Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Lumituisku

  1. My friend posted this at the Dogs of war forum. After reading this I went to test it, and I confirm it. Also I made a video about it. link to video https://youtu.be/Epw_K4q7CCE if upper link doesn't work maybe this does.
  2. Yea. I agree. So am I all mistaken that heat or MPAT to turret could make t-14 nearly useless to fight with? Thought I do wonder.. if and how many back up systems they have.
  3. Wilso845 - as far as I know, is / is been Challenger 2 crewman in real life. So he speaks from experience.
  4. Woah... that is impressive looking map. That bridge is insane! and your welcome. ^^
  5. Hmm, if you could post here some pictures of your map, it would rise up more interest I bet ^^
  6. Yeah that's right that you talk there. Maintenance get's really troublesome with only two members grew. But for gunner driving... eee.... I don't think that its good idea. Just like as you don't think that its good idea for commander to drive as there is lot map looking and so on. Also what I have heard from one who actually is driver, and from my own experience of heavy machines. Some terrains take so much attention to driving that its is completely away from most vital roles of tank, such as commanding and gunner. terrain on real life is not like in steelbeast. Even when trees are not tank killers as badly one still doesn't want to hit them or something else like boulders, nor to sink into soft grounds. On sim and games it is more likely possible for either one being as driver, on real life, it gets more troublesome and benefits of not having driver start collapsing to lack of third pair of eyes. - - - Those can's under turret are that active self protection? Will it fire all those at once or just one, and does it mean that second missile / heat on same place could hit?
  7. I do not agree with you. Looking at today's rabid technology with automatic gears and all that what makes joystick driving possible I could see that commander could be responsible of tanks movements in future. So.. Commander (who drives as well) and Gunner. That's how I think it would go. Looking at the history.. Taking care of gun and shooting targets is not good thing for commander. All kind of small task, and focus drifting away from situation awareness into tunnel vision is bad mistake. Driving then again, fits for commander, since it supports situational awareness. And today vehicle development has already made it possible, unlike before. Thought... Gunner driving as well. That is interesting. I haven't thought of that. It would have it's benefits too, and I could see it possible. Just... that darn fact of tunnel vision.. if tank has to move while firing... and that just leads to disasters. I guess that it would go to point where both are able to drive but it is commander who chooses who will drive tank. That is how it would see it happen.
  8. I do so much agree with you. Something like that would make me satisfied enough, as long as stamina consumption doesn't mean that missile team cannot run at least 500 meters (I mean run or at least jogging... not sprinting.) And thank you Rotar for letting me know what this issue is all about, from origin. with windows i mean.
  9. ??? they didn't move at all before? 5 kilometers? That is long distance, but how about even 500 meters. And honestly.. I have really hard time believe that TOW team would be more demanding than 95mm bored reqoilles riffle that itself weighs 150 kg, + 8 x 10kg default ammunition load, 3x heavy basookas, 6x light basookas, 2-4 mines (10kg each), and other battle equipment spread to 7 persons. Sometimes we did that with even less mens. So really... Running cooper test several times with that... and getting result of... 2 kilometers something. (I honestly don't remember end score.. I might have blacked out but we did atleast two km. So yeah... really... even 500 meters of fast movement from position where vehicle dropped team and back to vehicle.. instead of crawling like tortoise. Would that be too much asked?
  10. I mean. That if you as gunner try to engage enemy. In some building you just don't have any change to see infantry in buildings. But AI sees them. That sucks. And I do so much agree with you. Especially from my own experience. It's just ridiculous to watch these missile teams.
