The List poll

[Hackworth]

hey, you know what we're missing here?

we need more "active" measures for night combat -- arty flares, hand-fired flares for the TCs (if we ever get the T-72 crewable, i want flags to be able to signal my unit too ), IR on vehicles w/o thermals and that should have 'em, streetlights (both turned on and off from the mission editor [or even by conditions or events, JK...]) :biggrin:

[Ssnake]

we need more "active" measures for night combat...

Yes, we do.

...streetlights (both turned on and off from the mission editor [or even by conditions or events, JK...])

You may be kidding, I'm not. These are all things that would really be needed to make night operations both immersive and realistic. The reality however is that while night combat capability is often an option on decision-makers' checklists to tick off, no known instructor actually is interested in this because the actual training value is low unless you want to specifically train night operations specific things that you couldn't train in broad daylight. And then, when you look at it, there are very few things that you couldn't train under daylight conditions - the operation of searchlights would be one issue, but that has become technologically obsolete with thermal imagers and 3rd/4th generation image intensifiers.

Ultimately darkness only adds tons of friction. Dealing with friction is an educational goal, but it doesn't help much with training.

[Malakie]

I too would like to see more vehicles, tank crew members, campaign mode, etc etc... What would be nice is if the sim were set up to allow for easy methods to simply add units by modders. Then anyone that designed and created a 3D working model of a tank, apc or other vehicle or soldier could add them to the sim without a lot of hassle. If the SIM could somehow read 'add-on' unit files, this would be possible... or can it do so now?

I am still waiting for that first game/sim that comes out that can simply add into the game anything it finds in a certain directory... for example, lets say you have a dir called mods. Any 3D model, conforming to the style and naming conventions needed by the sims engine would automatically be added to the available in game units. Many games allow you to simply add mod files to a directory then activate which mods you want to use in game. With SBProPE, having this ability especially when it comes to 3D models would be a great addition.

I know though this is not going to happen since they make their money off adding units based on customer requests... too bad. It does get a bit boring using the same units, maps and so forth over and over... not to mention trying to create scenarios that are 'real life' oriented.

[Ssnake]

...I know though this is not going to happen since they make their money off adding units based on customer requests...

Your chances are better than you think.

[Parachuteprone]

Your chances are better than you think.

This would be great news !

[Hackworth]

....I know though this is not going to happen since they make their money off adding units based on customer requests... too bad. It does get a bit boring using the same units, maps and so forth over and over... not to mention trying to create scenarios that are 'real life' oriented.

i understand where you are coming from BUT, and this is a big BUT, of the height maps available, how many have user-created terrain files? of those terrains and those user-made, how many missions have been created? and finally, how many have I played? not that much, i haven't created any terrain maps other than adapting some to work for scenarios i've created, but i have created quite a few mission -- just haven't released them all. that said, have we really hit the "end" of the possibilities in this sim in it's current form? I think not. in fact, i'd wager everything i have against anyone that thinks so.

shit, we just got an upgrade with several new vehicles, not to mention all the additions and enhancements that have nothing to do with new vehicles.

not meant as a rant against you Malakie, but toward the idea we've reached some end-point and explored everything in this sim. shit, many people can't even operate all the vehicles we do have. that said, i've been into this sim in some form or another for about 10 years -- we are just scratching the surface of PE.

p.s. and here comes the purist... i for one do not want a bunch of ad hoc, user-embelished, screwed up new vehicles created by fans of their favorite AFV. sorry, i'd rather see eSim crank them out properly. no offense moders, but you rarely get things like this right -- stick with skins...

You may be kidding, I'm not. These are all things that would really be needed to make night operations both immersive and realistic.

i was and i wasn't Ssnake if we had streetlight, i think it would be inherantly obvious that we would need to be able to turn them on and off given specific conditions -- i.e. a bunch of live firing in town -- lights out (staggering out, of course, set on "delays" within the condition, civis hiding in cellars.

