Jump to content

Graycap

Members
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Graycap

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  1. Ciao! Anch'io sono italiano. Ho SB Pro PE dal 2006 .... Adesso invece ho tre figli tutti al liceo Purtroppo ho dovuto soprassedere ma il pensiero è sempre lì. Vedrai che ti divertirai parecchio. Bisogna entrare nell'ottica giusta che è molto diversa da altri simulatori. In merito che esperienze precedenti hai? Arma3, Dcs, Falcon ???
  2. Please don't consider me annoying... Even vehicle camouflage is different for different users. But the community has demonstrated that is more than able and willing to create fantastic mods. The same for sounds and other peculiar aspects. It could be done with text speech moddable that could be read by synthetic voices. It's just an idea. On the other hand we use standard NATO symbols even in Warsaw Pact scenarios. The translations in actual voices of command stemming from conditions could be simply an optional feature that could be disabled. The result
  3. Thank you for your kind reply. I understand very well the extreme complexity of a "AI battle group commander". But maybe there are little steps that could be taken in that direction. Manageable radio networks, different voices with a little of characterization (Red 6 at etc...) orders given at low level (e.g. change formation - if mission designer has so designed; retreat or advance to xy - if a condition is met; which kind of menace the platoon commander or another tank of my platoon has discovered, fall back in formation - if in wrong position.....).
  4. I understand that. With experience I have understood that the more important phase is before pushing the start button. Maybe I haven't been able to explain myself. What I'm trying to explain is this kind of situation: - download a scenario (company level) - you choose to play as a TC forgetting about anything else (maybe at the beginning of your learning curve) The problem, maybe solvable at the cost of more complexity, is: you can't forget all the other units. I understand perfectly that if I would learn the TC job I should play a one versus one. But
  5. Very interesting topic. Never reply to a question with a question. That's true, anyway... More complex for the programmer or for the player? The more complex the programming the more simple is for the gamer to have situational awareness (I mean the sensation of being there and to understand what to do and why). I've been a player (solo) for quite a time. As a simulation gamer I was coming from Falcon4 and its incarnations. My biggest problem at the start was the missing "picture" (a world "living" around you) and the missing commander. If I had been playing as a platoon leade
  6. It should be remembered that along with recon there was another operational problem that this vehicle was envisaged to solve: the defence of the long and exposed Italian peninsular part of the country from the menace of "desant" operation and possible amphibious operations from soviet forces. Defence of fleet ports, the capital, airbases... Long distances to cover, difficult roads (e.g. small bridges), no armoured heavy-weight adversaries. The result was this vehicle. But the world changed a lot from the original need. It had to enter in service with two other veh
  7. Impressive video. A lot of visual suggestions for artists See at min 1.50. It seems an esim screen shot from Nils video doesn't it? A real MRL barrage seen by the incoming side. Nice.
×
×
  • Create New...