  11. Ah.. got it. So that affects penetration that much?
  12. But its test range apparently. I find that distance being logical. Is not not? :confused:
  13. Since new engine is coming.. I thought to add here couple of my wishes. Of course I hope that these are already coming but well... some sunny day in future I hope. First... Houses.. It really annoys me that infantry inside some... actually make it "in most" houses, infantry inside is not visually able to be detected by player at all. But AI fortunately seems to notice them. Yet it doesn't exactly make me happy when I take RPG out of nothing and only thing I can do, is to go to F8 and hope my AI gunner knows where enemy is. That I'm not able to detect with eye, binoculars or thermal camera. Some time ago I started working list of building that have this problem but I completely forgot it due real life issues, until I remembered it again while looking photos from last ITEC. There are several maps especially on certain European maps where this problem is not as bad. But too many maps, there is trouble with this thing. Thought it can be dealt with mission editing. Nowww.. what else. I could make small list but I assume those are forever known subjects here. Such as killer trees for example and weird collision damages. for example yesterday I reversed to another cv9040.. and lost driver and commander. While other CV lost engine.. wtf? Well I admit that it was stop at march route and reverse but still. -sighs.- Anyways that building thing is really only features that annoys me overly much. Oh there is another... probably much complained subject again Infantry! especially missile teams are so freaking slow, that I cannot understand why they even are made to be able to move at all in game. Being infantry soldier myself with rather heavy team weapon of 150kg + another 150kg of ammunition and other stuff, I can tell that they should be able to move at least speed of normal infantry on jogging, and even move with weapon while crouching although it would be slower. Well maybe that is balance factor that missile teams are so freaking slow... but please could you do something to those houses that infantry would either be seen or something. Or just make houses that work appear on mission editor map on different color. Sincerely. Lumituisku
  14. Its white since winter time. On map that I use as my practice range / testing ground there was not wide open areas so I used frozen winter to have such area for testing. And I see it now. That white / Green area is commanders cupolas ring chasing under sight. But it still doesn't make sense to me why it doesn't have, hardly any upwards elevation and instead I see commanders cupolas ring so much. It's difficult to believe that it would truly have been done like that. Could someone who actually has T-72m1 experience confirm this? Thank you all for you answer's and patience. And uh, one more thing. Am I right that commander has it's on little IR searchlight on cupola that he uses? And Gunner has another even smaller next to GPS sight? And, isn't that searchlight next the main gun yet another and even larger searchlight possibly IR? if IR... could using that improve vision during night? At the moment it is really awful, only 250 meters and 300 at max. It's yet another thing that is hard to believe to really be that bad. Could someone confirm this too?
  15. Also something I noticed at same testing as I tested other vehicles too Bradley IFV Commanders auxiliary sight.. or AA sight? however that is called. You can use night-vision with it and its way better than normal night vision Thought only useful if you have lost thermal sight but things happen. Normal nightvision AA sights one - way better!
  16. Oops, I probably used wrong word. I should probably have used term "depression" instead of elevation... or actually both. >.<
  17. So... I did some testing with t72 night sights just out of curiosity and noticed this... I don't know if this is correct or not but it looks very weird to me. I took plenty of screenshots and repeated this couple of times, with both t72 versions in game. I'm running on latest aka version 3.025. On this image you can see gunners sights from commanders one. Nothing weird on this... but follow down sight just keeps going down. It begins to look like turret roof already... but still like.. seriously? Then again, elevation up, doesn't seem to be like nothing at all... This picture is with max elevation to up. Well... I knew it has poor upwards elevation but still... makes me wonder this. And... its same with daysight. Exatly same. Sight goes so deep down that more than half of screen goes white. regardles of direction where youre looking at. So... is this.... how it should be?
  18. That is really awesome. Would be really nice to find out more of these drills from somewhere to start practicing those or something similar with my friends. And yes indeed, it gives commanders more free hands. And that is pretty much what I'm looking for. Thought Ideally one has to learn all three places on tank, right? rather gun fire thought. Your post really made me even more interested. I wonder where I could find more information of these drills. I think I gotta check up what I can find from Esimgames folder. From that Tascop or how it is called. Maybe there would be some of these stuff?
  19. Well it really depends on place and vehicle like you said. Here in Finland, and well lets say that wooded areas. I think that driver is more useful, since there is less open space and one has to know where and how to drive. That would be overwhelming additional task to commander especially on tight situation. And yes I will check as many of previous topics as I can find with time and thinking of what is said in those. I actually thought to make summary where to gather these things up. But well see if Ill go to that. And what do you mean with "What I'm allowed to."? Why you would not be allowed to... -puzzled.- :confused:
  20. Uh. Maybe someone could bought that new version to you. Ain't it something like 40 dollars? And you could then pay it to him via paypal? I dunno just a solution. I wonder what others think? Can one bough came to other by giving other ones @mail for example? You have dongle right? And version 2.0?
