Jump to content

dejawolf

Members
  • Posts

    5,315
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by dejawolf

  1. 1-2. well, the tanks would have to be in a platoon in the first place for this to work, so as soon as the platoon is split, this behaviour would be disabled. other than that, it'd work like a strobe. where you cycle through the platoon, and activate illumination one tank after the other. with a set on-time/off time for each vehicle. 3. again, nothing complex. just simple LOS calculation, if the vehicles IR light is on, spotting range is extended. tricky bit would be making the AI remember the light spot, and fire at it, and not the tank, and simultaneously not waste their ammo on it. the best way would probably be this: after the light has been turned off. you'd have to make a separate "target" frame at the spot where the light was located(this would be added to the tank model anyways as a source of light) so you'd do an inverse transform of the tanks spotlight location to worldspace, so it won't move with the tank, then after a set amount of time, you'd delete that spotlight location. any tank on the opposing team that sees this frame will fire at it while it exists. you could also give the frame the previous velocity of the vehicle it was on, if it's over... say 5kph, that way the target won't wander off if it's standing still on a hill.
  2. hmm, looks a bit potato currently tho, even on highest settings? not sure if i'm doing something wrong here. mouse controls as well are not good. WOT-like mouse, instead of SB-like makes tracking targets and adding lead nearly impossible.
  3. well, figuring out a system and setting up the AI isn't such a big issue, making that new code work with the existing codebase however is where the nightmares begin. you could cheat it quite easily with a ray and angle comparison + ray length comparison. say FOV of the gunner is 15 degrees, if the unobstructed ray from GPS forward view to enemy tank with illumination is within 15 degrees of the gunners sight, and searchlight is on, the unit is spotted. it's fast, it's cheap, and it works. for the gunners AI, you simply limit it's view range, the rest would be standard SB fare. when on route X turn on illumination, when in X type of battle position, turn off lights etc. you could even fake some of the illumination with a 3d model of the light. what you would not be able to do however, is create a light cone, that illuminates things properly. you might be able to fake one with 3d stencils tho. as for sensible behaviour of AI.. when has that ever stopped us from implementing something before. snipers were added in without the ability to snipe TCs. snipers are a major threat to TCs, making snipers able to snipe TCs would force players to keep their heads down. but instead, because you can't order the AI to stay in umbrella position, or buttoned up, it was instead decided that snipers won't be able to snipe TCs.
  4. FWIW, the autoloader in the T-72 has been set up to be able to reload. and the ammunition doors in the abrams and leo have ammunition racks behind them. the programmers just never had time to actually make them move. as for IR searchlights for night combat. not with the current engine. for something like that to be viable, you'd have to basically rewrite the entire graphics engine.
  5. didn't play any tanksims before SB1. i bought SB because i was working on a tank game, and wanted to understand how tanks really worked. choice was betweeb M1TP and SB, i saw all the labels of "worlds best tank simulator" on the cover, and was sold. installed the game, started SB, and the graphics were so ugly i nearly threw up on my keyboard. to put it mildly, i felt ripped off, and wanted to uninstall the abomination immediately, but decided to give it a shot, since i had paid good money for it. and well, here i am, over 15 years later.
  6. a decent roof model, and good vision block models for the commander is what is essential. a full-on 500 hour grail quest T-72 interior.. not so much. the only way a full-on interior would be useful for casuals, is if could double as a tutorial. e.g if you mouse over buttons or panels, they would explain to you how to use them, and display keyboard shortcuts. in any case, looks like they(possibly he?) is off to a good start. 407 people sponsoring, making around 2100$ a month from patreon. could very well end up like steel armor tho. years of work for very little gain.
  7. it's an israeli sho't painted green.
  8. Ukraine is home to one of the most famous Soviet tank Design bureaus, Kharkiv Morozov, who designed the T-34, T-54, T-64, and T-80UD. Their tanks have time and again revolutionized tank designs. and basically caused a "red scare" every time they made something new.
  9. yes, this is a feature. right around the drivers vision block, the armour is significantly weakened in order to make room for the vision block. russians wanted to save weight... it's worse in the older T-72s, where they have composites all the way up to the vision block. on the T-90, the poor APFSDS protection has been alleviated by adding a block of steel near the vision block, although this reduces HEAT protection somewhat.
