Jump to content
T-72

Two questions of new players about Soviet tanks in SB

Recommended Posts

Hi Dear eSIM Games.

 

I am a new player who has just bought SB. The overall quality of the game is quite high. It can be said that it is the best tank simulation game in the world at present. This makes me feel that it is really worth spending money on, and I am also recommending it to my friends. Right now, I have been playing this model for more than a month. I have two questions - 

 

(1) Is it possible that the IR search light of Soviet tanks will be added in the future? We should know that without the IR search light, the night combat capability of the Soviet tank without thermal imager is extremely low. Even when using the tpn-3-49 IR sight of T-72b1, the imaging quality at night is very poor due to the temporary absence of IR search light in the game. Even the T-72b1 can not fight effectively at night without IR search light. SB is a rigorous and professional tank simulation game, hope to join the infrared headlight in the future.

 

(2) Are there plans to add more Soviet tanks for players to drive in the future? (e.g. T-80 series, T-90 series, t-72b3, etc.)

 

I sincerely hope SB will do better and better in the future, and I will support this game as always.😎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, 

 

This is my answers as a long time user:

 

1) Not any time soon. The night aspects of the sim including lighting effects is something on the main wish list but any major improvement is unlikely to be seen in the next year or so.

 

2) Probably, eSim tend to keep news of any new vehicles in updates quite secret until the last minute. The T- series is a popular addition to the game so i think they would try to provide more. My bets (hopes!) are on playable late T-55 variants & T-64/T-80 but that's just a guess. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, hoggydog said:

Hi, 

 

This is my answers as a long time user:

 

1) Not any time soon. The night aspects of the sim including lighting effects is something on the main wish list but any major improvement is unlikely to be seen in the next year or so.

 

2) Probably, eSim tend to keep news of any new vehicles in updates quite secret until the last minute. The T- series is a popular addition to the game so i think they would try to provide more. My bets (hopes!) are on playable late T-55 variants & T-64/T-80 but that's just a guess. 

 

 

Thank you for your kind reply. So you think it's very likely that they will add IR search light in the future?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, T-72 said:

Thank you for your kind reply. So you think it's very likely that they will add IR search light in the future?

Well from what i can gather there's a new game engine in the works.

It will be a huge undertaking.

I would speculate there will be a focus on conducting night time operations and equipment 

Esim are well aware its an area that needs addressing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Marko said:

Well from what i can gather there's a new game engine in the works.

It will be a huge undertaking.

I would speculate there will be a focus on conducting night time operations and equipment 

Esim are well aware its an area that needs addressing.  

That sounds great. Look forward to it!👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, T-72 said:

Thank you for your kind reply. So you think it's very likely that they will add IR search light in the future?

No. What he said was:

 

2 hours ago, hoggydog said:

1) Not any time soon.

 

That is pretty much the opposite of "very likely".

 

In any case only the eSim development crew really know.

 

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, T-72 said:

Thank you for your kind reply. So you think it's very likely that they will add IR search light in the future?

..also, creating multiple lightsources does not realy work with the current engine AFAIK.

It is not as easy a slapping it to a tank either...the AI must be able to deploy this lightsource in a sensable way, and AI must be made to react to the light source in a sensable way. This would be a HUUUUUGE undertaking and I doubt it will make it any time soon.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always maintained the position that I am against creating a "night combat" mode that is but a visual gimmick. Creating some sort of a searchlight effect just with the render engine is easy enough, as other games demonstrate. It is however absolutely insufficient, as long as the AI does not recognize a searchlight area for what it is (the zone to track while scanning for targets), as long as the AI doesn't recognize the source of a light beam as a priority target, as long as AI controlled units are capable of switching illumination duty every 10...15 seconds within a platoon, as long as the AI isn't capable of determining when it's time to switch from passive observation to active illumination.

 

Only if all of therse factors can be implemented together it makes sense to think of implementing a night combat mode that deserve being called as such. We're here to simulate, not to create a toy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

I have always maintained the position that I am against creating a "night combat" mode that is but a visual gimmick. Creating some sort of a searchlight effect just with the render engine is easy enough, as other games demonstrate. It is however absolutely insufficient, as long as the AI does not recognize a searchlight area for what it is (the zone to track while scanning for targets), as long as the AI doesn't recognize the source of a light beam as a priority target, as long as AI controlled units are capable of switching illumination duty every 10...15 seconds within a platoon, as long as the AI isn't capable of determining when it's time to switch from passive observation to active illumination.

