OnAlienware

Ssnake, hope you can answer: What development obligations stand between things as they are and a new crewable tank?

I love the new patch. Great work. What's next?

Got it. Does that mean there's slack in the development schedule to pursue other goals, or do you go on vacation? On another note, aren't the Australians a Pro customer? Their M-1A1 is is the AIM SA, so... might we see it?

Given the deathly silence around here, I'll poke a little more. What's the status of multiple sides/civilians, and 3D people/infantry generally?

What's the CV90 exploit?

It's a great explanation, but it supposes the Spaniards have opted for a primitive FCS in an otherwise 21st century tank. Did they really? Even so, is it an impediment to loading other NATO munitions?

What constitutes a "registered" stick? Am I "registered" with e-sim via my purchase?

Anyone know why the Leo 2E can't be outfitted with American ammunition (in SB)? The Spanish HEAT round is a real dog.

The other thing on my (reasonable) wish list is multiple factions, to include neutral parties and civilians. This would allow for tremendous new depth in scenario design...

Soo... I still love 2.46 Thanks for the on-point reply a few pages back, Ssnake. The things I'm most interested in (and hope contractual customers are interested in, too) are the mystery tool for efficiently adding non-playable vehicles, and the revamp of urban scenarios/map design. Can you comment? Don't worry, I won't ask any questions about implementing American vehicles/technology from this millenium.

Sooo... I love 2.46. My question is what are the (solidly) planned developments for SB, and how far out does that occupy the calendar? I understand private consumers don't pay the bills, but I'd like to know if contractual obligations are expected to wane enough for e-sim to focus on consumer oriented content. Just asking, guys.

Stick with the keyboard and mouse. It's -far- superior. A joystick doesn't enhance realism, and it just gives you one more thing to fight (the interface, in addition to the enemy).

I know the multiplayer community doesn't pay your bills, but it would mean a lot to have a 21st century Abrams opposite the modern Leos.

Amen on learning the M1. The floating reticle makes the FCS mathematics more transparent, which is invalueable for building an understanding of gunnery.

Take my money.

This caught me off guard a while back. Over the rear deck, the sight will aim lower than the gun can depress.

Nor to dwell, but I will anyway... If the requirement was for a thermal equipped tank, why didn't you just make it a T-80UM in the first place? In all seriousness, can you share any details about incorporating new AI tanks (even if it's in the distant future)?

No, no no... My thought was that an OPFOR tank would allow instructors to get behind the gun at critical moments while training students.

Have any clients expressed interest in an OPFOR tank? It seems to me instructors could get a lot of utility out of them.

Man, you guys are rough!

Wishing upon a star: A new tank, other than another Leo variant.

I understand. I'm hoping for some slack in the development schedule that would allow for consumer oriented content.

Ouch. Can you give us any hope?

Any definitive plans to bring American vehicles into this millenium? What might those plans be?

I hate to sound down, but the wait has taken much of the shine off of the coming content. Is there a silver lining? Something new and exciting made possible by the delays? I don't necessarily need to know what it is. I'd just like something more to look forward to.