  10. the slow speed is an illusion. the tank appears to drive slow because the 2D screen gives you no depth perception, and you have a very limited FOV. you can see the same effect when you film while you drive, then watch the film of you driving afterwards. Real life will seem much faster than the film. the one issue SB might have is that our tanks have somewhat slow acceleration.
  11. I'd rather have improved infantry over an accurate star map of the sky complete with adjustable star brighhtness.
  12. it's been 16 years. people have complained the entire time. something should have been done 11 years ago.
  13. crew morale depends on if you're driving around in top modern western tank, or outdated soviet monkey model tincan.
  14. All ERA is most effective when sloped. the heavier the slope, the more effective it is, since it gives the ERA more time to affect the penetrator, and also induces a twisting and shearing motion on the penetrator. however attacking from the top, the protection of the ERA is reduced to a negligible amount, since the ERA bricks on the T-72 roof is angled to defeat incoming threats from the front, and offer close to no protection from the top. another important factor is that ERA reduces the penetration power by a percentage of the penetrators original penetration. as for modern heavy ERA, it is even effective against APFSDS penetrators. however, it too has reduced protection against top-attack slugs, due to the near perpendicular angle they are struck at.
  15. well, it's "community picks" and sim city 2000 is rated as best sim so... eh.
  16. TOW-2B has 2 EFPs, and has been shown to be highly lethal against T-72's. they also have an advantage that ERA is ineffective against them, since they form a copper slug, instead of a thin copper needle. for leopard and Abrams, it depends on where it hits. Leopard would be far more likely to go up in flames, but only if the hull ammunition rack is filled. Abrams would at best be put out of action. at worst crewmembers could be killed. it would also depend on the version of leo2. newer versions has spall liners on the roof to reduce post-penetration damage likelyhood, and some versions has armour which might make part of the roof impervuous to EFPS.
  17. well, the roof armour thickness is not uniform. usually the front slope of the roof is thicker than the center and rear, and hull. The T-72 roof armour is around 60mm cast steel, with 25mm lead/fiberglass liner.
  18. right. well, that's just a matter of LOS thickness. the abrams glacis is already extremely sloped, over 80 degrees. And at 3/4, the thickness approaches ridiculous values, which in most cases would cause even APFSDS rounds to ricochet. as an example, between 80-86 degrees, an 80mm thick plate will have a LOS thickness from 460 to over 1100mm.
  19. it's due to the gun breech area being less protected than the chins. soviet tanks suffer from the same issue. it's generally an area that is difficult to protect in tanks due to the moving parts. a few vehicles have managed it brilliantly however, particularly the leopard 2A5 is an example of how to best protect the gun area on a tank.
  20. Well, i've created the majority of the vehicles in Steel beasts, and been paid for every vehicle i've finished, and a few other people on the team are former SB community members, namely Roguesnake and Dark, both of which i pulled aboard and trained back when i was "lead artist" for Esim games. i since stepped down from that position because it interfered with my true passion, which was making accurate 3d models of tanks, and instead Volcano, who has far more leadership qualities than me took over that role.
  21. Steel beasts 1 had some things that SB pro PE hasn't, colour height gradation of maps, making it easier to see hills and dips. it never ever crashed. and it had fewer bugs. AI tanks didn't skyline as often either, even tho there was no "stay" order back then. AI seemed more responsive and deadlier back then. unless you got up real close, then you could drive around them and they'd be completely useless. and the AI could shoot straight through dense forest you had no chance at seeing through yourself.
  22. new vehicles and changes to the damage model are separate from the programmers tasks. so you will see new vehicles, and updates to old vehicles happend parallell to updates to the structure of the SB engine. this is thanks to efforts by Al delaney years ago to improve the accessibility of vehicle implementation years ago. however, this is only for non-playable vehicles, which is why you see waves of non-playable vehicles appear every update. for playable vehicles, you still need the attention of the programmers.
  23. most likely there's a stub case ejector attached to the gun, like on the T-72 which catches the round when it fires, then rotates sideways to toss the spent casing out the side port, along with clearing the path for the next round.
×
×
  • Create New...