 

Only if all of therse factors can be implemented together it makes sense to think of implementing a night combat mode that deserve being called as such. We're here to simulate, not to create a toy.

Thank ESIM games for the reply. What you said is very reasonable. It seems that this will be a huge project. I hope it can be made in the future.

I have another question. I found that the loading animation of the Auto-loader Mechanism is not completed. Will you make a completed animation of the Auto-loader Mechanism in the future? I know it's not very important for the simulation, but I do hope to have a completed loading animation. It will look cool.😎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From time to time vehicles receive a facelift. I wouldn't rule our refinements in animations at such an opportunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/1/2020 at 2:27 AM, T-72 said:

Thank ESIM games for the reply. What you said is very reasonable. It seems that this will be a huge project. I hope it can be made in the future.

I have another question. I found that the loading animation of the Auto-loader Mechanism is not completed. Will you make a completed animation of the Auto-loader Mechanism in the future? I know it's not very important for the simulation, but I do hope to have a completed loading animation. It will look cool.😎

FWIW, the autoloader in the T-72 has been set up to be able to reload. and the ammunition doors in the abrams and leo have ammunition racks behind them. the programmers just never had time to actually make them move.

as for IR searchlights for night combat. not with the current engine. for something like that to be viable, you'd have to basically rewrite the entire graphics engine. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, dejawolf said:

...

as for IR searchlights for night combat. not with the current engine. for something like that to be viable, you'd have to basically rewrite the entire graphics engine. 

 

 

+ set up "AI" that is behaves in a sensable when using them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Grenny said:

+ set up "AI" that is behaves in a sensable when using them

well, figuring out a system and setting up the AI isn't such a big issue, making that new code work with the existing codebase however is where the nightmares begin. 

you could cheat it quite easily with a ray and angle comparison + ray length comparison. 

say FOV of the gunner is 15 degrees, if the unobstructed ray from GPS forward view to enemy tank with illumination is within 15 degrees of the gunners sight, and searchlight is on, the unit is spotted. 

it's fast, it's cheap, and it works. for the gunners AI, you simply limit it's view range, 

the rest would be standard SB fare. when on route X turn on illumination, when in X type of battle position, turn off lights etc. 

you could even fake some of the illumination with a 3d model of the light. 

what you would not be able to do however, is create a light cone, that illuminates things properly. 

you might be able to fake one with 3d stencils tho. 

 

as for sensible behaviour of AI.. when has that ever stopped us from implementing something before. snipers were added in without the ability to snipe TCs. snipers are a major threat to TCs, making snipers able to snipe TCs would force players to keep their heads down. but instead, because you can't order the AI to stay in umbrella position, or buttoned up, it was instead decided that snipers won't be able to snipe TCs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dejawolf said:

well, figuring out a system and setting up the AI isn't such a big issue, making that new code work with the existing codebase however is where the nightmares begin. 

you could cheat it quite easily with a ray and angle comparison + ray length comparison. 

say FOV of the gunner is 15 degrees, if the unobstructed ray from GPS forward view to enemy tank with illumination is within 15 degrees of the gunners sight, and searchlight is on, the unit is spotted. 

it's fast, it's cheap, and it works. for the gunners AI, you simply limit it's view range, 

the rest would be standard SB fare. when on route X turn on illumination, when in X type of battle position, turn off lights etc. 

you could even fake some of the illumination with a 3d model of the light. 

what you would not be able to do however, is create a light cone, that illuminates things properly. 

you might be able to fake one with 3d stencils tho. 

 

as for sensible behaviour of AI.. when has that ever stopped us from implementing something before. snipers were added in without the ability to snipe TCs. snipers are a major threat to TCs, making snipers able to snipe TCs would force players to keep their heads down. but instead, because you can't order the AI to stay in umbrella position, or buttoned up, it was instead decided that snipers won't be able to snipe TCs.

...the usuall drill i found in our handbook where:

1. one tank illuminates for a short time...the rest of the platoon engages

2. then switch illum duty to the next tank

3. any active IR source spotted by passive IR equiped vehicles should be engaged... etc etc

 

