Jump to content

Maj.Hans

Members
  • Content Count

    1,533
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Maj.Hans

  1. Any chance someone can make a Finnish skin for the T-55AM or AM2? Was thinking to put some Finn T-55's in a scenario but I think, given their upgrades, one of these would be a better representation.
  2. I've been spending a little time messing around in the BMP-2 since I hadn't played with it very much at all up till now... I noticed that the turret traverse speed seems slower when using the TC's sight and override than when controlling from the gunner's seat. Is this a feature of the vehicle, or is this a glitch? I read through the section on the Wiki and didn't see it mentioned. At first I thought it might have been a difference in magnification making me think the turret was slower, but it looks like it actually IS slower! Edit: Also the sound of popping smoke seems to be completely absent from inside. Same question: Bug or feature? I swear on everything else you can hear it when you pop smoke.
  3. Well, I didn't explicitly state to put those in, but I naturally expect that they would be part of a blow out panel upgrade. I expect that the cost, time, effort, etc required to get a smaller power pack and rebuild the interior is going to be more than most are willing to invest. I'm aware that many parts of the Leo2 can be considered weak or poorly designed, but the idea of a catastrophic T-Tank style turret launching explosion is what bothers me the most about that design. Even if it required a reduction in the size of the stowage area, I'd rather have blast doors than what's in there now if I were having to crew it.
  4. Blowout panels on the hull... Leo 2 needs hull blowout panels and suddenly it's even closer to perfection.
  5. So maybe the answer here is that this is actually accurate. I wasn't actually expecting to get a kill, but I was hoping that I could break the GPS, maybe even take the main gun out of action, or otherwise simply distract my target for long enough to let my infantry get out and into a position to hit it with an AT-4 or Javelin, but I guess a 25mm kill is still a kill!
  6. Well...I did kinda dump the entire AP ammo load into that tank, so...That's a lot of dice rolls!
  7. Ironically, I switched to 25mm spam because I had aimed my last TOW missile right at the turret ring under the gun, and it didn't even scratch him! Rather than sit there and take it, I told the infantry to bail out, overrode the gunner, switched to AP HI and let it rip and prayed. I didn't expect to destroy it, but thought I might get lucky and break the main gun or some fire control stuff.
  8. While running some very quick test scenarios to generate a log file, I stumbled across this... Having just spent my last loaded TOW missile to no apparent effect, out of desperation I told my infantry to "GET OUT!" and decided to spam some 25mm at this T-55 to at least, hopefully, smash some things up so my troops could get out and set up. It had more effect than I thought... Range to target here is rather short, probably 500m or less. Is this a small leak in the armor model, or did I luck out and hit a thin spot?
  9. Oddly enough I didn't find anything in there except for some warnings about memory, but I think that's because I have wayyyyy too much RAM so I don't have a paging file....Hmmm....I'll keep trying to screenshot the message...
  10. During mission loading I am seeing, very briefly, an error message pop up. I think it's indicating a missing texture file, but it disappears right away. Is there a logfile somewhere I can go to to read the message? It seems to acknowledge itself.
  11. Truth. At least in ProPE what irritates me most about the Chally 2 is the existing tennis ball launcher...
  12. Waaaaiiit..... Isn't this what the Soviets did for the T-64 and the West Germans in the welded turret Leopard 1's? Like fifty years ago!?!!
  13. I think the Loader's weapons (Along with the Commander's use of personal weapons like sidearm and/or carbine) would be in the category of "nice to have" for me, but I think this is sadly something that the ProPE team has kinda put on the back burner for now. Even if these don't get modeled, perhaps in the future we'll have a key command similar to the ALT+B for infantry hatches to tell our loader to get up out of the hatch and shoot. Having said that, I'll second this for "some point in the future". I'd like (as a human TC) to be able to pull out an M4/M16/G3/AK5/whatever and engage sometimes. Perhaps this kinda thing can come along with the ability for us to shoot our own weapon when commanding an infantry squad?
  14. Marder IFV *with* a working, vehicle mounted, MILAN-2 launcher: 1. Even IF it has to be a separate vehicle. 2. Even IF only the AI can use the missiles. 3. Even IF it has to be implemented incorrectly. 4. Even IF the whole separate vehicle is only AI. In all seriousness this is really killing me that every time I make a scenario with Marders they have to be treated like glorified M113s and can't be relied upon to fight off a T-55... I know there is a technical problem here and choices blah blah blah but C'mon, gimme some MISSILES!
  15. Maj.Hans

