Jump to content

Apocalypse 31

Members
  • Content Count

    1,490
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Apocalypse 31


  1. Some ArmA tanking.

     

    A NATO tank & infantry attack against an enemy mechanized infantry platoon defending a small airfield. Everything goes well until an AT ambush in the end.

     

     

    Game mode is Liberation (CTI) and the map is Livonia, from the most recent DLC.


  2. 58 minutes ago, Grenny said:

    Well for me even the 3D weapon would be optional...as long as the virtual grunts shoot what I want where I want and when I want.

    Not like the current state of the AT weapons. You are allowed to choose "shot at unit"...and then the AT-gunner will shoot when he feels like it. Drives me nuts

     

    Snap106_1.jpg

     

    Ghost Recon 1. no weapon. just a reticule. It worked well there. 


  3. gif_fps.jpg?w=1000&ssl=1

     

    The new 4.1 terrain enhancements just make me want it more.

     

    The gif is from a RTS/TPS/FPS hybrid called Call to Arms. The first person models are primitive (a weapon sight layer) but supplement the game nicely and allow players the option to fight from first person. This would be wonderful in SB.


  4. What if buildings, structures, and other objects were placeable in the scenario editor, much like bunkers?

     

    Most of the time my map modifications are minor - adding small villages or building complexes to increase the immersion of a map and add life. 

     

     


  5. On 8/27/2019 at 2:07 AM, Ssnake said:

    Is Steel Beasts a computer game among many for you, or is it a hobby of its own?

     

    What are the things that you personally are struggling with?

    1. Absolutely a hobby. Enjoy playing multiplayer, but spend most of my time in the Mission Editor creating scenarios and tactical dillemnas, some of which I have encountered in field problems or even deployment. I also have more hours in SB than any game I own, combined. 

     

    1a. I think SB has a perfect mix of technicalities. Maybe because tank FSC are made for an average 18 year old off the streets to jump into and easily learn. 

     

    I hate DCS because it is too technical. It feels like a keyboard button mashing simulator more than anything. The Gazelle requires almost 15 clicks before you can launch w HOT-3. I might as well go be a real pilot, for the amount of time that it takes me to learn all the systems. 

     

    2. Nothing on a technical level, but the game has the chance to be a great combined arms game - better than ArmA, but it stops just beyond the "the turret". I think it would attract a larger audience and have more playability (from a scenario aspect) if it would expand further into things like infantry and helicopters - even if there was an abstract approach (much like the AH64 in the Pro version that has an RWS site but allows players to fire hellfires).


  6. 22 hours ago, ben said:

    In this update I gave the air assault guys an extra Javelin launcher to give them a bit more punch!

    Realistic. (Good touch)

     

    An air assault element going into an environment laden with armored vehicles would definitely be carrying multiple AT weapons.


  7. DF90 gunnery is definitely not easy and the auto-lead is inconsistent. 

     

    There's also no indication that lead is being applied - at least not that I can see on the gunners interface. 


  8. 2 hours ago, munckmb said:

    The way de df90 works doesn't seem to work in the df30.

    Speaking of which, how does the lead work in the DF 90? I read the wiki page but it's not working for me.

     

    To calculate lead, put the reticle on target and lase. Then track the moving target and press the lase button again and hold it for five seconds, then release. Then when you fire, you will have lead applied to the shot.

×
×
  • Create New...