Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ghostdog688

  1. I actually like this, as it would simulate loader fatigue as well - something that would level the “auto/manual loader debate” a little bit.
  2. hello all! It’s been a while since I visited Steel Beasts forums. I plan on picking up the recent upgrade in the next month or so and want to congratulate you on keeping this sim alive and available to us enthusiasts. I would still want something like the T-64, or other Tanks that can shoot ATGMs featured. It would change the threat picture for certain scenarios quite a bit. things like scout vehicles (BRDM-2AT, Scorpion) being crewed would be nice as well). I appreciate the difficulty in modelling these things without the customer demand at the Pro end. But perhaps the old “If you build it, they will come” can be done in a low-key speculative manner. Either way, it would very much allow many of us to really appreciate the REDFOR side if we could have a more realistic TO&E that doesn’t rely on the much slower AI engagement process. completing interiors for Shot’Kal (and giving us a British Centurion seeing as they are similarly modelled) and Challengers would be nifty too. dare I ask, is VR something that the PRO market are expressing an interest in? Seems to me something that could really change the game here in a tank sim as well. The recent IL-2 content has very much peaked my interest certainly. But I want more modern equipment than ww2
  3. Hi there! Please consider me for the position of gunner or single tank commander for any remaining vehicle. if preferrred, I am also happy to direct REDFOR atgms and assets as well if you’d prefer a living, breathing enemy.
  4. SSnake i totally get where youre coming from. I anticipated such an answer to be honest, but i figured it was better to ask and put it out there. You dont know if you dont try after all I hope to see it eventually, but not at the detriment of the things you have prioritised. the reason i wanted the t64 (besides the fact its an iconic tank) is the ATGM from the barrel facility. i think it would add a new tactical dimension to your OPFOR - both AI and crewed. the only reason id prefer crewed (other than the obvious one of us driving them and commanding them ourselves) is that the AI doesnt react as fast as id like to threats. If thats realistic, fair enough. But hey, they call this a wish list for a reason...
  5. I totally understand. After all, it is a wish list... if someone (not me - I’m not clever enough) were to submit user-made interiors for your approval would this help at all? Just wondering if the fans can crowd source their way into the tanks they want a la FSX. i realise here would be several QA related issues with this, and I certainly don’t want your inbox flooded with “offers”. But I know the PE crowd will always take a back seat to the actual military contracts (rightly so and fair enough), and older tanks like this, while greatly appreciated, are less and less likely to show up for the reasons mentioned. Hypothetically, If the talented modellers in the community can build it, would you be tempted to work towards integrating it(acknowledging it as not officially supported of course)?
  6. It also makes sense for an 80s era “red tide” or fulda gap scenario. The t-64 was fast, low profile and with its barrel fired atgm’s in the later upgraded models, deadly from a distance. It would’ve represented the cream of the crop and the very tip of the spear for a soviet advance. The t72’s would’ve followed closely behind as the backbone of the advance too.
  7. I’m sure it’s been mentioned to death, but I’d really like a t-64 variant of some description to pair with the t72’s. That or a t80. Is this an issue with modelling or is this is a contract/legal issue?
  8. All I want is some cockpitted version of a t-64. As far as I'm concerned that would compete the set - especially as it could allow (with minor changes) a T80 as well, and would at barrel fired ATGM's to the equation
    Cobrabase amazes and astounds us all with his follow-on from operation Scorpion part 1&2. Voice work and background noises are a fantastic and immersive experience, and although i contributed in a small part to the voice work, I felt happy to play the scenario personally, whether i turn up or not, for the simple reason that its a damn good one! Expect a degree of randomness as the full weight of the force will come along from slightly differing routes and concentrations, so dont just pull the same FASCAM trigger every time. This makes an already fantastic scenario highly replayable and fun. I have posted my own LP on YouTube for those who want to see it themselves - check me out at youtube.com/ghostdog688 if you want. But do yourself a favour and just try it first. The community of voice actors did a fantastic job and it has been expertly crafted together. Cobra, when you read this: Great work, but once you wrap up the Op, you'll leave us all wanting more. Hope you're prepared for the huge demand for more missions - perhaps do a similar campaign from the Soviet POV??
