Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by solus

  1. On 2/13/2020 at 2:27 PM, ben said:

    Hi all, I have just released an update to this mission for anyone who’s interested.


    I have reduced the number of SPIKE teams and also reduced their missile count.  Missile teams are now separate from the Infantry company.  It’s less unrealistic than before :)


    I have added the third Infantry Platoon of the company, giving you more boots on the ground to hold the objective. For more challenge you could leave one platoon in reserve.


    The SPIKE teams from the weapons company have a couple of Pinzgauer trucks for mobility.


    Any feedback is welcome as always.



    Trying to beat the mission, but still no success. 


    How do you suggest to do it?


    Usually I take the big southern hill, covered in forests and try to destroy the targets with the missiles from cover,,, Anyway bad routing and a lot of missiles in enemy team stop me.


    At H+60 tanks are coming. Am I supposed to stop them as well?

  2. After almost completing the scenario I'm working on right now, I realized that the map area I used is much bigger then I actually need


    I tried to pick up the same map and cut off the smaller size, but it's close to impossible to duplicate all the routs exactly to the new part of the map. PC makes it automatically but it doesn't match.


    Is there a way to cut the part of the map in the already existing scenario?

  3. On 7/23/2019 at 5:08 PM, Gibsonm said:

    I've been reading the Release Notes (thanks for posting them) and have a few queries / requests for clarification.


    1. Page 7: "Especially, the performance of navmesh generation was improved by several orders of magnitude (!), and likewise the use of the navmesh works so much better now that we strongly recommend enabling their use by default."


    Yet the picture shows the choice requiring you to select "alt" to use the navmesh being "on"?


    Am I correct in thinking we need a sentence in there to the effect of:


    "In view of this improvement, we recommend you de-select (uncheck) the option requiring the use of the "alt" to access the navmesh routes for both the Planning Phase and the Mission Editor"?


    What's navmesh and how does it affect the ability of units to navigate? Really see no difference between cheked and uncheked options. 

  4. 15 hours ago, Maj.Hans said:

    You might have an older version of the game.


    The current version offers the T-72M, T-72A/T-72M1, T-72B1 m.1984, and T-72B1V m.1985 as playable vehicles.


    While I admit that the T-72B1 might not exactly be 'cutting edge' tech, it's quite a bit more advanced than the first few playable versions we had.  Plus with the latest game version you can now select AVEPS as an add-on which seems to give an effect similar to Kontakt-5, Relikt, Kaktus, etc ERA.  You can always do that and pretend it's the T-72B1 m.1989.

    I have the latest version of the game with all that fancy Armata prototypes... 


    Night vision, lead ability and better ammunition for Russian tanks in the game would be very appreciated.

  5. Any suggestions how to make TOS-1 fire? I noticed that if I choose Suppress in the Tactics it starts firing around in chaotic mode. 


    BM-21 grad can be ordered to fire with the help of FO team, but TOS-1 seems to unable to do that.


    I would like to understand how to make it fire at the point or the unit, and  script the on map artillery fire.

  6. On 2/14/2020 at 3:49 PM, Jartsev said:

    There is an installer containing all maps(minus Terrastan), which were delivered with v.4.0: Legasy Maps Installer; 'Suweon-Osan' map is likely should be included. 


    Please note, that those maps are not converted for use with v.4.1, and you need to do this yourself:


    Thank you for the advice!


    I've managed to restore my scenario... But I can't make this map published (the upper right side is grayed out).


    Why is that? 


    As I understand to upload my scenario I should share this map... Correct?

  7. 8 minutes ago, Gibsonm said:

    OK so can you define that a little better?


    Do you get the initial menu screen (grey with choices like “Tutorial”and “Instant Action”)?


    If you don’t see that then the location of the maps is the least of your problems.


    If you do see that what happens if you select “offline session” and then pick a scenario?

    Thank you for help. 


    I figured out what was wrong - I had to install the maps first, and the game second.


