Jump to content
Marko

SB Pro PE 3.02x

Recommended Posts

Just to add my 2 cents, installed with no problems so far. Ran a scenario nothing to report. Went smoothly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This might be a placebo effect, but the game seems to be running much more efficiently.

Changes from my previous forays with 3.011:

1) On re-install, I put SB on an SSD

2) I am now using the 64bit version vs 32bit

Either way, it runs a lot better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Updated the terrain rendering to better handle low light conditions. However, this means that it gets REALLY DARK now. Things look better during dusk and down. though.

The "glowing grass" at night is gone, but there's still no twilight: the ground and vehicles are completely dark just before sunrise or after sunset:

ncjXOmB.jpg

Also, the Leo 2A5A2-DK's cloaking device is working great now! :thumbup:

PuCmMb1.jpg

A7trl1r.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The release notes might need a review....

I thought 1 flavour of T-72 using this ammo might be a mistake.

T-72B (early) is the omitted entry regarding the 3BM-42M ammo.

Pg 16

All I can say is that the T-72B and T-72B(early) are usually referred to collectively as "T-72B". And both of them do not have the BM-42M in the game, what the release notes says isn't as important. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The "glowing grass" at night is gone, but there's still no twilight: the ground and vehicles are completely dark just before sunrise or after sunset:

Yes, it is all still a work in progress. Baby steps. :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question: Were any changes made to the T-90S armour model for 3.023? I remember a discussion that the T-90S may have been more vulnerable than it should have been (sorry, can't find the source discussion). I can't see reference to any changes to the T-90S armour model in the Release Notes.

3.023 is a very comprehensive update by the way. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Question: Were any changes made to the T-90S armour model for 3.023? ... I can't see reference to any changes to the T-90S armour model in the Release Notes.

This.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The T-90 is no different protection wise AFAICR, there was no error there. The only error was with the name of the vehicle (T-90S). But yes, if it doesn't say it in the release notes then it didn't happen. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AI (western tanks) still can find me and fire through buildings(((

:mad3::mad3::mad3:

Is it possible to fix?

This update does not fix everything.

If you want to help us out, then please post the bug in the Support Forum, and create a test scenario showing it for us. A test scenario is not an actual scenario, but a scenario created with as few vehicles as possible which make it easy to see the behavior, isolate it, and debug it. These things get lost in the general forum. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This update does not fix everything.

If you want to help us out, then please post the bug in the Support Forum, and create a test scenario showing it for us. A test scenario is not an actual scenario, but a scenario created with as few vehicles as possible which make it easy to see the behavior, isolate it, and debug it. These things get lost in the general forum. Thanks.

Thank you.

I'll try to make it. Sorry for posting of bug report in wrong thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firing through buildings won't get "fixed" anytime soon. As a fundamental design choice, computer-controlled units will only fire if they have a line of sight to the target. Firing on a target that the computer can't see when pulling the virtual trigger requires contextual knowledge, that "the target is there" even though it can't be seen, and a reasonable assessment that the chosen ammunition will still do damage to teh target after going through the camouflage, and that going through the camouflage won't create unacceptable collateral damage (which in itself is a big can of worms).

I'm not saying that you demand the impossible, but it's quite high up the scale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Firing through buildings won't get "fixed" anytime soon. As a fundamental design choice, computer-controlled units will only fire if they have a line of sight to the target. Firing on a target that the computer can't see when pulling the virtual trigger requires contextual knowledge, that "the target is there" even though it can't be seen, and a reasonable assessment that the chosen ammunition will still do damage to teh target after going through the camouflage, and that going through the camouflage won't create unacceptable collateral damage (which in itself is a big can of worms).

I'm not saying that you demand the impossible, but it's quite high up the scale.

Thank you for your explanation!

It will be fixed in future, I believe. Anyway, eSim team completed a great job, each update makes this sim much better!

SS_01_38_43.jpg.114936dbff6df10b24820ca7

SS_01_39_23.jpg.27d113e6fda3768688406f24

SS_01_39_55.jpg.9b4581f3ab0e3f0a1004db97

SS_01_49_32.jpg.b3e9fe8ddf552eda33faafc0

SS_01_38_43.jpg.114936dbff6df10b24820ca7

SS_01_39_23.jpg.27d113e6fda3768688406f24

SS_01_39_55.jpg.9b4581f3ab0e3f0a1004db97

SS_01_49_32.jpg.b3e9fe8ddf552eda33faafc0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The second screenshot suggests that the M1 detected you and perhaps was tracking you as you went from his left to his right.

If he had a fire solution (the range didn't change much) then the APFSDS round can quite happily punch through those types of buildings and still cause pretty catastrophic "terminal effects" esp. at what seems a pretty short (under maybe 700m) range and hitting the vehicle's side?

If you were quite a distance away and maybe moving through substantial (multi-storey) buildings say in a city then its unlikely the M1 would have acquired you and if it had the rounds probably wouldn't have hit / caused damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The second screenshot suggests that the M1 detected you and perhaps was tracking you as you went from his left to his right.

If he had a fire solution (the range didn't change much) then the APFSDS round can quite happily punch through those types of buildings and still cause pretty catastrophic "terminal effects" esp. at what seems a pretty short (under maybe 700m) range.

If you were quite a distance away and maybe moving through substantial (multi-storey) buildings say in a city then its unlikely the M1 would have acquired you and if it had the rounds probably wouldn't have hit / caused damage.

It is possible, for sure.

Same result happened at range more than a 2000 meters (during COOP sessions in previous version 3.011), I did not save reports. I will provide a report if detect it in future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But yes, if it doesn't say it in the release notes then it didn't happen. ;)

Roger, thanks.

The T-90 is no different protection wise AFAICR, there was no error there.

OK, so as far as eSim is concerned the T-90 armour model is all correct? I'm sure I'd read previously here that there were concerns (appreciate it doesn't help that I can't find the original discussion). If it is, then I can stop worrying and move on.

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, so as far as eSim is concerned the T-90 armour model is all correct? I'm sure I'd read previously here that there were concerns (appreciate it doesn't help that I can't find the original discussion). If it is, then I can stop worrying and move on.

Well, yes and no. We are aware that it is a little thinner in the area of the driver's hatch than it should be, but that is because the older T-90 model and will be improved at some point if/when the model is updated.

However this issue is not a major one, the tank would still die when shot there by modern ammo, but it might make a difference with older ammo or at extreme ranges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, yes and no. We are aware that it is a little thinner in the area of the driver's hatch than it should be, but that is because the older T-90 model and will be improved at some point if/when the model is updated.

However this issue is not a major one, the tank would still die when shot there by modern ammo, but it might make a difference with older ammo or at extreme ranges.

Great, thanks for the clarification Volcano. I'll shut up and relax now :redface:

Happy Holidays!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Roger, thanks.

OK, so as far as eSim is concerned the T-90 armour model is all correct? I'm sure I'd read previously here that there were concerns (appreciate it doesn't help that I can't find the original discussion). If it is, then I can stop worrying and move on.

Thanks.

the concern was mostly because of a bug that had appeared with the armour angles. this was fixed in the previous release however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the concern was mostly because of a bug that had appeared with the armour angles. this was fixed in the previous release however.

Thanks dejawolf, appreciate the additional info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you ESim, another outstanding milestone achieved. I am delighted with the 64 Bit version! Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!:bigsmile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×