Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

[Marko]

The 30 mm sound is  cool but the fifty cal takes a lot of beating .

[Marko]

10 minutes ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Find me a video and I'll make you a sound for ingame

Thanks will do Apocalypse.

[Kev2go]

option to order bail ( after tank gets hit, if there are crew still alive) and see ai crew survivors  hop out of the hatches, and take cover. I mean as a sim it should be important to simulate this as well as AI potentially ordering crew bail, as suriving crew members with a penetrated hull, or damaged modules, wouldnt continue to stay inside the tank and await eventual death, from a follow up shot.

Edited September 6, 2016 by Kev2go

[Bond_Villian]

2 hours ago, Kev2go said:

option to order bail ( after tank gets hit, if there are crew still alive) and see ai crew survivors  hop out of the hatches, and take cover. I mean as a sim it should be important to simulate this as well as AI potentially ordering crew bail, as suriving crew members with a penetrated hull, or damaged modules, wouldnt continue to stay inside the tank and await eventual death, from a follow up shot.

 

This has been mentioned a few times before, i like the idea. This could extend to weapons crews being able to abandon their crew served weapons under some circumstances, like if ammo depleted or under fire.

[Vikingo]

5 hours ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

 

Here ya go. 

 

My mistake - the brad is not effected. Just the 2A42 shares the same sounds as the 30mm Bushmaster (Apache)

 

 

 

Thanks Apocalypse 31 for the extra sound  + the great video, top quality 

 

4 hours ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Find me a video and I'll make you a sound for ingame

 

Reinforcements have arrived  -Great video and check minute +/- 3:30 -Cold War taste is high on that one, and I like it-

 

 

4 hours ago, Marko said:

+1

thanks for posting the video it was excellent Vikingo.

Talking about auto -cannons sounds.

[...]

 

Very welcome Marko !  Really like that video, show inside details -great to compare with the one in game and find all the stuff right there-  and the live sounds are very nice. Glad u like it. I remember the times when I have to wait to TV documentaries (very few about weapons and more few about tanks) and have ready the crappy VHS ready for record stuff...  Now is like paradise, so much material that is impossible to process all  

 

Can't resist 

 

 

 

Edited September 7, 2016 by Vikingo

[ChrisWerb]

Another minor request - crew on Wiesel - especially TOW gunner (and Rh202 gunner if this variant exists).

[MikeKiloPapa]

M41 DK1.......to give us a light tank  to play with ;-)......a crewable AMX-13 would be awesome too.   

[Marko]

8 hours ago, Vikingo said:

 

Thanks Apocalypse 31 for the extra sound  + the great video, top quality 

 

 

Reinforcements have arrived  -Great video and check minute +/- 3:30 -Cold War taste is high on that one, and I like it-

 

 

 

Very welcome Marko !  Really like that video, show inside details -great to compare with the one in game and find all the stuff right there-  and the live sounds are very nice. Glad u like it. I remember the times when I have to wait to TV documentaries (very few about weapons and more few about tanks) and have ready the crappy VHS ready for record stuff...  Now is like paradise, so much material that is impossible to process all  

 

Can't resist 

 

 

 

 

 

Indeed the last few years have been a great time for armour enthusiasts.

I remember spending a lot of cash for specialist books on armour when I first developed an interest in armour

The discovery channel was  great back in the day. Armoured fist/ battlefield/ etc

[Apocalypse 31]

8 hours ago, Vikingo said:

Great video and check minute +/- 3:30 -Cold War taste is high on that one, and I like it-

Video is a little old, and the rapid fire and narration make it hard to pull out a single round - but ill see what I can do. 

[ChrisWerb]

Nice the see the Keiler is still around. (4:54)

 

 

Edited September 7, 2016 by ChrisWerb

[Vikingo]

2 hours ago, Marko said:

 

 

Indeed the last few years have been a great time for armour enthusiasts.