  21. Not exatly sure where the word conscript refers to. My translator gives it three different meanings. But yes, I went into army as conscript, and was there for an year during witch I was training to Anti-tank company, to heavy basooka group of 7 persons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/95_S_58-61 (Four for operating main weapon and three to be used as cover/ recon/ flanking element). I served there as Alikersantti -> lowest NCO rank in the Finnish defence forces And I was in control of that 3 men squad, being one of them. Each carrying 1 Apilas basooka and two ligher basookas http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APILAS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M72_LAW Uh, yes, I think you're right. Yet I have feel that there is more in tank. See, problem is that AT weapon is often stationary before and during engagement, unlike tank. If tank stays still it will get shot. Well infantry would as well. But tank can reverse and retreat far more faster than team with 150kg main weapon, although infantry has some stealth, and cover from terrain due smaller size. So, from these thoughts I wonder if there is something more. Like something that I do not know? Such as tactic of how to proceed? when engaging? Something that grew have either practiciced, and what is possible with tank what is not so well possible with infantry weapons. For example as manouvering on formation, there are probably commands if enemy comes from side / rear sector by surprice? Or if something out of ordinary happens? something unexpected? And how should targets be called? Tank, PC, Truck, Troops, Chopper? Indeed, this is true. Thought in infantry there are quite several different ones. I do not even remember those all, cause those are on various different situations. But main one for engagement is almost same if not the same. Actually it is same, yes. I wonder if its same for other nations as well? This is during engagement it seems. And yes it works for driver too. Bit long thought, but makes it very clear. Probably one well placed order is better than constant micromanaging. I'm interested to know how many know this same. unit, direction, distance, description of target and fire-command list. I think I will start practicing this form just like you said. Using same way of saying that same part of message is same place always so, even new crew member will learn it fast enough. Heh, Yeah we had those too. Obviously. And those were so much necessary since these were 3:d most loud weapons in Finnish army at the time. Thought hand marks are not much of use in game. Unless... playing in same room. Could be nice thought, but can't see that happening unless playing with friends on LAN session.
  22. Dear god. I just found our several similar topics that partly or mostly answer my questions here. It was coincidence that I noticed how to get older messages to be visible. I had wondered why older messages didn't show and thought that those are automatically removed or something. I was wrong those were just now shown as I have to select how old messages are shown. I'm terribly sorry about making almost duplicate threat. I will be looking at those existing ones now and seeing if I get all my ansvers from those topics. Such this one. http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=17137 Also I noticed that Gibson has done really nice post of "words have meanings." That is something to learn from heart too I think.
  23. Thank you Grenny for your reply. I'm well aware, that there is not just one truth. - So to be more clear what I'm seeking is to learn more of how things are done here and there and so on. To learn by myself then later on what works best for me and between me and others. I do not really limit myself only to one nation or so. Even when I of course look with love to things preferred here on Finland. I would love to learn more of how things are done there in Germany as well as in other places. Because Isn't Germany home of Leopard? There might be way to communicate or tactics to use that at-least part of those, work elsewhere too. And what comes to experience. That is something that I do not have. And probably never will have other than virtual games. That is why I'm so interested to hear how things really work inside tank and between crew members. Thought I'm starting to feel that this topic might get swollen, and have many branches for discussion to go. Well, it will be seen how it goes. I have feeling that I wasn't clear enough. I'm doing this switching of view from commanders position to have good situational awareness. If I'm gunner Im most of the time looking at the sights and scanning sector that I'm told to. So yeah I do agree with you on this. It's same with driving forest machine that I do as work. Eyes have to be on work, not on handles. too bad that I do not really understand enough German. And from that this comes to point that maybe... maybe I should be looking into working communications used in, English speaking countries such as UK or USA. Cause ain't here in SteelBeast English main language between players. Yet like I asked. Is there more ways and communications than just ones in steelbeast? Cause this is simulator after all. No matter how good game is I doubt that all kind of communication needed between tank grew would really be working in game as it works between tank grew in real life? . . . .
  • Create New...