Leaderboard

I always wanted to have a more gunner controller like input device. Having spend some time on the "real" simulator again over the past 2 years, I now decided it's time to something done. For the moment I have finished my POC phase and am on the way of building the first prototype. So from the Hardware side im using: torsion spring loaded mechanism that I ripped out of a sim racing steering wheel for X rotation (left right) torsion or dual spring mechanim on a shaft for Y rotation (up down) for a maybe future V2 version already sourcing parts to replace the spring mechanism DC motors, basically a constant force feedback version Android 10" tablet gyrosensor for the positioning, and touchscreen for button and keyboard inputs Not decided yet might add some real physical buttons to the handles, but would require the device to be wired On the software side: Freepie apk for Android to send gyro sensor data to the PC (the way any racing game on a mobile works, rotate device for steering, tilt for acceleration) Opentrack with freepie input and vjoy output to receive the sensor data and translate to axis movement of the vJoy virtual device SpaceDesk Server Client to convert the Android device into a secondary PC monitor Helios (mainly used in flight sim to build virtual cockpits on touch devices) to be run on the tablet and providing virtual buttons and switches. Physical buttons might be added during prototyping Joystick Gremlin to map everything together onto a single virtual HID device that is then used in SB as controller The POC testing with my phone as gyro sensor went better as expected. It feels just more natural and even without dialing in response curves fits my liking more than the joystick and/or gamepads that I have tested/used so far. Will post more progress once mor of the 3D printing is done

...overwhelming chances are, it's not because we don't want to. 95% of all incoming emails are being answered within 24 hours, the majority within 6 hours. Most people contacting us - either directly by email, or by using our contact form sheet, supply only a single email address (more on that later). While the vast majority of email addresses supplied this way to us are correct, there's still a non-zero chance for a typo. We may be able to spot and correct such errors if they are in the second half of the address, e.g. @uotlook.com or @gnail.com - but whether you're tankmaster771 or tankmister717 we have little chance of guessing right. Then there's spam filters. Corporate email addresses like to filter our messages because there's "games" in our name, others find the license ticket codes highly suspicious (only cyber criminals encrypt, there are no legitimate cases!). Whatever the cause, sometimes our replies and license tickets will be found in there. If you don't check there and rather assume the worst, chances are that our subsequent apologies get swallowed by the very same filter. An all-time classic is the full mailbox. You don't receive your ticket - because the mailbox is full. You ask, where's my ticket, and never receive our reply - because the mailbox is full. You send us an angry letter demanding a refund and still don't get a reply? Maybe, just maybe, the mailbox is full. Who knows what other messages you missed, recently? You will never know. This is why we think that it's a good idea to send us one alternative email address. We're not collecting such data because we want to trade with them. There simply needs to be an alternative communications channel so that we can actually get in contact with each other. Yes, there are cases where we need a bit longer to reply. Someone might be sick, or traveling, or answering your question is unusually complex. Give us a day or two, then nudge us with a gentle reminder. Don't wait months. Try to supply us with additional info, like the date of a purchase or other relevant information.

As some players reported, T-80U and T-64B have UNLIMITED and extremely fast reload. We would very grateful if you people could fix this problem. Thank you. 466f66d4ae676a8f.mp4

No. There will be a final 4.3 update this year (summer...autumn-ish), and, probably, a major upgrade next year. Whether that will bear the number 4.4 or something else, I don't know yet. We try to maintain the established three-year cycle 2013 (3.0) 2016 (4.0) 2019 (4.1) 2022 (4.3)

Gunner Sabot Tank!

I found both "Enemy in Sight" and "Charge to Battle" by Nick Ryan as good blow by blow "near future fiction" and good items to listen to during recent flights.

Yes I am, it happens on many scenarios (including distributed scenarios on here) then we tested what was going on. I`m suspecing that some specific tank such asT-80U fires unlimited amount of missiles if it loaded and fired once. Here is improvised testing scenario for the issue we talk about. T1.sce

Yes, I'll do the COing

Here ya go, Bradley fans:

Pretty much a trade off. M1 family, turret remains facing the frontal arc (mostly) but not fast. Leo 2s, turret traverses off but faster. Ideally for both you pull back into dead ground if you can, before you start the process.

Time acceleration can indeed cause trouble if the frame rate isn't high enough - which depends on the computer, and the scenario, of course. While forests do help with reducing the likelihood of getting spotted (by a lot), once that a unit is spotted, it will get immediately identified and from that moment on has very little chance of escaping observation again. This is less than ideal, but to change this mechanism we need a new software architecture (which is in development). The good news, version 4.4+ will do something about infantry getting spotted at longer ranges.

Just FYI... The question was asked, when does "round 2" (spring) part of the campaign start? It will begin on the April 26th TGIF (four TGIF's from now). So prepare yourself. If you didn't participate last time and want to, then you can - although the teams might need to be balanced. If you participated last time and don't want to this time, that is fine too. The only rule is that if you started on one side they you must remain on that side, unless we have to re-balance the numbers on each side. More info will follow as we get closer.

