Jump to content

SB Pro PE 4.0 - Discussion thread


Rotareneg

Recommended Posts

  • Members
1 hour ago, Lumituisku said:

Uhm I have for long wanted to ask this...  On Steelbeast when there is crew damage such as lets say Gunner. Is he/ she considered injured, dead or just unable to fill that role?

 

The military term - whether you call it "precise" or a "euphemism" depends on perspective - is "incapacitated". IOW, no longer able to function in the designated role. Whether that's killed, maimed, wounded, shocked, or shaken - Steel Beasts makes no statement about it. The guy who's supposed to do X doesn't, so either the task doesn't get done or someone else must do it, potentially having to fill two roles now ... and obviously with a loss of effectiveness.

 

 

Also..  what kind of damage triggers this..  anything that even scratches hitbox of gunner? or does it need certain amount of erm..  from damaging effect?

 

A "hit" is a hit. Our interest ends about there. We have a certain criterium - a projectile should have a residual energy of about 70J to be considered harmful, which corresponds to certain ballistic gel experiments - and if there is a collision between a projectile vector and a "hit box" Steel Beasts will roll the dice to determine the damage (the hit box might represent a component inside the vehicle for which collisions may yield damages other than just "incapacitated" (or not). For crews (and other individual characters) it's a binary state variable, you're "out of the game". Medics in proximity may bring you back into the game. Whether that's necromancy, healing magic, or a super-speedy replacement of the fallen with fresh meat from the recruit mill, it's up to you to rationalize it. Personally, I talk about it as "necromancy" but that's just my usual snark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Perhaps that's covered by:

 

4 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Like I wrote in the disclaimer at eSimGames.com, the footage is based on late Alpha/early beta versions. I have to start producing the videos well in advance of the marketing campaign. Making these videos costs a lot of time - getting the right footage, splicing it together to show something coherent, ... anyway, that TAM driver is an example of a bug/incomplete implementation that you won't see in the final release. The beta testers are going through all the vehicles right now to find discrepancies like this, but I'm not redoing the videos that may occasionally show something like that.

 

I suspect crewmen's heads aren't the only thing that has improved since "late Alpha/early beta versions".

 

Edited by Gibsonm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes me wonder.. Will small ditches be visible now on, and actually be sensed from tank while moving over. 

 

Ones like these.  Though I suspect it wont be the case. I know that these are not much of an obstacle. But those are good places for infantry to hide in. And well...  if crossed carelessly, for sure tank can get stuck on these too, especially larger ones. Its just...  Dunno I have been kind of annoyed of how those are just different color on map and ground and not actually visible. Because at work I drive large machines and know perfectly well that these can cause trouble, especially during rain seasons. 

Entw%C3%A4sserungskanal.JPG

 

And how about sloped sides of medium or larger sized roads? O.o  

Those could be used to get hull down positions like here for example. 

vg8925k7.jpg

Edited by Lumituisku
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
3 hours ago, Lumituisku said:

Makes me wonder.. Will small ditches be visible now on, and actually be sensed from tank while moving over. 

 

Well, "in principle" the engine will be capable of supporting that. Initially you're unlikely to actually see them in action simply because the old map editor provides no tools to dig such trenches in the digital landscape. We have one internal test map that includes all kinds of terrain obstacles (similar to an army test drive area, actually), and given a raster width of .78m a trench of 1.60m width is quite feasible.

And of course vehicles will react differently when trying to drive over such a trench.

 

 

Quote

I know that these are not much of an obstacle.

 

Depends on what your vehicle is. ;)

 

All that said, the terrain type resolution will stay at 12.5m raster width, so you couldn't assign JUST the trench area, say, "bog" terrain type properties. And unlike real terrain you shouldn't expect the edges of the embankment to crumble under the weight of your tank. Maybe later. The point is, the new terrain engine supports these things, so we can now actually consider implementing them as features. With the old engine we didn't even need to start thinking here.

The new terrain engine is largely an infrastructure project and less one of immediate eye candy. It's an enabler for future development, things that simply couldn't be done without it.

 

 

 

Quote

And how about sloped sides of medium or larger sized roads?

O.o  

Those could be used to get hull down positions like here for example.

 

Yes. Road leveling requires that we modify the terrain under, and left and right of them. I'm currently preparing a video with a particularly extreme case of terrain that didn't work well with the old terrain engine; I will mix scenes from the old with the new so you can have a direct comparison how the new engine can improve existing maps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
5 minutes ago, Lt DeFault said:

Ssnake, you're not leaving much for us to pester you with in the future. ;)

 

If I can still think of ways how you could pester me with new requests, I'm sure that you can come up with the same things, and then some fresh and new ones that I couldn't even imagine. So, I'm somewhat positive that the nag factor won't go away...

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

 

If I can still think of ways how you could pester me with new requests, I'm sure that you can come up with the same things, and then some fresh and new ones that I couldn't even imagine. So, I'm somewhat positive that the nag factor won't go away...

 

;)

Oh, don't worry, I already know at least one thing I'm going to nag over extensively ;)

But  right now esims engine-room is working hard to make a great release version of 4.0....so I know they have no time for my nagging.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...