Jump to content

Maj.Hans

Members
  • Content Count

    1,391
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Maj.Hans

  1. Yhea I didn't mean that one, I meant the Panzer3/4/5/6 etc. Somehow I always found the Zeiss gunsights easy to use and quite effective when they were simulated properly.
  2. That reference is about to trigger the heck out of someone lol I think the reason why people hate the T-55 and such is that it's basically a step BACKWARDS from the pinnacle of WW2 era gunnery. I swear I have always had an easier time with Zeiss style optics than that Soviet made garbage.
  3. I made a joke about getting the Tiger I as a model...But in all seriousness I would *LOVE* for someone to develop a WW2 era tank sim based on the ProPE engine, and would gladly plunk down another $125 for a copy of it.
  4. I think I certainly would, although I think that would depend upon the version? The T-72A, T-72B, T-72BV are pretty darn obsolete by now. But a T-72B3 with it's fancy new sights and stuff seems like it's relatively modern and capable. And the T-72BU *COUGH* Sorry I mean the T-90, which is totally not a T-72 renamed for propaganda reasons, is of course very modern...
  5. I've thought about this before...Since we have the ability to add sound to scenarios. I wonder if maybe it would be good to create a "scripting" form for scenario designers. Ask that the scenario be developed into a "finalized" version where only bugfixes will need to be done, and then the author can post it up with a script and ask for volunteers to play the roles, by reading off the sections of the script. A good point. It makes me wonder if mission designers would be smarter to use only short clips and draw the players attention to the message window at the bottom to read the rest. Kinda like how early DOS games with digitized speech used to use a short clip in some cases and put the other data up for the player to read, just using the short clip to get the player to know to look for the message. "Alpha Six Six this is Alpha Three One (radio static)"
  6. Panzerkampfwagen VI Tiger Ausf. E! Steel beasts is just totally incomplete without it! Srsly if we can't have it ALL how about a Tiger? lol
  7. Funny you mention that... Having been born in the late 80's I wasn't necessarily super informed about every PC game released, so naturally I simply missed some of the titles. I'd been given a copy of "Steel Thunder" as a birthday present in the early 90's, maybe 1992 or 93. Other than that, I mostly had flight simulators and some first person shooter games. The next tank simulator I actually played was Panzer Elite, and I didn't get my hands on a copy of that until 2001 or 2002. I had stumbled upon a used-like-new copy of it in a store in the local mall, had been completely unaware of it's existence until that moment, and bought it on a whim despite it looking and being somewhat outdated. I played the HECK out of that, and it was what got me looking for a modern-era tank sim. At that time, I seem to recall that the most recent releases had been Armored Fist 3, M1 Tank Platoon 2, and Steel Beasts. I immediately ignored Armored Fist 3 since it looked too much like "Delta Force TANKS!" to me and didn't count as a simulator in my mind. So by 2002/2003 or so when I went looking for a new tank sim my choice was pretty much between hunting down a copy of M1TP2 or Steel Beasts. I played the demos, and thought that M1TP2 had the better graphics, but that SB had it beat in almost every other area. Steel Beasts had what I thought was a MUCH better modeled fire control system, combined with MUCH better interface between the player and the sim, better missions/scenarios, etc. The key settings seemed quite natural, the map menu screen just worked. No contest. In fact after a bought a copy, I stumbled across the Gold Edition somewhere cheap and bought a second copy to make sure I didn't lose it. Since then, "T-72 Balkans on Fire", "WW2 Tanks T34 vs Tiger", "Kharkov: 1942" have all come out, and I found them more annoying and irritating rather than entertaining..."Steel Armor Blaze of War" I never even bought because of the YouTube videos I saw of it. If Pro PE hadn't been released I would probably still be playing the original Steel Beasts.
  8. LOL....Well the first tank game I played was Steel Thunder... So the original Steel Beasts was just incredible to me, and IIRC I was STILL playing it for 2 or 3 years after Pro PE came out just due to the cost of Pro PE. Thankfully I don't have to go back to that lol.
  9. Whoops, did I just screw this up? I went with " Upgrade License from version 4.0 " since I already have a codemeter....But then I went back and saw the pre-order bundles...Should I have picked something else to order the upgrade instead of that since I already have 4.023 or whatever is current?
  10. You know, I'm not going to lie here. Maybe I'm suffering from a really bad case of nostalgia, or maybe I just find my attention being pulled too many different directions these days, but I've been playing "retro" games about as much or more than modern ones lately. Rather than firing up Steel Beasts or DCS world, I'll fire up Falcon Gold or Fleet Defender (DOS flight sims from the 90s) with the difficulty turned down a little bit. There's a lot of "Quick, let me get in here and play for 20 minutes, then I better go do this thing I *need* to do" and a lot less "I *want* to spend 3 hours to learn how to play a simulator that's realistic to the switch, *and* I have the time to do it!" these days Quite frequently I find myself wishing that, when old games were clearly done and over with, the company or team that made it would just dump the source code, resources, dev tools, etc out there on the net and leave it there for anyone interested to build upon their work. I wish that games like Falcon 3.0, Aces of the Deep, Task Force 1942, Fleet Defender, etc, would have perhaps gotten the same kind of treatment that Panzer Elite and Falcon 4.0 did.
  11. I'll second that. In addition to the ability to lay down concertina wire like we can with roads, I'd like to request some similar Gulf War era objects... A "berm" that can have gaps knocked in it with mine plows and dozer blades, and an "anti tank ditch" that AI bridging units can be used to cross.
