Jump to content

stormrider_sp

Members
  • Content Count

    319
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About stormrider_sp

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Personal Information

  • Location
    UK

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think there is a big gap in the market in the middle ground between gameys like WT and sims like DCS. Think about a good Apache Longbow or Attack Submarine or WW2 Battleship sims in line with middle ground reality based genre like Flaming Cliffs. Not hardcore study sims like DCS series, but not kids trigger frenzy MMO like WT. How long since we dont have a proper Apache sim? Last game I remember was Apache Havok, from 1998! SSN was Dangerous Waters from 2005! And the last good WW2 Battleship sim was Task Force 1942 from 1992! If I was a new developer that's where I would tackle. What makes me sick about this Microprose revival thread, tho, is this 'announcement of an announcement' crap with silly artwork and nothing to show.
  2. I agree, I think it would be a great addition something like: "attach to if" and "divide if" conditions. Exactly what I was thinking while playing with the editor these past few days.
  3. I guess so are humans. If I was one of those 4 bmps and the only thing in sight was an enemy vehicle, I wouldnt care if my company was already shooting at it. With four missiles in the air, who could claim the kill for himself? I'd say its mine.
  4. If I could choose where to improve complexity it would be in the infantry, the thermal imagery simulation, artillery and company+ battle management.
  5. On my part, I am one of those who appreciate complexity. I used to create the car physics in Assetto Corsa for small rally teams and private clients. I devored some DCS and CMNAO for breakfast. In Steel Beasts specifically, my hobby is to be able to try out in the sim what I read in military history books and magazines. Although I was obligated to enlist in my country's military and serve for about a year, all I learned about strategy and tactics came from elsewhere. So when I transitioned from M1TP2 into Steel Beasts what I missed most was a comprehensive set of Tactics tutorials, something beyond camp hornfelt, more detailed, more achievable, something like a study-scenario-introduction to each specific aspect of tactics like Hasty Attack, Hasty Defense, Movement to Contact, Recon, Security....everything that we find in the Field Manuals. So,there was this HUGE tactical understanding gap between M1TP2 and even camp hornfelt series that was never really fulfilled. And that's something that one doesn't learn from the manual or simply FM-17-15. The most direct result of this was the years and years of study, trial and error trying to create something plausible in the mission editor. It was never the complexity of the tools the problem, but the understanding of the content.
  6. https://www.benning.army.mil/armor/eARMOR/content/issues/2017/Spring/2Wayne17.pdf
  7. Recently I read an article I think on a recent Armor magazine, about the use of the Stryker MGS. The article explain that it should be used in cooperation with the Stryker ATGMV. Using their high level of mobility, the MGS would serve as a prey for the enemy, running top speed diagonally towards the enemy, while the ATGMV would engage targets with missiles. Apparently this tactic achieved great success in the NTC. I couldn't replicate the success in SB tho; all my MGS were always decimated before the missiles could hit their targets. (DF-90 and ITV)
  8. what you can do is create a new 'side', make it allied to iraq and give it russian camo.
×
×
  • Create New...