I remember spending a lot of cash for specialist books on armour when I first developed an interest in armour

The discovery channel was  great back in the day. Armoured fist/ battlefield/ etc

 

Yes, same here. I have tons of books + magazines. Now here the prices are like gold but I will keep em until the grave  Is great to have a good sim session with SB, then grab an old book and inject more fuel to the passion  PDF is nice but will never replace a good paper book, at least for a 41 like me. Armored Fist! I remember that one, still play M1 Tank Platoon II from Microprose.  My first arcade/sim game was Spitfire and my first "true sim" was Gunship in Commodore 64 

 

2 hours ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Video is a little old, and the rapid fire and narration make it hard to pull out a single round - but ill see what I can do. 

 

Thanks, no rush. Hope we will find a better one for the Marder... 

[Ssnake]

17 hours ago, Marko said:

Talking about auto -cannons sounds.

The marder cannon sounds remarkably quiet even when you are concentrating fire.

it sounds almost muffled compared to other Auto cannons in game

Is this accurate is it like this in the real marder.?

 

Depends on whether you're in front of the gun, on the gunner's seat, or in the rear.

Unbuttoned in the rear, it actually isn't very spectacular. Likewise in the gunner's seat: The whole gun assembly is mounted externally (as is pretty obvious), so - lacking personal experience with THAT part - I'd assume that the loudest elements are the movement of the ammo upwards in the feed chutes.

From the ouside, and forward of the muzzle, the 20mm gun is substantially louder of course - though, again, I never found it as hard on the ears as, for example, the Gepard, or the CV90/30 when I made the sound recordings. Then again they have substantially larger calibers, so it shouldn't come as such a big surprise.

 

All in all I think that we have a pretty good representation.

[Grenny]

4 hours ago, Ssnake said:

 

Depends on whether you're in front of the gun, on the gunner's seat, or in the rear.

Unbuttoned in the rear, it actually isn't very spectacular. Likewise in the gunner's seat: The whole gun assembly is mounted externally (as is pretty obvious), so - lacking personal experience with THAT part - I'd assume that the loudest elements are the movement of the ammo upwards in the feed chutes.

From the ouside, and forward of the muzzle, the 20mm gun is substantially louder of course - though, again, I never found it as hard on the ears as, for example, the Gepard, or the CV90/30 when I made the sound recordings. Then again they have substantially larger calibers, so it shouldn't come as such a big surprise.

 

All in all I think that we have a pretty good representation.

Well, some noted that the "ping" sounds when the 20x139 casings hit the turret roof are missing, other then that the interior gun sound is spot on. External is pretty good too

[Apocalypse 31]

35 minutes ago, Grenny said:

Well, some noted that the "ping" sounds when the 20x139 casings hit the turret roof are missing, other then that the interior gun sound is spot on. External is pretty good too

 

Try this :-)

 

 

 

Edit - ping might be a little loud. i can dampen it more

i_20AutocannonMarder.wav

Edited September 7, 2016 by Apocalypse 31

[Marko]

1 hour ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

 

Try this :-)

 

 

 

Edit - ping might be a little loud. i can dampen it more

 

 

Thanks apocalypse.

Great addition.

[Werewolf]

I am a lot buzzed right now so to Ssnake - if this has actually been fixed then I apologize for the below and please delete. To the rest of the community: posting after drinking a half bottle of port is bad form, causes one to post stupid *&^%$ that even though it may be true is still probably posted in a less than appropriate manner.

 

Those that have been around since 2002 are probably already thinking to themselves - ahhh crap. He's at it again.

 

Anyway - here goes...

 

Possibly already mentioned.

Possibly already fixed in 3.028 or 4.004 (pretty sure not fixed in 3.028 which is where I'm at now - though to be fair - there are work arounds - shouldn't have to use one but...).

 

Fix AI controlled AFV's so they WILL NOT DRIVE INTO LAKES, RIVERS OR STREAMS that will immobilize them.