  12. OK hang on a second...Exactly WHAT is going on here? Microprose is back...Great...Why didn't "F-14 Fleet Defender" get a mention? That was one of their best flight sims IIRC. I checked out the iEntertainment Network thing... The WW2 flight simulator they show reminds me of the late 1990s or early 2000's in terms of graphics. It feels like I'm watching videos from Microsoft's Combat Flight Simulator or the original IL-2 Sturmovik. The tank simulator reminds me of Panzer Elite, except that I think Panzer Elite had better graphics and more realism thanks to mods like Ostpak and other updates... Are these guys seriously trying to take old titles and re-release them for modern operating systems and turn a profit from that!?
  13. I've asked about the simulation of CBRN threats before, and I still feel like it could be done without being overly graphic. If civilians are a concern, simply remove them from any region that's been contaminated by CBRN threats. Use regions in the scenario editor to define an area effected by a chemical agent or whatever. Vehicles with NBC systems will be forced to button and remain buttoned, or they will risk contamination. Unbuttoned crew, crew in contaminated vehicles, or crew in vehicles without NBC protection suffer restricted vision from their NBC masks, and sometimes cannot hear commands given through an NBC mask. Unprotected infantry randomly go "ULP!" and roll over in the grass just like the currently do when you shoot them. We don't need a graphic representation of death by nerve agent or chlorine, just to say that "this unit is no-longer combat effective". Protected infantry lose stamina more rapidly, regain it more slowly, and can't see or shoot as well. My interest, personally, is less about nuclear since I figure that would mean the whole world is going to hell in a handbasket super quick, and more about how chemical warfare would effect a cold war scenario.
  14. I'll +1 some of those commands for vehicles with digital maps. It's not totally horrible, but a little awkward with the current interface to have that thing right there but not really be able to use it, but that may honestly be one of the shortcomings of PC simulation vs being in a real tank. And yes, back in the IL-2 1946 days I was a quite competent virtual Bf-109 pilot.
  15. I'll +1 that. Unfortunately that's one of the costs of fighting evil.
  16. I will +1 this, sort of... I would like for the TC to return to whatever level he was in when he exits map view. I would like for, while the TC is in map view, the "B" button to work only to button up. This way if we're looking at our map when we hear gunfire we can duck inside and slam the hatch. I leave it up to the developers to decide if this should also kick the player back out to the F1/Eye view as if you have just had an "OH !@#$" moment and dropped your map to slam the hatch. I would like, personally, to be able to tell my gunner to "Fire!" and/or to "Fire and adjust!" from the map view. I would +1 this, but I'm not sure if I would rather see the Leo-1C2 or a Leoaprd 2A4M model. The 2A4M model could also be used to represent other hypothetical Leo2A4 upgrades...
  17. I noticed this a long time ago personally, but I admit I'm more curious about the monuments that are out there. I saw the Volcano one in a city while on a road march through...Had time to "Driver STOP! Driver Back! Driver Stop!" and stare for a second. But I seem to recall on some other map a small grave marker or something featuring some names that I never had time to read and didn't get back to for some reason.
  18. In regards to the whole "make something up" and "take a guess" remarks about the M1TTB, T-14, etc, I just want to point out that a simulator CAN have fictional or guesstimated elements without suddenly becoming a Sci-Fi fantasy game. Every armor array and every penetrator featured in ProPE that is not modeled based on a complete technical data package and test results, is an estimate. Nothing more, nothing less. And that's OK, because we don't KNOW, so we do the best we can to make a good representation. If the dev team throws together an interface for the M1TTB and sticks a line in the release notes that says "We really had no data, but this is a plausible way it might actually work, so when you design scenarios remember that this isn't intended as a high fidelity model" that's fine. It's not like they just added an X-Wing or a Tie Fighter... One of the great things about simulators is that you CAN try things out to see how they might work.
  19. Since it is a "WHAT IF FANTASY TANK"... Drivers position: A Leo2 with reverse cameras Gunner position: M1A2 fire control system TC's position: M1A2 GPSE/CITV setup with a periscope array. The main part of this vehicle that I am interested in is the auto-loader with a large number of rounds on tap, to use as a stepping stone to introduce newbies to the concept of limited ammo. The frequent "stop to reload the ready rack" thing seems to drive them insane and has, as a matter of fact, driven every one I've tried to get into SB away from it. Since we still don't have a difficulty option to make "everything" ready short of completely unlimited ammo, this is my next best option.
  20. Crew-able M1TTB, even if using an "ersatz" interior or no interior at all.
  21. Wasn't the T-62 in many ways regarded as a lemon specifically because of ammo advances with the T-55 eliminating most of the T-62's reason for existing? I'm not intimately familiar with Soviet/Russian designation systems and stuff, but I seem to recall that the T-55 was frequently updated in many of the same ways as the T-62 was upgraded, producing very similar lines of vehicles, except that with the T-55 being MUCH more widespread it often times got more attention. Maybe it's just because I don't "get" the T-62 fire control system, if you can call it that, but the few times I have toyed with it in Steel Beasts, I felt like I could have done more damage to the enemy with a Tiger IE or a Panther...
  22. I think he's being a smartass...I think....I'm just not sure...
×
×
  • Create New...