Deputy276

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!! 😄👍

18 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Well, what can I say. I wouldn't expect micracles, but they may still perform fine.

Cool!

18 hours ago, Ssnake said:

You are.

Please, it's "Ssnake". Small difference, but important to me.

Oops...sorry about that. My 71 year old fingers goof up sometimes. I'll be more careful in the future.  👍

11 minutes ago, Gibsonm said:

Perhaps wait a little while - given that its Sunday night in Germany?

Will do!! 😉

SSnake....so I am good to go with buying the $30 upgrade?

7 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

That's not easy to answer.

- With stronger graphics cards, version 4.1 (and 4.2) runs generally faster than SB Pro PE 4.0.

- Medium class graphics cards don't seem to profit much, but they fare no worse.

- For rather old graphics cards, the optimizations that we managed to squeeze from the code have no effect, and some additional tricks to make things look pretty cost additional frame rate. 

 

So, your mileage will vary. Upgrading to a version 4.1 classic license from 4.0 would cost you $30.- (and you could participate in multiplayer sessions with the rest of the community). A one-month license to try and see for yourself is $9.50. It might save you $20.50, but I wouldn't recommend this as an insurance policy TBH. Were you to upgrade from version 2.6 or older it'd be totally worth it.

 

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. 

9 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Difficult to say. It's probably fastest and safest to plug in the CM stick, and then to run CmDUST. After it's done, please send me the "CmDust-Result.log" file by email attachment. I'll have a look at it.

CmDust file sent. Hope it has the info on it. I remember buying the full version for over $100.😃

9 hours ago, Ssnake said:

In another 15...20 years we may have reached the break-even point, with the expenses that we had to set this up. The expenses weren't great, mind you, but it's not as if a tank themed lifestyle is everybody's unfulfilled dream.

I know and understand. But it IS great that you guys are doing this. 👍

Thanks Gibson. Brave rifles!!! 😅

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?

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

My post at the bottom of this page:

That post was from 2015. So do I get 10% discount on mugs? 😄 LOL...just kidding. But glad to see someone woke up the the merchandising aspect of the game

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. 😊  

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. 

17 hours ago, Furia said:

While I see the big advantage of ATGM as Spike or Javelin that have a  Fire and forget and Top down attack capabilities, I fail to see how the LAHAT as it was designed could offer  better than  those missiles.

Most tanks would never have the chance to see targets at 8k unless a really realli flat terrain and very favourable visibility conditions.

Said this even steering a missile using the gun sight at 8 km and being able to hit a maneuvering target is not a easy feat.

Regarding hitting helicopters, well just try it in game with a moving helo using a TOW, MILAN ect. Not really easy

If it is static and hovering it is no problem but hovering helicopters are easy targets for any weapon in range.

 

I do not say that LAHAT it is a bad idea but unless it implements features such the Spike or Javelin fire and forget and top down attack or I do not see this like a really big advantage.

In thie other hand we have to start thinking that we do need more  "affordable" ammunitions. Because not all tank targets would be highly expensive objetives. As it was discovered during the Gulf War,  destroying old trucks with very very expensive AGM-65 MAvericks or Hellfires was not a good idea. You may ran out uf money before the enemy rans out of trucks, Technicals ect.

The actual modern tank rounds are not really very cheap and sometimes the targets are less worth than the ammo cost.

Cost is also a factor to consider into the "overall value" of a weapon system or ammunition.

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.

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.  

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 designation—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 missile’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

Okay, thanks! Just wondered 

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. 

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!!! 

22 hours ago, TSe419E said:

The issue is that all the tanks are on the same side, they're all blue force.  You need to switch to the Red force (upper right corner of the screen, arrow next to "Blue") and add tanks there and give them routes to attack the blue force.  The T-tanks you have think the M-1s are on their side because they are.

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!!! 

20 hours ago, Kingtiger said:

well I was talking about your pacifist tankers initially, it sounds very odd but without any better (detailed) info nobody can guess the issue.

/KT 

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

7 hours ago, Kingtiger said:

well I was talking about your pacifist tankers initially, it sounds very odd but without any better (detailed) info nobody can guess the issue.

/KT 

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.   

1 hour ago, Splash said:

 

Ah, but it doesn't work the way you've explained.

It's more like

[Mods](theme)(nation)
(theme)(nation)
(theme)
(woodland)(nation)
(woodland)

 

If there is no skin in the correct mods folder, the game will not look in any other mods folders. the path does not lead back to the mods directory after it goes to the main game directory.

So your example on a desert theme with a US 1990 side would be:
Mods Desert/us
Desert/us
Desert
Woodland/us
Woodland

 

Boom.

 

If you don't have a skin in the mods/theme/nation folder, the game goes to the main installation directory and does not come back to mods. It won't look in your mods/woodland folder for a desert theme.

 

The takeaway here is that if you're in Deputy's situation and want to use the same M1 skin all the time regardless of season/theme, you need to drop a copy of it in multiple mods folders.
 

EXCELLENT!!! Thanks a ton for that info! I will do exactly that

1 hour ago, Kingtiger said:

You really need to start giving better descriptions of what you are doing if you want people to help you... 

 

Regarding the skins. the skin you drop in the mod folder replaces the M1A1 skin for that country choosen in the mission editor. so you can have 1 M1A1 skin for USA, 1 for Australia and 1 for russia if you so like. You also need to add the skin to both Woodland and Autumn to cover "normal" terrain and desert and winter if you have a desert/winter skin.

A skin is never tied to a scenario.

/KT 

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. 

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?