[Parachuteprone]

p.s. and here comes the purist... i for one do not want a bunch of ad hoc, user-embelished, screwed up new vehicles created by fans of their favorite AFV. sorry, i'd rather see eSim crank them out properly. no offense moders, but you rarely get things like this right -- stick with skins...

Shouldn't matter if Esim should give the rest of us the option to import 3rd party (AI I would assume) models as long as it is for offline use.

I doubt anything not approved would be useable online so I don't see the harm.

If the models were to be useable online then I can see your point - A souped up Leopard wouldn't be fair - Unless it was mine . But your safe - I don't go online.

Perhaps they will want to approve all 3rd party additions - the statement was vague.

Sounds to me like Ssnake is testing the waters a bit so it might be wise for everyone to weigh in with their opinions.

Seems to me they will never be able to keep up with requests for this tank or that without some sort of outside assistance. I for one feel variety keeps the sim interesting.

We may not have many 3d modelers in the community anyway.

I'm certainly not one.

[Hackworth]

...Shouldn't matter if Esim should give the rest of us the option to import 3rd party (AI I would assume) models as long as it is for offline use.

I doubt anything not approved would be useable online so I don't see the harm.

If the models were to be useable online then I can see your point - A souped up Leopard wouldn't be fair - Unless it was mine . But your safe - I don't go online...

that's not the entire point -- i don't want to see PE gamed up like some BF2 pos. if someone wants that, then buy that. i'm sure there are plenty of games out there where people can add crap to it -- isn't ARMA one?

once more, if it's not accurate and it's just window dressing, why not just use your imagination? hehe, my Gephard works just fine in this sim...especially with a proper skin and markings.

Edited May 29, 2009 by Hackworth
figured i'd show off the Gephard -- still a WIP

[Malakie]

i understand where you are coming from BUT, and this is a big BUT, of the height maps available, how many have user-created terrain files? of those terrains and those user-made, how many missions have been created? and finally, how many have I played? not that much, i haven't created any terrain maps other than adapting some to work for scenarios i've created, but i have created quite a few mission -- just haven't released them all. that said, have we really hit the "end" of the possibilities in this sim in it's current form? I think not. in fact, i'd wager everything i have against anyone that thinks so.

shit, we just got an upgrade with several new vehicles, not to mention all the additions and enhancements that have nothing to do with new vehicles.

not meant as a rant against you Malakie, but toward the idea we've reached some end-point and explored everything in this sim. shit, many people can't even operate all the vehicles we do have. that said, i've been into this sim in some form or another for about 10 years -- we are just scratching the surface of PE.

p.s. and here comes the purist... i for one do not want a bunch of ad hoc, user-embelished, screwed up new vehicles created by fans of their favorite AFV. sorry, i'd rather see eSim crank them out properly. no offense moders, but you rarely get things like this right -- stick with skins...

i was and i wasn't Ssnake if we had streetlight, i think it would be inherantly obvious that we would need to be able to turn them on and off given specific conditions -- i.e. a bunch of live firing in town -- lights out (staggering out, of course, set on "delays" within the condition, civis hiding in cellars.

I don't take what you said in a negative way. I was just expressing my opinion as you are with yours. Although it was a nice reply from the DEV about my wishes might actually come to fruition! That would be awesome.... most awesome in my opinion.

As for your comments... you might be surprised at how 'deep' some of us getting into great simulation engines like this. I have owned Steel Beasts from the original release. Although I was not able to afford SBProPE until a few months ago, I continued to play with and use Steel Beasts until then. Since the basic engine functionality and scope are very similar, it was very easy to move into the Pro PE edition. The only thing I forgot about was the ability to lock views out from use in missions... thus my first few operations had me frustrated because I could not use external view until someone pointed that out to me again..

For someone with a military career background, sims like SB are what I enjoy... for me though, it is the realism and details that matter the most in my mission designs etc. I too have created some scenarios but to date, I have not released any because none are accurate in representation. For someone like me that is a very large important part of the simulation scenarios I create.

I also enjoy Combat Mission Shock Force but it too lacks in equipment. It is not as detailed as SBProPE in terms of mission scope and detail but it is a pretty good combat and tactical simulation engine.

