Rangoon

2 hours ago, Rotareneg said:

To put the upgrade license on your CodeMeter stick you just need the CodeMeter User Runtime installed: https://www.wibu.com/us/support/user/downloads-user-software.html

1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

Absolutely, it's an independent installation. We actually recommend uninstalling version 4.0 first.

Okay, perfect. Looks like the wording may have changed on the preorder page, too, for the better. It jives. Unless I just dreamt the part about having 4.0 installed etc.. Thanks!

I purchased the upgrade license only. Is there a way to upgrade from 4.0 to 4.1 without having 4.023 installed? I deleted my install files for 4.023. It sounds like 4.0 must be installed in order to upgrade the Codemeter license. So would I have to download 4.0, install, update my Codemeter, then download and install 4.1? Or is there a way in my case to simply update the Codemeter license, then go straight to 4.1?

Does it upgrade 4.0 to 4.1? Or is it a separate installation?

Upgrade 4.0 to 4.1 preordered. I have almost entirely given up on preordering anything these days, but you can't go wrong with a new version of Steel Beasts. And really, if it helps esim (beyond simply cashflow now vs. later), then it's a done deal.

It seems from the CITV when you order a battle position it uses your commander's head facing (forward in this case since you're looking at the screen). Shouldn't it assign the direction you're looking in the CITV? It works this way in the F1 view, with or without binoculars, but not the F3 view. 

EDIT: it works to "designate target" first, wait for the turret to swing, then order battle position because the turret moves your head. But if I'm unbuttoned, look to the three o'clock position and order battle position, the driver swings right. TC is obviously stating a direction to face, since the driver can't know where the TC is looking. So why, when looking through the CITV independently from the main gun doesn't the TC assign the direction he's looking?

Sure, that makes sense regarding selecting what you want on the panel vs. a toggle. So that just leaves the main point - gunner won't respond to TC's command to switch to coax. I guess that must be a bug. There is some other weird behavior in there (like how sometimes the toggle does work and other times not), but the primary issue is gunner ignoring TC. 

When I said "I assume is as intended" about the lack of toggle (back and forth select) behavior I was giving the benefit of the doubt but perhaps that's related and they're both bugs. I figured it was different from the Abrams, but it really shouldn't be since a) it really is a main gun in that sense, and b) Ssnake says it "should toggle between coax and main gun" like it does for the Abrams. So it seems that's not working the way it's supposed to, either. 

Another strange behavior that I can't reproduce 100% of the time is that *sometimes* the M key from the TC position will actually tell gunner to switch from coax to main gun. I haven't yet figured out when it does and when it doesn't, but twice now I've been in the gunner seat, switched to coax, then moved to TC seat, hit M and it changed back to main gun (last selected 25mm ammo type). So the plot thickens?

To reiterate, as I've tested this again today:

From gunner seat in Bradley the M key changes to coax, but not back to main gun. You can also switch to coax with the End key.

From TC seat, the M key does nothing, and neither does the End key. The Ins, Del, and Home keys work as expected. When pressing the M key, the sim does see it however! I know this because it prints a message about selecting the main gun (regardless of whether the main or coax is currently selected). 

From TC seat with override, the M key will select coax, however it will not toggle back to main gun. The End key does nothing.

Of further note, I tested using an alternate hotkey and the behavior is the same. 

In version 4.019, I can't seem to get my Bradley gunner to use Coax. If I'm in the gunner station, the M key or the End key both select Coax (but M does not switch back to 25mm, which I assume is as intended). If I'm in the commander station using override, I can switch to coax with the M key, though the End key in this case does nothing. However, if I tell the gunner to use Coax, the message just pops up "Gun Select: Main" and does nothing. Neither the M key nor the End key work here. 

Something I'm doing wrong? Bug? 

Sometimes all I want is a quick damage and casualty report from an AI unit in my platoon. Is there any way to do that other than jumping to that unit? I suppose if that's possible, then might as well ask for ammo count as well. When I hear a unit is taking fire, as soon as there is a lull, that's the next thing I want to know. 

Thanks for clearing that up. Makes sense.

I thought I understood the reload function, but maybe not. Just finished a battle where I expended one SABOT and 4 or 5 HEAT. I am TC, sitting internal, hit reload all. I see the green message flashing that it's reloading SABOT (8|17). Other than showing white solid messages the few times I switched between F1, F2, F4, and F5 views, it's still just flashing that same message and not making progress after a few in-game minutes (tried sitting there with time compression on for a bit, noting no change). Am I missing a prameter here that's inhibiting the relaod? Tank isn't moving. M1A1.

EDIT: I tried unbuttoning and suddenly it made progress. TC must unbutton to allow loader to reload? All I saw in the manual was that some vehicles must orient turret a certain way, but I assume if that was the case in the M1 the AI gunner would handle that part. 