 

I do understand that SB isn't perfect (really, I do) and no game is but the only thing in SB that really PISSES me off is a tank or PC driving to it's ultimate death or uselessness by being so stupid as to drive into an over sized puddle that will KILL it.

 

I can say from real life experience that in the 3 years I served on active duty in the US Army in M60A1's not once did I ever see, become aware of or experience a tank in my unit or any other drive into a body of water that would have immobilized it either by accident or on purpose.

 

If it's still an issue - tipsy or not - one has to wonder - WHY IN ALL THE YEARS SB HAS BEEN OUT HAS IT NOT YET BEEN FIXED?

[Vikingo]

3 hours ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

 

Try this :-)

 

 

 

 

My ears thank you! 

[mpow66m]

39 minutes ago, Werewolf said:

I am a lot buzzed right now so to Ssnake - if this has actually been fixed then I apologize for the below and please delete. To the rest of the community: posting after drinking a half bottle of port is bad form, causes one to post stupid *&^%$ that even though it may be true is still probably posted in a less than appropriate manner.

 

Those that have been around since 2002 are probably already thinking to themselves - ahhh crap. He's at it again.

 

Anyway - here goes...

 

Possibly already mentioned.

Possibly already fixed in 3.028 or 4.004 (pretty sure not fixed in 3.028 which is where I'm at now - though to be fair - there are work arounds - shouldn't have to use one but...).

 

Fix AI controlled AFV's so they WILL NOT DRIVE INTO LAKES, RIVERS OR STREAMS that will immobilize them.

 

I do understand that SB isn't perfect (really, I do) and no game is but the only thing in SB that really PISSES me off is a tank or PC driving to it's ultimate death or uselessness by being so stupid as to drive into an over sized puddle that will KILL it.

 

I can say from real life experience that in the 3 years I served on active duty in the US Army in M60A1's not once did I ever see, become aware of or experience a tank in my unit or any other drive into a body of water that would have immobilized it either by accident or on purpose.

 

If it's still an issue - tipsy or not - one has to wonder - WHY IN ALL THE YEARS SB HAS BEEN OUT HAS IT NOT YET BEEN FIXED?

 

Valid point,which is why i dont do rivers or breeching in SB all that nmuch.And OHHHH CRAP hes at it again..i guess,lol.I cant remember 2002,lol.

Edited September 8, 2016 by mpow66m

[Panzer_Leader]

In a future release is it possible to include '(Platoon) HQ' or similar in the list of Infantry types available for selection in the Mission Editor?  Reason being, it would be nice to have the ability to convert pre-4.0/04 squads to an HQ with medic rather than having to create new platoons with headquarters and the subsequent disruption to call sign templates and scripting this can entail.  For this reason I've avoided including HQs in my existing scenarios but thought treating them like any other Infantry type, and the ability to choose them in the Mission Editor, might get around this in future.

[Maj.Hans]

Just to update my list of prior requests...

 

M60A3 PASSIVE.  We already have the A3 simulated, and this would give us something that could be more easily slipped into earlier cold war scenarios.  This should be, essentially, the M60A3 TTS exactly as we have it now, but with a passive IR night sight as fitted to the M60A1 tanks with passive night sights.  It would make an excellent stand in for the M60A1 RISE/Passive.

 

(Before somebody tells me there was no M60A3 Passive, I did some digging and yes, it was a real thing.)

 

Duplicate this new M60A3 Passive with an ERA kit fitted (As was pointed out elsewhere, the army never used it but they did have some 200 kits in stock) and we would have an incredibly close stand in for the M60A1 RISE/Passive used in the Gulf war.

 

Add a night-vision (passive IR) view to the LeopardAS1's gunner sight so it can better stand in for Leopard1A3/A4s.