  9. Do you perhaps mean BDRM'S? I can't think of a scout BTR that I came across. Not to speak on cobra'S behalf but as I understand it the latest versions have an end trigger... as for the briefing I found it adequate, but we can agree to disageee there
  10. You have now learned why deconflicting artillery from air assets is an important consideration give the mission another read and another go, playing it as suggested above by the mission designer. as for more detail on the briefing - what more do you need to know? It's a Soviet advanced guard - a heavily armed recon. If you don't know what that's supposed to look like, google is your friend, but if you get mega-stuck, PM me and I will try to find you some resources and answers. Please bear in mind that this mission is all about a realistic interpretation of what this would look like - a platoon leader in this situation would be well aware of what he would be dealing with, and the briefing reflects this. Given that the scenario is that you have barely rolled off the airfield to defend the area, the briefing is probably about right in terms of available intel - you'd probably be lucky to have an annotated map to be fair!
  11. Can't wait - my next day off is tomorrow so I'll be playing that on a live stream as soon as it's downloaded
  12. It was a pleasure workin the voice work in here, and I look forward to working with you on mission 4. As always, once the tastings complete, I'll play the hell out of it and probably frustrate the living hell out of you on the live stream. Dont worry, this time I'll know who TORCH is also, I'm not the god of BMS. That title goes to Krause - he taught me all I know, and most of what I forgot too!
  13. I was wondering how long you would wait for the t-64 onslaught... I hope you packed us full of SABOT!
  14. Thanks to your mention of the map used, I found Alfield for my own scenario! to be fair, I wouldn't have minded overly if they had engaged me with DShKM, at least I would've found them and gotten the hell out lol. I had the chopper set to scout patrol, so it should have bugged out on contact.
  15. Perhaps infantry accuracy can be raised or lowered by the shape of the terrain, grass height and distance from solid cover? Some examples: infantry in a building engage infantry in the open (infantry in hard cover get a bonus on accuracy for fighting from a prepared position with decent cover, and infantry with little to no cover get penalties for having no solid cover to hide behind and die easier due to lack of cover), or infantry near a wall compared to infantry in a grassy field (infantry behind wall get a partial bonus to aiming from low cover, but the slight concealment of the tall grass negate some of this etc). this means the degree of "wargaming" going on is affected by distance and the amount of nearby cover (LOS could help with this) accuracy goes on a sliding scale, tending to 95% at point blank distance, but decreasing over distance, moreso if cover/concealment comes into play. i know this isn't going to completely satisfy those that want to pick up a rifle, but it helps somewhat surely?
  16. My LP the sound production was amazing - the little details like keeping the rumble of battle going on keeps the immersion going through the mission, really feels like I'm stuck in West Germany here in Cold War gone got! what map did this terrain use? I'm guessing Fulda? I decided to hold back the ITV'S, using the Bradley's and M1's to the middle and the artillery to counter battery theirs. Thank god we don't have counter-battery radar implemented for real or I'd have problems!
    just completed the two missions, and as i thought the missions and voice overs ROCK. two thumbs way, way high Cobra! This should be a MUST DOWNLOAD scenario for anyone seriously wanting to look at steelbeasts mission design and what it can do. Only regret is that i cant leave 6 stars!
    I've just downloaded this, but I know its going to rock. have 5 stars. looking forward to the next part also! update after playing: yup. it was awesome. i'll point out this is an introduction and is mostly cinematic. actual combat gets going from mission 2 onwards, but its still something to marvel at seeing the mission making in design.
  17. Easiest way to manage this in TS is to have a rule set that discourages this behaviour. Then move to a waiting area channel or equivalent. Or mute yourself. and then play honestly. Alternatively, accept it as a reality of simming - if you want to maintain immersion, you could always go with the notion these "voices" represent the tactical knowledge and experience that a good tank commander would have ("my teammate on the right is down, fire must be coming from that suspected enemy battle position at 2 o'clock!")
  18. I've been watching the tank biathlons with interest this year, how about a map of the alabino proving grounds?
  19. im really looking at playing more REDFOR scenarios. only one i see on steel beasts forums is soviet advance, which is fun, but i could see myself overplaying it. any others someone can point my way?
  20. Great posts Damian, keep up the work!
  21. You're going to think I've lost my mind here but now that we have an avenger for US, how about an SA8 for Soviets? Not necessarily chewable (yet) but it would be good for making missions where we need to ground forces to clear SHORADs before sending in choppers (apache/cobras) to support a counteroffensive.
  • Create New...