Ssnake

Whozzat?

Well, I have no idea, haven't heard of it before, so I recommend to save the map, exit SB Pro PE, and start it again. Maybe it is a Memory issue after all (unlikely IMO, but what do I know), so exiting SB Pro will free up all memory that may have been utilized in the previous hours. Let's keep observing it, maybe there will be other sightings that help us to piece together a consistent picture.

Everybody would love this, and illumination lights from the older tanks while we're at it. It's just that while the visuals are possible to make (though probably eating a bit of performance - directional spotlights and shadowcasting and all that), the real challenge is to make the computer call in for illumination on the SUSPICION of enemy presence without calling it all the time, all over the place. Of course we could make them just react to incoming fire, but that would not change the current balance very much. By the time that the illumination arrives most tanks without thermal sights would be dead, just like they will be right now. Possible to do, the engine is prepared for this. Several customers expressed loose interest in such a function and then called off the thing when they couldn't secure the funds. For me, the absolute priority at the moment have to be features that keep SB Pro relevant for contemporary training, and that means - like it or not - to focus on aspects of asymmetrical warfare. The Taliban don't fire illumination rounds, they don't have earth-moving equipment, or mine-clearing tanks. VBIEDs, that's a different thing of course.

You may also have tested it on a terrain theme with really high drag and/or low traction values. Add to that a minor slope and things can come to a halt quickly.

Actually, the ammo count buttons work, but only after you press the Enter button (which is either an error on our part (in this case it'll get fixed), or a really disingenious user interface design (in which case things will stay the way they are until we are notified that things changed in real life).

How much RA memory does your computer have?

Mere seconds. You should receive it the same moment as the order confirmation. If it isn't there, most likely it's stuck in the spam filter - or maybe an anti-virus program thinks that the ticket is some form of a trojan horse or an encrypted URL or something. I can assure you however, it is not. If you can't find it, please forward to me your order confirmation by email and I will then look it up.

Screw the release notes. There's just rubbish in them anyway. :cul:

The Eagle is not supposed to have dismounts. Technically it could have up to four (the driver included), but really, it's just not meant to be a troop carrier.

Maybe they are prepared to receive a Lemur in future versions as well.

It was mostly created to give OpFor a forward observer that would blend better with the rest of the equipment than the FIST-V or the M113/VB that we had for a while. It has an additional capability to dismount an FO team, and that works like all FO teams.

I don't think anyone is going to miss this abomination. Good riddance.

Hm. The tank range, we rearranged all entries in two columns as it became too many vehicles. Some other problems have been reported with that as well, so maybe this is another glitch.

With Sean's permission (and the original file) I could do that. But I'm not sure if I can do that with a self-executing flash video.

If you can tell me the email address which you gave when making the purchase, I can still find your ticket. Or any other detail that you remember, with the exception of the credit card number - I have no access to that.

Most likely, the texture simply is missing.

The computer-controlled units will certainly open fire on the dismounting troops, just not the cars. Guys, it's important to understand that these cars are an intermediate solution before we implement multisidedness and more autonomy to noncombatant units. That will be a major undertaking, so here's at least something to bridge the gap for the moment.

Civilian vehicles - no matter which side - are being ignored from either side's computer-controlled units. That's the very point of them, that they are not distinguishable as combatants ... UNLESS they are dismounting fighters which, however, you can see only the moment when they actually unload them. Until then it could just be a group of people sharing a car. By default they are all filled with troops - "insurgents", if you will, although they actually are all in uniform - UNLESS the mission designer adds a "Damage ... Troops". The challenge would then be to figure out which of the cars is carrying those invisible troops. Do you indiscriminately spray all vehicles to find out which of them has fighters in them? Or do you wait until you can observe hostile activity? What if a red and a blue car dismount troops simultaneously at the same spot and they start shooting each other, will you put a 120mm HE in the middle to silence them all, or try to sort friend from foe and apply lethal force more selectively. Welcome to the sucktitude of modern, asymmetrical conflicts.

I'd rather have multiple sides and better pathfinding. Parked vehicles should have the capability to start moving at any time.

It was around the time when 2.460 was released, or close to release.

Interesting idea, but it isn't possible, I'm sorry.

Well, the lead vehicle is seeding "bread crumbs" which the trailing vehicles try to follow. If the first vehicle veers off the road and then manages to recover, the training vehicles in their attempt to follow the bread crumbs instead of the original waypoints might sense an obstacle enroute to the next breadcrumb that the leading vehicle didn't experience because it was in a slightly different position to begin with and by definition wasn't attempting follow a trail. They will then try to avoid the obstacle, and hilarity ensues. So, if the lead vehicle manages to stay on the road better, then more bread crumbs will remain on the road, with less chances for aberrant maneuver.

In any case, having one or two route nodes behind the corner and not at its apex will at the very least help them to extricate themselves from the forest faster. Remember, the node gets deleted from the queue as the unit approaches the waypoint, and not just when it is more or less exactly on top of it. With very close and sharp turns this means that the node gets deleted even before the vehicle has started to turn, and if the next waypoint is a long way down the next road the vehicle must obey the order to go in that direction. This inevitably results in going off-road.

Gah. Care to update it?

Well, yes --- you see, at 0:17 the Challenger turns into the forest because the route node was placed in front of the corner (at least that's how I'm interpreting this, I haven't seen the map view, but I bet this is how the route will look like). As the vehicle approaches the corner and comes close to the node, it is considered as "reached" and gets deleted from the nav queue. The next waypoint is way down the road to the left, at nearly 90° - well above the 30° threshold. Now the challenger veers off the road to approximate better the route direction, and hence wanders off into the trees which are all obstacles, and therefore make navigation even worse.