    We love photos

    "overheating problem" LOL.... The Leo2 would be perfect, but every time I see one with a popped top or something I just wish that the hull ammo storage was a little bit different... Also @SSnake 2A4M CAN please. *cough*
  16. I'm not real sure if the AI treats them any differently, but if you select "Not Camouflaged" you'll see what looks like freshly dug soil. If you pick "Camouflaged" it looks blends in a bit better with the terrain. Generally speaking I have used to "Not Camouflaged" option to represent ones dug in a big hurry, and "Camouflaged" to represent positions that were pre-dug some time in advance.
  17. A quick comment to answer some of the questions asked in the reviews: In the case of the M113A3's, those are American mechanized infantry attached to your command, and not German troops. Because the M47 Dragon proved to be essentially useless against the T-72s in this scenario, in a later update these have been replaced with TOW launchers. I considered Milan launchers, and the German infantry carry them, however since they sit so low in the grass I've often found them to be simply frustrating to use. This was done in the last update, read the change log and you'll find it in there. When this scenario was released, I wanted to sort of keep the surprise of the unknown, and I always feel like my ability to code or plan for the Red team is limited and lacking, so I prefer to keep it hidden for a while. Thanks to all who reviewed and gave feedback, hope you've been enjoying this one!
  18. Very understandable, especially from a code-mess point of view. I'm looking forward to seeing what you come up with. In terms of scenario building, the old system wasn't perfect, but at least I could easily organize a very simple "line of troops marches ahead of line of PC's" type attack that made a convincing representation of a whole mess of angry soviets coming after you. This is something that I can and have scripted around, so it's less of a problem, although sometimes it requires more effort to ensure that I don't have all troops simply converge in the middle of the line or wedge of PC's and all end up clustered in one giant ball. I think it's actually during missions that I miss having something simple and primitive at my disposal, like an easy way to go "Oh crap, we've blundered into enemy troops, everybody get out and stay 100 meters ahead of their PC!"
  19. In the original Steel Beasts, I seem to recall that certain sounds, most notably the sound of the loader doing his work, were audible from outside the vehicle. I'd like an "Internal Sounds in External Views" slider to allow us the option to hear a little bit of what's going on inside our tank, particularly when we're in the overhead cover hatch positions, and perhaps to make those sounds fade away so that openining the hatch completely or moving higher up in the hatch makes them more quiet. And finally...Even though I've asked for this before, and the current system is though to be far far superior, I really do want to see an option to have dismounted infantry behave in a manner similar to the old system. Sometimes I just want to throw together a quick and dirty scenario and it would be nice to be able to tell the troops to "GET OUT!" and have them automatically fan out and move with their PC's. Yup...I can recall one very panicked play through of the scenario "A Village Called Netreba" in the old SB where I was trying to use the high arc of HEAT rounds to get around the rear deck clearance and lob them at the charging Reds. Not sure it worked very well!
  20. Interesting! Where did the 2A4 variants come from? Are those taken from old cold war stockpiles? Also curious to know if they'll get any upgrades. The Leopard 2 might not be a perfect tank (hull ammo storage) but I still think it's quite good, and I understand that the Canadian 2A4M is a quite comprehensive update.
  21. Not only will I never lose sleep over a minor 3D shortcut like that, but I'll even give you money for it, if it means another playable vehicle. Like a crewable M1 TTB, etc
  22. I just want to say that I resent the comparison of the G3/HK91 to a boat anchor. I happen to think it's quite a handy rifle, and the problem isn't the size of the rifle but rather that a proper gentleman is simply 2 meters tall! In a more serious note, some better 1970s/1980s infantry & tank texture packs would be great for the various nations. Like DE70s, DE80s, etc. The cold war era is where it's at for me when I play ProPE. Also...Since we brought up Gun Jesus...
  23. I should explain that a little further... There's two modes for the M60A3 LRF. In one mode the gunner pushes the lase button, the laser fires, the range is entered into the ballistic computer. In the second mode, as I understand, the commander has to press the "FEED" button to send the range to the computer after the laser takes the range. If we could force the system to that mode so that gunner and TC had to work together, etc, old system, etc.
  24. In relation to this kind of ad-hoc unit subbing, it would be great if we could "damage" the M60A3 such that the LRF system could only be used in the "manual" mode, so that a human crew or human TC would need to manually lase the target and send the range to the gunner, thus half-way replicating ranging with an optical range finder... Second, would be nice to be able to "damage" certain components WITHOUT the message being permanently displayed on screen...Such that TIS could be simply missing from the vehicle for that scenario, for example.
×
×
  • Create New...