That not working at least kind of ok would , unlike the sniper issue, stick out like a sore thumb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

one of the issues is programming the computer when to ignore or not to get fixed when the computer detects distant or obscured sources of the beams and sort them out from other threats- you can imagine exploits used to dazzle computer units, that is, detach a

vehicle and place it turretl down, have it flip on and off its IR projector and  illuminate the sky or environment wherever it can in order to distract the attention of computer units. you would have to program the computer in such a way to prioritize attention to these beams, but at the same time

know when to realize that the source can or should be put lower on the priority queue. quickly users may get frustrate by the AI being confused or what have you when beams are projected all over the place and the computer either gets target fixated or is confused by multiple beams

projected from multiple sources, some which may be obscured by cover or concealment. likewise, the computer would need instructions to know when it's a good idea or not to illuminate as they lack context- intuition about that

this isn't of course to say no one wants more features, but it doesn't seem like something you would accomplish with no less than fundamental changes to everything

Edited by Captain_Colossus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dejawolf said:

FWIW, the autoloader in the T-72 has been set up to be able to reload. and the ammunition doors in the abrams and leo have ammunition racks behind them. the programmers just never had time to actually make them move.

as for IR searchlights for night combat. not with the current engine. for something like that to be viable, you'd have to basically rewrite the entire graphics engine. 

 

 

OK,do you know how to reload the T-72? What key to press.Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Grenny said:

...the usuall drill i found in our handbook where:

1. one tank illuminates for a short time...the rest of the platoon engages

2. then switch illum duty to the next tank

3. any active IR source spotted by passive IR equiped vehicles should be engaged... etc etc

 

That not working at least kind of ok would , unlike the sniper issue, stick out like a sore thumb

 

1-2. well, the tanks would have to be in a platoon in the first place for this to work, so as soon as the platoon is split, this behaviour would be disabled. 

   other than that, it'd work like a strobe. where you cycle through the platoon, and activate illumination one tank after the other. with a set on-time/off time for each vehicle. 

3. again, nothing complex. just simple LOS calculation, if the vehicles IR light is on, spotting range is extended.  tricky bit would be making the AI remember the light spot, and fire at it, and not the tank,

and simultaneously not waste their ammo on it. the best way would probably be this: 

after the light has been turned off. you'd have to make a separate "target" frame at the spot where the light was located(this would be added to the tank model anyways as a source of light)

so you'd do an inverse transform of the tanks spotlight location to worldspace, so it won't move with the tank, then after a set amount of time, you'd delete that spotlight location. 

any tank on the opposing team that sees this frame will fire at it while it exists. 

you could also give the frame the previous velocity of the vehicle it was on, if it's over... say 5kph, that way the target won't wander off if it's standing still on a hill. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Captain_Colossus said:

one of the issues is programming the computer when to ignore or not to get fixed when the computer detects distant or obscured sources of the beams and sort them out from other threats- you can imagine exploits used to dazzle computer units, that is, detach a

vehicle and place it turretl down, have it flip on and off its IR projector and  illuminate the sky or environment wherever it can in order to distract the attention of computer units. you would have to program the computer in such a way to prioritize attention to these beams, but at the same time

know when to realize that the source can or should be put lower on the priority queue. quickly users may get frustrate by the AI being confused or what have you when beams are projected all over the place and the computer either gets target fixated or is confused by multiple beams

projected from multiple sources, some which may be obscured by cover or concealment. likewise, the computer would need instructions to know when it's a good idea or not to illuminate as they lack context- intuition about that

this isn't of course to say no one wants more features, but it doesn't seem like something you would accomplish with no less than fundamental changes to everything

put this into the normal SB target priority routine, and have each spotted light source act as a target. and give it appropriate target priority. but we all know that the SB targeting priority routine is flawed. i've lost count of the number of times i've got a tank in my sight, and just about to pull the trigger when my asshole TC decides that a bunch of troops hiding close by in a bunch of grass that i can't even see because of said grass is higher priority than that T-80U which just sent a depleted uranium dart into the air, and which is also now on it's way to the side of my fucking turret because of the previously aforementioned TC. 

Edited by dejawolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

that's the problem i believe, unless the computer is allowed to cheat, that is, able to sort out an IR beam sourced from a T-72M and a T-80U (or T-62, T-55 and so on), even if the vehicle isn't relatively near to identify or isn't out in the open. then imagine several vehicles throwing beams and the

computer bamboozled with information overload if it sees each beam as a projection of the targets everywhere.

 

computer units have some nasty advantages over a human, that is, they can instantly sort out live, dead, civilian thermal signatures when there are lots of killed vehicles or civilian noise and a few live enemy vehicles mixed among them- a player may have difficulty discerning which one is a valid or a priority

target in thermal images from all the clutter, the computer on the other hand discerns them immediately- you might really notice the difference when the TC is calling an identified "tank" out of a sea of TIS signatures when the user cannot identify which unit the computer TC refers to from all of the noise- then if you switch views to say, the F8 external view, your computer gunner will immediately sync up with the TC to the valid target.