3 hours ago, Ssnake said:

a) wait for the next update where the team managed to improve render efficiency in some scene constellations

 

Thanks - Looking forward to seeing their improvements.

Quote

Thermal views are now particularly demanding because their render distance is often much higher than optical view, and on top of it the depth of focus function requires that the scene must be rendered twice before it can be composed into a picture.

I must say they're also much more immersive than in the past! Awesome work!

Maybe a one-time fluke. One thing I did was install my Creative ALchemy dll's I'd used from previous versions of SB Pro, so maybe that will help. I played out that mission, but it was more sounds than just the engine as I found out. I was missing all of my contact calls (I think all communication audio) and some other vehicle sounds. What was left was turret slew/adjust and impact noises on my vehicles. Nearly everything else was gone (in case that is helpful information at some point). I'll report in again if it happens again.

I can't find any other threads about this, but has anyone seen this behavior? I'm about 30 minutes into a scenario with 4 M1A2's and suddenly I lost my engine sounds (while tanks are moving). I have tried switching between all my vehicles, all crew stations, etc., but no engine sounds. I can still hear turrets. It's a little...disquieting.

Version 4.010 M1A2

When I'm in the F1 view, the CITV (picture in picture) is buttery smooth. However, when I switch to the F3 view, the CITV is extremely choppy. Is that expected behavior right now or is there something I can do to improve this?

I'm trying to upgrade to SB 4. When I continue to payment (Paypal being the only option), I get the error: Invalid Required Domain. I am able to log into Paypal in a separate tab without any issues, but I've tried several times to purchase from the eSim site but cannot get through.

Any suggestions?

EDIT: it resolved itself. Just had to wait a couple of hours.

Maybe. Maybe 3.5. Why would this matter to you?

It's just a number. I don't believe in version number inflation just for the sake of a cheap marketing effect.

I would think this question only comes from a curiosity about how eSim views the update internally. As in, how large a step is this next update in overall scope. If eSim says 4.0 vs. 3.5, it implies a larger step when taking into consideration previous iterations. So...just a 'glimpse' into the internal dialog at eSim and general sense of scope as perceived behind the scenes. Otherwise of course the number itself has no meaning beyond whatever eSim attaches to it. I assume it doesn't actually matter to anyone, per se.

This thread can hardly contain its own excitement, especially given eSim's excellent track record (get it? get it?) for pragmatic, low-fanfare, no-nonsense, highest-quality deliveries.

I know this isn't a feature request thread, but I am hoping for enhanced physics with the vehicles, occupants (player view camera inertia), and tracks/terrain interaction. Movement still feels a bit sterile to me compared to something like SABoW or even original Steel Beasts.

Patiently awaiting the next masterpiece.

Many thanks to you both. Exactly what I wanted to know.

Can someone please link me to an article (I've searched but found nothing sufficient) or explain how the M1 gunner's control works? I'm curious in general, but also specifically curious when using a joystick to aim which is most authentic or comparable to the real thing regarding the Y axis.

So about the real thing: what exactly is being moved and in which direction to move in each axis? I see two handles which look like they can be tilted fore/aft, but not sure if this does both direction (rotation/heading/yaw/x-axis) and elevation (pitch/y-axis) or only one. And if only one, are there foot pedals for rotation?

As for elevation, does tilting forward raise the elevation (as in *increase* elevation)? Or tilting back (as in *leaning back* and bringing that plane to rotate upward)? Years ago, I began gaming with mouse and keyboard and I always used inverted y axis to aim first person shooters. I've been a flight simmer as long as I can remember, so that felt more natural. But somewhere along the way I switched. I use mouse forward to aim up now instead of down, and find no conflict switching between joystick for flying etc. and mouse for aiming.

In steel beasts, I use mouse in the same way, but am still not sure what feels best when using the joystick, which I typically do. So which is more authentic at least? Joystick forward moves the gun up? Or joystick back moves the gun up?

Are you sure? If you'll run the short test I attached to my post above, you'll notice the AI section of M1A1-HAs does reload when it stops (replacing the battlecarry round, I presume) even though it has not fired.

I'm sure. In my first test, all units are "battle ready" so I assume they weren't doing any reloading. But to be positive, I tried it again. This time, I went to each vehicle of the element and fired a round from the main gun. Then I had them stop and reload. Got the green reloading message, waited for them to stop reloading, and saw the right numbers in the ammo count. Reload All, no response. So jumped to another element, then told the first element to go somewhere and at the final waypoint take a BP facing the opposite direction of their last leg. I viewed the map to watch their approach to the last waypoint and they both just stopped, held the formation of their route, and froze. I hopped into the lead tank's F8 view and they sprang to life. I verified no change to ammo count, no reloading message. Reload All, no response from either vehicle.