It's not so much about regulation having one ammo door open at one time, its that you physically cannot have both ammo doors open at the same time. When one door opens, it slides over and covers the opening of the other side. First, you have to prepare the TC's stored ammo, which is only a manually opened door -- its not opened by hydraulic power nor electrical motor. This full process is (from memory)... a. Remove the TC's "curtain" which is a curtain behind him that is in front of that door, which has pockets and pouches, that you use to store "stuff" like maps and manuals. The curtain clips off but then has to be moved out of the way, covering up other things (like the TC's control panel) in the process. b. Then you have to un-stow a prybar-like handle that is used to manually pry open the TC's ammo door. This handle is attached to the wall, between both ammo doors. It slides and then swivels out, like some kind of crowbar that is attached to the wall. c. Then you have to pry open the door with this handle, which isn't the easiest thing to do - it can take a minute or so. d. Then you have to use your fingers to grip a detent on the door, and manually slide the TC's blast-door (which is pretty thick and heavy, maybe ~ 1" thick) over to block the ready side. e. Then you have to extract ONE round into the crew compartment from the TC's stored ammo side. f. Then you have to manually slide the TC's ammo door back shut, all the way shut, so that the ready ammo door can open. g. Then you have to hydraulically open the ready ammo door (as you normally would). h. Then you have to store the round that you currently have in the crew compartment, and let the ready door close. ...all the while you have to try to avoid chopping off anyone's fingers in the process. Then you repeat the process back at "d" above, for each and EVERY single round. (There is probably some YouTube video showing the process, maybe.) So why not just pull out more than one round at a time? No. The rounds are bulky, and it is dangerous to be handing more than one round in the turret while everyone is opening and closing doors manually, and so on. Plus, yes, regulations are in place for this part of the process, and for good reason, for the same reason that you do not "lap load". The process wasn't designed to be quick, but then again, that is the trade-off of having the ready AND stowed ammo protected in the ammo bunkers. Rest assured, if the time was wrong it would have been changed in 25 years -- it's realistic. It was timed a long time ago, to be an average crew.

Me and Wiggie for C1. But im a "maybe" as we are getting close to birth for my kid.

a particular angle might create the impression of a net draped over the vehicle say when viewed more or less perpendicular from the side or the top aspect, but the illusion becomes apparent when joining surfaces are viewed say from a shallow 20 degree angle- eg. the net doesnt appear to hang from the gun tube viewed from a side angle, or in a similar way if both the turret side and turret top are viewable at the same and the net is supposed to continue from one to the other- then it looks painted on, it creates a very 2D effect painted on 2D surfaces where it joins and transitions, it tends to look like a painted camo pattern baked into the skin rather than a net draped over it; it is relatively simple to photoshop a net mapped onto the skin, but in my experience, even photorealistic details of a net does not escape the problem that it looks unnatural viewed from certain perspectives. you may have seen very convincing urban street art painted into sidewalks or onto walls by graffiti artists giving the impression of depth when viewed straight on, such as a realistic looking swimming pool painted onto the pavement, but the illusion collapses once you begin to view it at acute angles ( in a similar way older graphics rendering techniques which mapped satellite images of cities and towns and installations onto the terrain produced a nice effect with distance and altitude, less so closer to ground level)

I've spent some time on this with him. 1. He initially installed it on the wrong drive so instead of "uninstalling" he deleted the folders (this is when I became involved). 2. Attempting to uninstall via the "Settings" failed, as it was no longer listed. 3. When he subsequently attempts to "install", we now get a message about a copy of Steel Beasts already being installed. 4. If you hit "OK", it goes and installs map packages, Codemeter, etc. but not the central software. That's when I suggested posting here as I didn't want to start trashing his Registry.

Sooo... 5.0?

You know that you can get a kit with all switches & electronics plus 3D print files for the handles from AFV Sim, right?

Sorry I thought it was some sort of joke / spam so I left it alone. From our Discord Q&A page: 1. Confirm your your ISP that they will support port forwarding (apparently many don't). 2. Give your (host) machine a static IP address. 3. Forward the following ports: 2300 and 2400 UDP (2 ports only). If that doesn't work, resort to the old more open approach as shown in the screenshot. 4. Make sure you support the right protocols - its not just TCP or UDP, its and. Assuming 4. not needed: 5. Make sure your friend is trying to connect to the "right" IP address - the WAN address provided by "whatsmyIP" or other sites. 6. Make sure the firewalls on the PCs allows SB traffic. 7. Make sure you are both using the same version of Steel Beasts Pro PE. Those are the general steps, but usually it boils down to something unique. The good news is that the "client" (your friend) doesn't need to do anything.

Its a scouting drone, otherwise known as a UAV

Hello MD, The scenario only has 2 parties and only I have the password. With a total of 8 participants (also from the USA and Australia) I was able to use my PC (small server): everything ran normally as scripted! With 9 participants, the same from the USA and Australia, I had to use the large server: best network connections. Even at the beginning and without any enemy, the scripted artillery fire was only displayed acoustically but not visually via waypoints and/or triggers: no mines and no impacts! However, the own artillery fire used was shown in full: very strange and has happened several times in similar scenarios with the large server!