    Now it works... but pretty slowly.


    Btw, are there any ways to make loading times less? It takes forever to load the map and forever to quit.

  8. 7 minutes ago, Gibsonm said:

    Your clicking on “OK” just confirms that the path information is correct (only you will know if it is or not, since you know where you installed the maps), it doesn’t load any maps.


    I’m not quite sure what you are expecting / hoping?


    You only really get to “choose” a map in the Mission Editor when you are creating a new mission, or in the Map Editor when you want to edit a map.


    If you can chose a scenario (select one from “offline sessions”), the underlying maps will be used.


    Again I’m pretty sure how to start an offline session is described in the Manual.

    Maybe I described it incorrectly, but the main problem is that games doesn't start. 

  9. 3 hours ago, Gibsonm said:

    If you mean the 10 parts - the installer should put them in the right place (“right” depends on where you installed the basic maps).


    Note: You can now elect to store the maps on a different drive (not everything has to go into C:\ where you install the game).


    The map tool puts the ones from the “Downloads“ in the right place.


    All of this and more is in the documentation (i.e the Manual). :)


    I downloaded the packages, installed them, but game doesn't pick them up.


    When I start the game the path to the directory with the maps appears in the menu , but when I click OK nothing happens (game tries to launch the main menu, but fails).


    So no Steel Beasts for me yet.


    Any tips?



  10. 1 minute ago, Gibsonm said:

    Yes the 10 parts are the “usual” maps.


    If some makes a new map, or modifies an existing map, you use the download manager to get it.


    New maps are no longer posted complete to the “Downloads” section.

    Where should I put them after downloading?

  11. Hi! 


    Updated to 4.162 and was surprised that the default version doesn't include any maps (almost).


    How do I download them and install? Do I have to download all those 10 (!) parts archive? Whats the purpose of Map Tool? 


    So many questions and confusion, really (and everything for $30).



  12. Hey guys!


    What's new? Did the game become better?


    I played SB several years ago and even made some single player scenarios. For example, you can look them up here: 

    I have CodeMeter Stick and want to upgrade license to play again. How do I do that?


    Any guides? Advices?

  13. Ssnake, we are very glad tht eSim have such a high quality standards, it's, no need to argue, only benefits the game. Of course, it would be stupid to tell you how you should do your product.

    As you mentioned yourself, "Steel Beasts Professional is not a game". But SB Pro Pe is. So, can you consider to include more Russian units in the SB Pro Pe. I think, it would not require such high quality demands as SB Pro does. I absolutly sure, that it will be profitable both for eSim and for the players.

  14. Those who read the user's manual will also find a chapter or two about the underlying modeling & simulation part, our sources, and methods. Throw in a bit of "standardized guesswork" and plausibility checks, and you'll have it.
    Maybe I missed something, but I didn't find anything on simulation sources in the manual. It has very interesing chapter, called battlefield hazardz etc., which personally I found very interesting and educating, but there is actually nothing on where eSim got the data on simulation.

  15. _--__[]KITT;217544']They don't need to know that' date=' What they need to know is the power of the gun and the performance expected from the round(classified data).

    Then they compare those with the protection of each potential target in game(classified data) and voila! Pretty simple math if you know the telemetry/classified data from defense agencies.

    [/quote']Well, it looks pretty simple, but the only problem is that "performance expected from the round" and "protection of each potential target" both are, as you mentioned, classified and,what is even more important, basically unknown because there was no examples of confrontation between modern tanks (except modern m1 and outdated t72, which is not the case). So there are 2 questions to be asked:

    1) How do they simulate the potential outcome of such a confrontation?

    2) Do they have "classified" data? (anyway, even if they have, they have only the data from the "Blue" side)

    Well I'm pretty sure they aren't going to tell someone posting from Beijing for starters.
    Yeah, Chinese intelligence entangled SB forum with its tentacles. Do you think, they would say if I have changed the location in my profile, for example, to "Sydney, Australia"? :)
  • Create New...