Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Deputy276

  1. Got the new license and installed it. Worked great. Newest version works just as smooth as previous versions. And my comp definitely qualifies as "potato". Thanks to Ssnake and Gibson for the help. Much appreciated!! ๐Ÿ˜„๐Ÿ‘
  2. I have four identical comps. All four have 16GIG RAM and dual Xeon 3.8 Processors. The best graphics card is a GTX960 OC with 4 GIG onboard RAM. The comp I am on right now has a GTX 950 with 2 GIG onboard ram.
  3. I know and understand. But it IS great that you guys are doing this. ๐Ÿ‘
  4. Thanks Gibson. Brave rifles!!! ๐Ÿ˜… Ssnake...does the newest version of SBPE have problems with frame rates? My computer is pretty much a "potato" when it comes to performance. Version 4.0 ran just fine. Have the graphics gotten a major boost?
  5. I HAD a license for 4.0. However, I don't see it anywhere in the code meter. Where should I look? There IS a serial number. Is that the license? I want to upgrade from 4.0 to 4.1. thanks, Dep
  6. My post at the bottom of this page: That post was from 2015. So do I get 10% discount on mugs? ๐Ÿ˜„ LOL...just kidding. But glad to see someone woke up the the merchandising aspect of the game
  7. Hi all, Well I am back to Steel Beasts. Where have I been? Mainly WOT. WOT is about to take a major downturn with something called Crew 2.0. Or as they call it on their forum...sCrew 2.0 It's a pretty obvious money grab by the former Soviet Union game company and most players are pretty peed off about it. I suspect many will bail and try and find something else to play. Today I tried going back to Armored Warfare, but having a single server in Amsterdam doesn't do a whole lot to prevent lag and slideshow. So it's back to Steel Beasts and solitaire play. ๐Ÿ˜Š
  8. You stated, and I quote, "Its "might have been" because no one has bought it and no one has used it." I was simply commenting to your comment. As to Germany, we really don't know what they do and don't have. I doubt they would admit the truth if asked. Heck, the USA was even testing the LAHAT. So it's very possible we have at least some of them. I'm not making any requests to eSim. Unless you guys want to include a Merkava III or IV. That would be pretty cool. Or give the current Merkava, whatever model it is, the LAHAT. It IS capable of using it. Although that tank is no longer used AS a tank.
  9. Tanks equipped with the LAHAT DON"T HAVE TO SEE their targets. They can use a laser designator and F&F the missile. And before you say that's not an efficient method, lets not forget the VERY successful Copperhead system that was used to great advantage in Iraq. As to shooting helicopters, that would depend on the helicopters you are trying to shoot. No, I wouldn't like to try and shoot down a moving OH-6 Cayuse. It would probably be impossible to even track it with the turret. But an Mi-26 or a Chinook or maybe even a Sea Stallion would make a nice, fat target. I don't know what country you are from, but budgetary worries really don't come into the picture during wartime. Israel is certainly not a wealthy country, and they are the ones that developed the LAHAT. Plus our recent Tomahawk missilefest on Syria cost a pretty penny and we aren't even at war with them. And your argument about $$ being spent doesn't hold water because Nike-Ajax already gave you the costs of LAHAT vs Javelin. "Its "might have been" because no one has bought it and no one has used it." Hmmmm....I suspect the Israeli Army might dispute that. But getting exact data/information from them is not an easy thing to do, as the lack of Merkava III and IV tanks in SB indicates. Israel is reluctant to blab to the world about everything they do or use in combat. Mainly because it gives ammo (pardon the pun) and propaganda to anti-Israeli forces. No doubt the enemies they face would find some way of twisting the use of the LAHAT to some horrendous act of terror. We also really don't know what is going on in the Ukraine as far as tanks using missiles. Both countries have them and I don't think they would be reluctant to use them if the possibility arose.
  10. Well the Israelis sure got a surprise in their 1973 war when they encountered a crapload of missiles fired by Egypt. They are so concerned that they have developed special anti-missile equipment on their tanks to defeat it. That being the "Trophy" system. They realized from the losses in the war of 1973 that you can't sit back and be reactive to advances in ATGM systems. It's no longer "might have been", but is now "ARE". The US is considering and testing the Trophy and other anti-missile systems for the Stryker vehicles. You can't prepare your tanks for battle based on old technology and Cold War specs. If you aren't up-to-date, you will lose. No country wants to be "surprised" by something in combat. Just because something HASN'T been used often, doesn't mean it WON'T be used in the future. More simply...better to be safe, than sorry.
  11. According to Wiki, the LAHAT uses a laser designator. All they need is a scout vehicle to lase the target and the LAHAT follows it: "The LAHAT is designed to achieve a 95 percent probability of kill under most conditions.[3] It has a semi-active laser guidance system, capable of both direct and indirect laser designationโ€”the target can be laser-designated by the launching platform (e.g. firing tank) or other platform (e.g. another tank, helicopter, UAV, or forward scouting team), requiring minimal exposure in the firing position. With a low launch signature, the missileโ€™s trajectory can be set to match either top attack (armoured fighting vehicle, warship) or direct attack (helicopter gunship) engagements." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LAHAT
  12. I did a forum search but couldn't find any info on this. AFAIK, the LAHAT missile started being equipped, or at least available, starting with the Leo 2. Certainly the Leo 2A5 had them available. But I don't see any Leo tanks with them. I see Russian MBTs with missiles, but not the Leo. Any reason for this? LAHAT is a devastating ATGM with a 95% probability of kills.
  13. Well I finally got back to my test scenario and got the bad guys to ACT like bad guys. Thanks a ton for the help!!!
  14. DOH! I knew it was something basic that I wasn't doing. Okay, let me pack up the leftover pizzas and end that party. Thanks guys!!!
  15. If you want, I can send you the scenario to look at, as far as pacifist tankers. It is still in "early development" stage, so it hasn't been totally fleshed out. I am sure I am doing something wrong and just don't know exactly what it is. Ha! Figured out how to attach it on the forum Thanks guys! test.sce
  16. If you want, I can send you the scenario to look at, as far as pacifist tankers. It is still in "early development" stage, so it hasn't been totally fleshed out. I am sure I am doing something wrong and just don't know exactly what it is.
  17. EXCELLENT!!! Thanks a ton for that info! I will do exactly that
  18. I was under the (mistaken) impression that the mods folder covered ALL areas of the game. I now know it doesn't. I installed the desert skin, but if I go into the training area, the woodland skin shows.
  19. Well I got the skin working. I was hoping it would replace ALL the skins in the game for M1A1, but it only replaces what's in a scenario. I'm in the process of making my own "first" scenario. Can't seem to get my pacifist tankers to engage in battle. They drive up to each other and then seem to want to have a pizza party. Nobody shoots, even though they are set to fire at will. Maybe they are waiting for the guy named Will?
  • Create New...