I guess a bear? We have "bin chickens":

Gibsonm, The SWMBO, has decreed that the basement will be effectively referred to as the mancave and is now my domain. My wife has also stopped tracking my kit collection, so I am way past having to justify a new kit or sneaking it into the door. You can't go wrong with those Tamiya kits, static or rc. Andy Scrapper_511, My collection was built over a few years, especially during the time I was deployed to Iraq and other exotic destinations. Andy

Hitting a mine:

I build everything, here is an image of my latest build plus some of my stash. Tanks Andy "Tankleader" Elesky

The balance of scenarios is constantly shifting. With every new version, AI routines get modified, armor and ammo parameters get reassessed - and things might no longer work as intended. The Mission Editor is part of the Steel Beasts Experience. We want people to use it, and modifying an existing scenario is a very good way to learn how to use the editor. Scenarios aren't monolithic miracles dropped from the heavens that must not be touched by mere mortals. They are more like play-doh sculptures that you can transmogrify into something new, possibly for the enjoyment of others. Preserve the credits, though.

Looks like the improved AI for helicopters works. The scenario probably was designed when the helicopters couldn't do what they can now. So, either you improve your gunnery to conserve ammo better, so you can shoot it down before you have to reload. Or stop shooting when you're down to a handful of rounds, then order your wingman to reload first. Or, edit the scenario and add some air defense assets. No shame in that.

It's sorta-kinda semi-accessible, but rotating the turret makes everything so much more convenient and faster that you'd have to come up with a very particular scenario to justify why one wouldn't want to take the turret to the six.

All three issues can be observed in the attached scenario. Resupply Test.sce

In the driver slot you have to manually start up the rear facing camera by hitting the red button on the cameras panel. As soon as you leave driver slot the AI takes over control and turn that off so when you come back in as driver again you need to start up the camera again before reversing. Irritating when stressed out and I cant understand why the AI driver prefers to have it OFF instead of ON.

Thank you for your alert, we'll get right to it. In future release notes, look for bug no. 12242. IFVs not firing on bunkers is "sort of normal" in the sense that they won't fire if they can't see the center of a unit, or if their ammunition is insufficient to shoot through the walls. That being said, we aren't happy with those bunkers, and will replace them with something better.

View from the mech inf's pov by Kingtiger:

No, but www.afvsim.com should.

There are, and we're working on them.

In all honesty, if all my friends had jumped a cliff, I might be depressed enough to do it, too. Or maybe they all had a very good reason. At least, the friends I have wouldn't do this in the spur of a moment, so I have to inquire about the boundary conditions that make this scenario plausible to begin with.

I love them, Id have an RC one of one if I could. Yes, it ticks the box for comedy value, but as a mobile pillbox, it was arguably not any worse than a Vickers light tank or some of the tankettes we were building in the 1930's. Even the Panzer 1 was little more than a mobile machine gun post. Besides, the developers of Gunner Heat PC have already put one in as an easter egg, so there is no reason to be shy anymore.

I suspect that this is a case where we "invent" a dismount unit that's actually the vehicle commander, so in that sense we're technically not dealing with a duplicate ID. That said, V5 is all about getting rid of these hacks and organize things properly rather than squeezing functions from the last bit available in unit status bytes.

While we are on a role with Ver 5 "things" ... Can we add some additional granularity to unit name (or maybe display their unit IDs)? I have a unit called "XO Spec" unfortunately the dismount is also XO Spec: As a result trying to use the logic choice: becomes problematic as they are listed twice and it seems even the smallest turn of the mouse wheel (or click) moves you from the 1st "XO Spec" to the 2nd one. As a result I'm never certain as to which one I've selected until I test it and almost inevitably find that I made the wrong choice. The call sign template doesn't seem to provide any obvious way to distinguish the vehicle from the people: Can we add an additional description to the Call Sign template, or perhaps can we be shown the "unit ID" since as I understand it these are unique, with the vehicle and the passengers having different / unique Unit IDs?

I could post a video of me scrolling through it if you like? It's pretty funny and cool.

I will do more stuff before i upload it here. I just started today and got addicted to sound modding again 😋

Last Friday's TGIF mission, REFORGER '85:

Thanks mate, I appreciate the compliment :thumbup: I'm glad you enjoyed them.

spurring further discussion?

Harold Coyle Team Yankee, that is the first that comes to my mind... But he has several books that are VERY good. Sword Point, Brite Star, Gods Children, and a few others... All very good, almost like Tom Clancy just about the Army and not as much technical detail.

"Heights of Courage" by Avigdor Kahalani is a "must read" for every tank officer. "Thunder Run" (David Zucchino) is for tanks what "Black Hawk Down" was for Delta Force. "Tuskers" (Pierson) didn't leave much of an impression, but wasn't bad. The same goes for "Tip of the Spear" by Michaels. "Red Army" (Ralph Peters), "First Clash" (Kenneth Macksay), "The Defense of Hill 781" (James McDonough), "Armor Attacks" (John F. Antal), and "Combat Team" (Antal) are all fictional, but still worth to be checked out.