 

Milan launcher on the Marder1A3!  Sadly my dismounts tend to be stupid when it comes to lobbing missiles at tanks so I don't get roasted with a HEAT round, so I want to be able to do it myself!  If the best way to model this is as an "optional weapon" in the mission builder, so be it.

 

M113 with the TC position M47 Dragon mount and M113G with the TC position MILAN mount.  We've got much more viable infantry now and I think it would be good to have some examples of APCs with AT capability for scenarios where an M2/M3 or Marder is overkill.

 

Playable M1 TTB.  IMHO we only need sight and peri views modeled, and eSim should feel free to take broad liberties with modeling the way the FCS works if this will get it implemented as a playable vehicle.  We will probably never know how it really worked, so lets flip a coin and decide if it should work like an M1A1 or M1A2 and then just do it.

[Ssnake]

6 hours ago, Werewolf said:

Fix AI controlled AFV's so they WILL NOT DRIVE INTO LAKES, RIVERS OR STREAMS that will immobilize them.

 

If it's still an issue - tipsy or not - one has to wonder - WHY IN ALL THE YEARS SB HAS BEEN OUT HAS IT NOT YET BEEN FIXED?

 

Because it's bloody difficult to fix it. We tried it once by making water the #1 thing to avoid for non-amphibious vehicles, but that didn't find public approval either. Water-shy tanks won't drown themselves, but they show other highly annoying habits that would piss you of as well, just for different reasons.

 

Anyway --- I'm currently investing about $150k to get it fixed. ("It", and a few other things that are related.) It better be worth it.

[Ingolf]

1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

8 hours ago, Werewolf said:

Fix AI controlled AFV's so they WILL NOT DRIVE INTO LAKES, RIVERS OR STREAMS that will immobilize them.

 

If it's still an issue - tipsy or not - one has to wonder - WHY IN ALL THE YEARS SB HAS BEEN OUT HAS IT NOT YET BEEN FIXED?

 

Because it's bloody difficult to fix it. We tried it once by making water the #1 thing to avoid for non-amphibious vehicles, but that didn't find public approval either. Water-shy tanks won't drown themselves, but they show other highly annoying habits that would piss you of as well, just for different reasons.

 

Anyway --- I'm currently investing about $150k to get it fixed. ("It", and a few other things that are related.) It better be worth it.

 

I see the river crossings as great logistic problems. It adds to the strategic decission making. It is quite easy to cross if doing it in a controlled manner using column and close formation at proper locations. I think of it as a bigger problem than what the graphics actually show, adding rocks and bogs around the waterbody just in my mind :). It is also a vulnerable position, so it is a good practice to think of this controlled river crossing as protecting your units. But that's just me.

Another workaround is to play MP of course

Ssnake, If your investment in "it" pays off, I'm naturally a happy chap too - then I wont have to use my imagination that much ;).

 

Anyway, here's a suggestion: In scenario editor, add the option to "Attach if..." and "Detach if..." similar to the mount and dismount logic. Not sure if it's doable or causes havoc? The reason is I thought it would, for an example, be easier to give troops side-missions when dismounting a vehicle (and having the vehicle staying behind).

 

Edited September 8, 2016 by Ingolf

[Ssnake]

No, that wouldn't work at runtime. These two options in the Mission Editor are just a kludge enabling to modify the organic infantry (and the associated internal data structure that signify who's belonging to whom).

[Ingolf]

ok, I see. I suspected something like that. Thanks for quick feedback.

[12Alfa]

9 hours ago, Ssnake said:

 

Because it's bloody difficult to fix it. We tried it once by making water the #1 thing to avoid for non-amphibious vehicles, but that didn't find public approval either. Water-shy tanks won't drown themselves, but they show other highly annoying habits that would piss you of as well, just for different reasons.

 

Anyway --- I'm currently investing about $150k to get it fixed. ("It", and a few other things that are related.) It better be worth it.

 I got the solution. Make all AFV's swim, and send the 150K to me plz. Your welcome