw sod it, just give a plane to fly.

"If I had the wings of an angel, and the arse of a buffalo, I'd fly over all of your houses, and go shite on the tankers below.

Aut Pax Aut Bellium
2B or not 2B

[Ssnake]

I'd like to see the T80's gunnable or a smarter enemy AI. No one keeps rolling into a kill zone after the Regt'l recce and FSC goes boom and you see burning tanks and twitching bodies If 50% recce dead in location XXX XXX, then go around. Which, of course, ist just an example of bad scenario design, not bad "AI" (let's speak of Computer Control Logic (CCL), that's less misleading).

[GsMcAmis]

(let's speak of Computer Control Logic (CCL), that's less misleading).

And Lo...
The_Powers spoke of this new concept and it was good.
From that day forth, Computer Control Logic (CCL) was forever a staple moniker within the Steel Beasts community and the vale of confusion was all the more reomoved.


ohhhhhhhhhm

[Skip]

Something I'd like to see is an additional option/capability for "deployment zones". This option would only be available if there were 2 or more DZs and would allow the units within the zone to have conditions similar to route conditions that would determine which zone they would appear in at the beginning of the game (or when the conditions were met). This would make it much easier to set up scenario options for computer controlled units without having to have the units travel halfway across the map in order to get to an optional starting position. In addition, it would provide an easier and cleaner way to provide one or both sides with reinforcements at a specific time or under specific conditions.

As an additional thought, it could even be used to simulate an airborne/airmobile operation by allowing troops and light vehicles to arrive at their "drop zone" under the scenario designer's conditions/timing.

[labrat]

I would like to see operations in an NBC environment. If you are in a contaminated area you would have to stay buttoned up. If not then the crew dies. It would demonstrate the difficulties in operating in such a situation. I think that if you weren't in the military then you don't understand how hard it is to work in MOPP 4 conditions. It would open up some civilian eyes.