Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by dejawolf

  1. even if the slope doesn't deflect the round, it will still increase the LOS thickness of the armour. so an armour plate sloped at 60 degrees is effectively ~twice the LOS thickness. sloping ERA and NERA as well drastically increases the performance of these armours, as it allows them to act on the penetrator over a longer distance.
  2. it would mean a change to the ammunition layout as well, RH 120 rounds are longer and would not fit in the current challenger ammunition compartments.
  3. Loading it with HEAT or ICM capable of taking out an armoured vehicle, would mean it wouldn't have much of a loiter time. maybe at most 3-10 minutes before batteries run too low. it'd probably be better paired up with artillery or mortars for precision guidance of artillery fire.
  4. yeah, i've made enough turret bustles to know what it is.
  5. yeah, wouldn't barrel collison be great.. i mean, it's 2021 after all. but it's not possible with steel beasts. you need multiple things that steel beasts lack. basic physics, collision meshes for each vehicle, and some way for the AI to not break the guns. basic physics is a massive can of worms, that will inevitably break SB. collision meshes for each vehicle is a huge undertaking. a stop gap solution tho.. You could fake it with a ray intersect test, where you set the rays length for each vehicle. then if the "barrel ray" intersects a building, one of two things could happend. for a player vehicle, you could damage the gun if it smacks into something, like a tree or building, if the velocity is high enough. for lower velocity, and AI vehicles, it would be better to perhaps just stop the gun from moving. the way to do this would be to create a point at the point of intersection, then draw a line from the turret center to this intersection point. then set turret rotation to the direction of this line. rotating the turret the opposite direction of the direction that caused the intersection would "free" the turret movement, until the barrel again intersects something. this should work for everything. however since some buildings has imperfect collision meshes, you'd see some weird stuff like barrels being caught in the area of roof overhang.
  6. hmmh, well checking my file dates, oldest CV90 exterior files are dated 02.12.2005.. interior reference is dated 22.02.2006 pizarro reference is dated 18.10.2005, which is the time i started work on the pizarro interior. so CV9040B exterior was finished december 2012, and interior was started february 2006. the oldest finished pizarro interior file is 13.09.2006. and oldest finished CV9040 interior file is dated 24.03.2006 i guess what happened is that i gathered reference for the pizarro in 2005 and started work on the interior. got reassigned to the CV9040B, and finished that, then jumped back to the pizarro interior, and finished it later the same year i finished the CV9040B interior.
  7. realism isn't fun for everyone, but then again steel beasts isn't for everyone, it's for a niche. if we dumbed down SB, we'd essentially turn SB into war thunder, but uglier, which would more or less give SB zero competitive edge. for this reason, the thermal on the fennek is garbage, the T-72 reverse gear is non-existent, and it's IR night sight is a joke. IRL, the T-72 IR night sight is even worse, since you have to spend time unscrewing 4 bolts of a plate in front of the IR night sight, since bright lights might actually damage the sensor.
  8. thanks. the CV9040B and CV9040C were some of the first vehicles created for steel beasts pro pe way back in 2006, after the danish leopard 2A5DK and pizarro, and the second real military vehicle i ever got to explore the insides of in person. i remember sitting for the better part of 3 whole days inside the CV9040B troop compartment with my laptop, taking measures, pictures, asking the crew about specific details on the vehicle and modeling the interior.. needless to say, the exterior model was in dire need of a proper update. and yes, the vehicles in general look better now, thanks to a new lighting update that Mike has done. it takes into consideration environment light colour, which makes the vehicles blend in better with the environment. it's sort of primitive PBR. it's not perfect, but a huge step up from the older lighting system.
  9. well, actually this piece is not missing. it is called "cloth" which should rotate with the mantlet. for some unknown reason this mesh got turned off in-game..
  10. on the challenger 2, the propellant is stored below the turret ring, and scattered across the hull in protective water bins, while the APFSDS projectiles are stored above ring.
  11. cool. i'll be looking forward to seeing it in about 10 years time, once the programmers are done stuffing their faces with truffles in their mansions, and going on expensive vacations.
  12. to be fair, the challenger is still a good platform for further upgrades. the running gear is sturdy enough to carry 70+ tonnes into battle. with a new powerpack, RWS turret with a rheinmetall 120mm or 130mm, and crew in hull, and you have a potent challenger to the armata.
  13. yeah, well it's all down to Nils scheduling it.
  14. personally i would like to see popups when mousing over different switches. it could contain a short description of the switch, and the hotkey. e,g "laser, RMB" "autoloader, V" also, the ability to switch to an alternate overlay system, with more detailed information about each switch, sort of like a short tutorial. this would make it easier to jump from vehicle to vehicle, and you could study the switchology while driving to contact, if you need to brush up on some vehile-specific skills.
  15. The BMP-1 has 16mm armour protection on the sides in SB, and should be proof against 7.62mm. the marder 1 side protection is 15mm @60 degrees on the upper side, and 15mm on the lower side. whatever round you're using against the BMP-1 would penetrate the marder as well.
  16. Initial marders were death traps as well. only with the uparmour package did they become viable. armour protection on the first marders is actually equivalent to that of the BMP-1.
  17. man, those dushkas sure get some mileage on them. they're even used in 23rd century.
  18. yeah, my main point is that shell-casings are hotspots that can give away your position in thermal. especially when they are shot up through the roof, and over treetops and buildings. as an enemy vehicle, you could simply aim below where the shellcasings are, and kill the vehicle. so it's a design flaw that's not properly represented in SB.
  19. not to mention working blowoff panels, and shell ejection. paticularly for the CV9040 this is an issue, since it throws it's white-hot shells high into the air.
  20. well, the animation tools for vehicles in SB are practically non-existent, so a programmer has to go in and manually program in the movement. otherwise there would be a working animated autoloader inside the T-72 series, the ammunition doors on the leopard and abrams would move, and well.. a bunch of other things that i prepared for movement, but never happened.
  • Create New...