I'm sure they're really busy with something critically important, but I don't know what. Probably watching YouTube videos of Steel Beasts.

You could try running the mission in the mission editor and watch using the camera tool.

Good idea. I ran the mission in the editor. I placed a route for the first element (of the tank I started out in), and then went to "view" from a location near the BP. It took up the BP just fine. I jumped to it to verify it didn't have anything more to do, but it was happy with its work.

Then, while still "being" that original unit, I told another element to take up a route and BP. I observed this element go to its final waypoint and just sit there. I jumped to the lead tank of this element and it sprang into action taking up the BP.

I then set a route and BP for the first element, and observed it. Once it got to the BP, it just sat there in formation facing the same direction it was on for the last leg of the route. Once I jumped to it, it sprang into action changing heading and taking up positions within the BP.

Neither element was going far, so neither elment fell out of formation en route (and both tanks in the element were stopped, not repositioning for route formation). Neither had fired any rounds, so neither had to reload or take care of any other tasks that I can think of before getting into the BP.

I've noticed this too, perhaps it's caused by observing a unit.

Heh, yep, most likely!

Maybe we could add a "sneak to unit" rather than "jump to unit". Then we could at least hope to observe what exactly they're doing before they suddenly decide to take up the BP proper. Or, maybe it's best not to know that...

I have.

In an edited version of one of the Camp Hornfelt scenarios.

Section of M1s arrives at the BP and stops. My section is already there and properly oriented. The second section retains the facing of their approach (which in this case was roughly a right angle to the BP). There was no threat present at the time.

I thought at first they were reloading. But I thought it strange they didn't first orient properly in the BP.

Interestingly enough, I'm also seeing it in a modified Camp Hornfelt mission. GaryOwen, what black magic have you woven into these missions? I assume you sold your soul to the devil to make such awesome missions, so perhaps this is just some fallout from that arrangement.

I continue to observe this in 3.011 now that I'm back to playing that version. I send a unit off on a route, with a BP at the final waypoint. I am off managing other units, then jump direct to the unit in question after it has arrived at its BP (sometimes several minutes have gone by, sometimes just a few seconds). As soon as I am hopped into the observer view on the unit, it (all vehicles in that platoon/unit) starts orienting and positioning as if it suddenly woke up from a slumber and realized it was at a BP.

Is anyone else observing this behavior? There are no enemy contacts on the map at the time of witnessing this.

Actually, AI entities with auditory senses are not uncommon these days. If you can live with a simple model of sound propagation, it's not all that difficult to implement, apparently ("difficult" being a context-sensitive term -- AI in general is very challenging).

That would be a welcome new layer to the AI. Of course what I meant by "that mess" and what you're referring to as challenging would b the process of teaching the AI how to respond to the aural contact. If it can detect an approximate bearing and range, and perhaps vehicle classification, then it has to decide whether to do anything about it and, if so, how to go about that. That sounds like a major undertaking, though certainly a worthy one. But as you're saying, it starts with the basic detection, and glad to hear that's not actually so complicated.

Could you elaborate on this please? How do you ensure that the 'embark if' routes that you attach to 'checkpoints' (I assume you mean waypoint?) that you have placed off the map, will lead the units correctly over the required terrain?

What I did with mine is just place a few vertices arbitrarily along a route as a starting point (though you wouldn't have to). Then when I paste the route to my BP, I adjust the vertices for position and use CTL and SHIFT to add or remove vertices for better precision.

Here's a trick I came up with a while back:

In the planning phase, make a checkpoint somewhere off the map. Then add a few engage routes with "embark if..." conditions such that the AI will randomly choose which route to take. At the end of each route, make a BP. And finally, add retreat routes (conditioned or not) back to the original checkpoint.

Once you're in the action phase, you can right click the original checkpoint and choose "copy route chain". Then you can paste the route setup onto any checkpoint you create and adjust the BPs and routes as necessary. Granted, this doesn't solve your original problem. But it does give you the ability to quickly create BPs with retreat routes and alternate positions in real time.

Also, if the first checkpoint you create is one of the BPs, you can paste the route chain onto the checkpoint that you made a few pixels away from your current BP and have conditioned/retreat routes leading away from it.

I hope that made sense. If you give it a try it might be easier to see what I mean.

Cheers

Just wanted to say thanks again for this idea. It's an elegant solution for many situations. I stored a route off to the side with "embark if seeing at least one enemy" for my recon units, and it's exactly what I needed. Now during execution phase I can just copy that route and have more than just the "guard" response of "split once taking fire" since what I really wanted them to do was leave at first sighting so I can either direct tanks that way or call in artillery.