 

on the other hand, humans have a certain intuition about when to realize when to ignore or prioritize threats that computers do not have based on contextual information, so a computer can conceivably be overwhelmed and scrambled by human players either deliberately or unintentionally using their IR searchlights to

project a target everywhere the computer units can see and distract them,, since they essentially see the length of each beam as the projection of a target: and then the computer takes shortcuts to be able to source back to the beam and know immediately the threat level of the target, (even if there is no direct line of sight

to the target) the same way the computer as it is now can properly identify any thermal blob and determine target type immediately

Edited by Captain_Colossus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Captain_Colossus said:

that's the problem i believe, unless the computer is allowed to cheat, that is, able to sort out an IR beam sourced from a T-72M and a T-80U (or T-62, T-55 and so on), even if the vehicle isn't relatively near to identify or isn't out in the open. then imagine several vehicles throwing beams and the

computer bamboozled with information overload if it sees each beam as a projection of the targets everywhere.

 

computer units have some nasty advantages over a human, that is, they can instantly sort out live, dead, civilian thermal signatures when there are lots of killed vehicles or civilian noise and a few live enemy vehicles mixed among them- a player may have difficulty discerning which one is a valid or a priority

target in thermal images from all the clutter, the computer on the other hand discerns them immediately- you might really notice the difference when the TC is calling an identified "tank" out of a sea of TIS signatures when the user cannot identify which unit the computer TC refers to from all of the noise- then if you switch views to say, the F8 external view, your computer gunner will immediately sync up with the TC to the valid target.

 

on the other hand, humans have a certain intuition about when to realize when to ignore or prioritize threats that computers do not have based on contextual information, so a computer can conceivably be overwhelmed and scrambled by human players either deliberately or unintentionally using their IR searchlights to

project a target everywhere the computer units can see and distract them,, since they essentially see the length of each beam as the projection of a target: and then the computer takes shortcuts to be able to source back to the beam and know immediately the threat level of the target, (even if there is no direct line of sight

to the target) the same way the computer as it is now can properly identify any thermal blob and determine target type immediately

well sure, but that's already an issue in SB as well. The AI is way too good and fast at ID'ing targets as either enemy/friendly, especially on older vehicles. 

in some scenarios, especially low-light ones, you're better off just letting the AI do all the shooting, since you don't have a hope of finding that abrams tank that just went down below that hill, between those trees over there behind that artillery smoke

floating by. 

in this case i'd say the proposed AI behaviour in IR-illuminated night combat is on par with what already exists in SB. it's far from perfect, but "vell, it vörks". 

you could have yourself a little bit of broken fun with it before going back to the usual MP fare of 30 minute planning session turning into 2 hours because 12Alfa keeps dropping.

but hey, i've gotten plenty of work done on SB tank models in those 4AM-6AM sessions. maybe even cheated in an extra half an hour of modeling work on that M60A3 by routing units and waiting for them to reach their destination and getting engaged. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another use of "light source" IR/II in the troop context ,is, the tank that just turned on their "hey, I'm over here (light)" the crew would have to re-position right after they switch off , as so not to be a target.

 

Using the light source on/ off search tactic is a dance within the troop and requires positions to be scouted before this process to begin to avoid getting bogged down, running over own troops, driving into rivers -in the dark.

 

Granted the crew may have a tank with crew night viewing devices to make this possible, others depending on time-frame would not.

 

I would think in the sim this will be difficult to make work as in real life without a human in the AFV supervising this Light on, light off, reposition, repeat sequence.

 

After all...we still drive into rivers/ buildings, with light,...... oh the fun in the dark...LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong. It's all doable.

It requires however a concentrated effort both in the visuals, the AI, and possibly auxiliary issues such as preparing/marking positions with glow in the dark paint for NVG equipped drivers, light traps against infantry etc.

 

At the same time you can't make night "too dark" when 80...90% of the important clues to the player are conveyed visually. If you make it too cinematic and the player can't see shit except for explosions and other lighting effects, there's only very little to be gained from a training perspective. It doesn't help that all the techniques described above are largely obsolete these days because none of our customers still uses searchlights, except for deterrence in peacekeeping operations.

Which brings up the other aspect, AI reactions to being illuminated - freeze? dive for cover? Pop smoke? Rush forward? They need to be able to detect it and, depending on the circumstances, react accordingly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Working "Bodenleuchtkörper" would be fun 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
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...