Jump to content

SB Pro PE 4.0 - Discussion thread


Rotareneg

Recommended Posts

  • Members

No mine-laying at runtime yet.

 

That said, concertina wire obstacles have a cumulative likelihood of damaging tracks. A single strand obstacle has only a low likelihood. Double-strand wire obstacles have a distinct, but decidedly under 50% likelihood to immobilize a tracked vehicle. Triple-strand concertina wire however is something you only want to try to breach by simply plowing through in a desperate situation, of if you're willing to leave the lead vehicle stranded.

 

I'll leave it to the beta testers to comment how well vehicles avoid these obstacles. I must confess, I haven't tested this for over a year, and I don't exactly remember the results. So I'd rather leave that to someone with fresh experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

2 hours ago, Swordsmandk said:

can engineers now put mines Down in game without use of editor?

 

It looked like the example was done in the editor. The detonation of the claymore seems to work exaclty like the IED - it needs to be scripted thru the mission editor.

 

Maybe I'm wrong, but that's how it appeared from the 4.0 screenshot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes. You can also "reprogram" it in the planning phase.

In addition to a condition being fulfilled however a friendly unit must also be within the grey "command range circle" (and, ideally, behind cover). Otherwise the claymore won't explode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes. Of course, that COULD have been implicitly done with IEDs before too, if the condition was about "know" enemy in a trigger region, maybe coimbined with the presence of own infantry in a nearby region. But I don't think many mission designers went to that level of detail. Plus, the IED is a much bigger explosion while the claymore is comparatively benign outside of the target cone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Grenny said:

So that gives the chance to spot/kill the triggerman first

This is how I've always made my missions.

 

It gives the player incentive to scan and look for a trigger man versus blindly hitting them with a victim operators IED.

 

I've also scripted a spotter/triggerman duo, but I won't clog this thread.

 

Will we see APOBs, Bangalore's, or body breach for the infantry?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

This is how I've always made my missions.

 

It gives the player incentive to scan and look for a trigger man versus blindly hitting them with a victim operators IED.

 

I've also scripted a spotter/triggerman duo, but I won't clog this thread.

 

Will we see APOBs, Bangalore's, or body breach for the infantry?

If body breach is what i think...i alwasy prefered using a door , a latter or some other piece of material for wire breaching

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Lumituisku said:

Question... just to make sure - will AI , at least try to avoid driving into concertina wires?  and how those can be breached in steel beast? 

 

Pretty sure a vehicle with a mine plough will do it just like they clear steel beams.

 

Good to see some of the stuff from the Mil version "trickling down".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Yes. Naturally, the field of view is different from a REAL night sky, so that makes things a bit less convenient. But in principle, finding Polaris (or the Southern Cross, for that matter) isn't terribly hard. Orion is, as always, easiest to identify.

 

Does that mean the little red tank icon in the bottom right corner can be disabled (since it shows us where north is, deosnt it?) ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
1 hour ago, BlackDeath said:

Does that mean the little red tank icon in the bottom right corner can be disabled (since it shows us where north is, deosnt it?) ?

 

"THAT" - the night sky with star patterns by itself - no.

 

 

 

However, the Mission Editor includes the new option to force manual direction finding (Options -> Require manual azimuth determination).

This does indeed disable the system HUD's tank clock in the 3D view.

 

So, basically you have to sit still for a moment and then get the direction shown as a HUD overlay at the top, similar to the UAV controls, that fades out if you turn the view too much away from your original viewing direction, or if you start moving. So, it's the mission designer's decision - along similar lines as the option to disable map updates which you already know. And before you ask: No magnetic deviations implemented whatsoever. Maybe - one day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...