Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by RogueSnake79

  1. This is one of the better documentaries on the 1973 war, in fact the whole series is great IMO.
  2. And for all who played at least one scenario, the campaign ribbon! Thanks to Zero, and the two CO's, was a lot of fun!
  3. Yeah, may have to add that to the wiki, if a fix is difficult. Thanks for going down the rabbit hole to figure out what the problem was Rotar, +20 xp!
  4. It is my understanding that this is a feature that was added in the last release. And that it only applies to ATGM's AFAIK. So at this point no vehicle should have "unlimited" ATGM loads. Because of technical limitations I think the total number of reloads is a random variable. You will have to wait for Volcano(Encyclopedia of SB knowledge) to see this thread for more detail.
  5. These armor options represent "improvised" armor as seen on various Hemtt's. I presume this was a stop gap option to provide protection from small arms until the later "up-armored" cab's could be retrofitted to enough trucks, and shipped over sea's. It was also seen on many Humvee's early in the war on terror, and later faded from service once factory built options became available. These pictures are from prime portal if I recall correctly, I have more, but you get the idea. For steelbeasts, this is the first in what we hope to become many vehicles with this type of option in
  6. Lighting of the buttons on that panel is done by a graphics shader, so it cannot be modded.
  7. Yes, its being looked at. Initial tests by Volcano were also unable to reproduce this bug. We had people drop and rejoin multiple times(way more than normal), and ownership of those vehicles changed many times, sometimes with said people. We are thinking that the bug is in there somewhere, which as you can imagine is not easy to test. We can avoid MP scenario's that depend heavily on repair zones for now, or try to avoid giving repaired vehicles to people who we know are having network issues, while playing them.
  8. He just doesn't check the forums like he used to. I've uploaded it for you, should be approved soon.
  9. Version 1.0.0


    Created by Dejawolf
  10. Template is here: https://www.steelbeasts.com/files/file/2150-tunguskazip/
  11. Version 1.0.0


    Created by Dejawolf
  12. I will upload it to the template section for you. Should be there later, once approved.
  13. The other thing that needs to be reiterated, is armor protection. It is low on this turret, very low. Particularly on the sides to my understanding. Why do tank commanders in SB insist on using HEAT to engage PC's, IFV's, etc.? Armor is required to release fully, the kinetic energy of a KE round. The blast, and fragmentation simply does not happen when a sabot travels through thin, lightly armored targets. Sure, there will be some, but most of the round will be in one piece when it hits the dirt on the other side of the target. You could argue, that if they up-a
  14. Even if these images are more accurate than the model we have, they all still show clearly that there are rather large areas in this turret that have no major, vital components, and would not be affected by a pass though of a KE round. Which means this whole discussion is at best about a very minor adjustment to an armor model. And with that adjustment, the events in question will still be possible, now only by aiming a few more inches to the left, or right etc I think the core of the problem we seem to be having, is not taking into full account the fact that this turret is unm
  15. By now you guys should know that you need to post as detailed information as you can, as well as an aar if you think you found a bug. It is pretty well known (I thought), that in multiplayer sessions the hit rays in aar's are often not super accurate, because the information is being sent back and forth over a network . And yet you give no indication if this image is from a single, or multiplayer scenario...from the host, or a client. This stuff is pretty important.. And I get it, not everyone has time as a software tester, but Assassin "OH COME ON!!!" you should understand how this work
  16. The pdf document states that this is an advanced programmable fuse round. Explicitly designed to defeat ERA, AND APS by fragmenting based on information from the tanks lrf. That makes things a bit more complex than just adding a few RHA's to the A3 round. We do have programing in place for these types of rounds, the CV90 KETF rounds. But based on what I read in this pdf, this A4 operates a bit differently than a air burst round. At any rate, this round is not something that sSnake can just crank out on his own with a new entry, and a few keystrokes..
  17. I had planned to reply to this thread, but Breakthrough7 posted that article which is basically what I knew about it. When I was tasked with updating the M113 fleet in SB, I purchased most of the books I could find on it. Many squadron signal, concord publications etc. Already had the hunnicutt Bradley book, which covers the 113 is good detail. While I didn't read every last word in each, I did read about these armor kits. And they said basically what that articles says about it. One of the squadron signal books had multiple images of vehicles belonging to the 1
  18. This should be it. Leo 1a5 roof template.zip
  19. Looks like you guys figured it out without me. Anyway, about the poles attached to the sides. This is based on images of US 577's in the field(would attach but they are on another computer, SO MEH!). Including images showing the poles on the sides, with the antenna already raised. So it is my guess, and the guess at the time, that they carried extra(or extra tent poles), and used those to erect the camo netting around the vehicle. So that's what I did. The tarp on the trim vane is part of the random storage, so it should be... random. Looking good Splas
  • Create New...