This might give you an idea of how I like my sims:

1) Free Falcon and Falcon 4 Allied Force for fixed wing sims

2) Steel Beasts and Steel Beasts Pro PE for land combat

3) Combat Mission Shock Force for land combat

4) Apache/Havoc and Comanche/Hokum orig modded for Helo Combat Sim

5) Call of Duty 4, ARMA for first person combat

6) Silent Hunter IV with RFB and RSRD for Sub Sim

7) X3 series (X-Beyond, X2-The Threat, X3-Reunion and X3-Terran Conflict) for space simulation, fleet battles and space station construction.

8) Pacific Storm Allies and Dangerous Waters for naval conflict (very lacking though)

Most of those mentioned are pretty good.. The one area that is truly missing a good, detailed and accurate simulation is in Naval Warfare, especially modern.

Anyhow, As you can see I like the most realistic I can possibly get for what I enjoy.... especially when recreating real life situations I have seen or been part of.

Some days I think it would be so cool to actually create scenarios and campaigns for a living using my experience and experiences as framework! 46 years old and fully retired due to my military service connected injuries has given me more time than you can imagine to do things.. I would love creating full real situations that people could experience in full meticulous detail. I am one that pays attention to detail... from background sound to the direction of the wind, if I can manage and set it, I do. I also try to tell the story through the missions as well to give you the feeling of immersion.

I look forward to seeing what is in the future for SBProPE that is for sure.

[Hackworth]

dood, post up some of your missions.... i get tired as hell of playing and testing my own :biggrin: i'm sure i'm not alone.

[Parachuteprone]

that's not the entire point -- i don't want to see PE gamed up like some BF2 pos. if someone wants that, then buy that. i'm sure there are plenty of games out there where people can add crap to it -- isn't ARMA one?

once more, if it's not accurate and it's just window dressing, why not just use your imagination? hehe, my Gephard works just fine in this sim...especially with a proper skin and markings.

I imagine we all want realism. Its not a shootem up kinda community here.

I just think we could have both realism & variety.

I suspect Esim does too if they are willing to accept 3rd party.

If I want to see a pt-76 or a Chieftan etc. I may never see it without some 3rd party effort. Using a Leopard as a fill in for a T-55 for instance is just as unrealistic & gamey - maybe even more so.

If you are familiar with Il2, Maddox accepted 3rd party & kept the integrity of the game intact. Then it was turned completely over to the modders (AAA) & they are very serious about realism. Maddox could never have produced the quantity of aircraft now in Il2 without a huge investment in time.

As long as Esim maintains control over what goes in online its all good.

Anyway, I'm tired of hearing myself talk

Would like to hear everyones opinion.

Ulimately the only opinion that really matters is Esims.

[Parachuteprone]

hehe, my Gephard works just fine in this sim...especially with a proper skin and markings.

Nice skin BTW !

[Furia]

I already mentioned it in another post about map editing but I think its worth mentioning it here again.

For me one the most "missed" things on this sim is the removal of external view when doing multiplayer sessions.

I know I have been told that this was due to some issues related to where people spawn where their vehicle is destroyed.

I have not a solution for this mostly because other sims I have played include the option to remove the external view so I guess this is something related to the SB engine.

However said this I will keep waiting for the day E-sims can give us an option to remove external view from multiplayer sesions. I consider this as a serious cheat that kills the inmersion feeling this excellent sim offers in single player.

It is funny we can restrict people to access the driver, or the gunner or even the TC station but we allow them to "take a look" outside gaining visuals no real tanker would ever get, ie, take a look around a corner before moving in a city or to some extend take a look over the hill before exposing my turret.

When in multiplayer, you are forced to use this cheat because you do not know if the other side is using it as well and we have no means to know if they do.

I really wonder if the military customers have to endure this as well on their profesional training session. LOL anyway there you have the NCO yelling over your shoulder "Are you cheating, soldier????????" :biggrin:

Well my two cents, I hope one day on a future release we can have this "realism" option enable for multiplayer. I will wait patiently

Please add this request to the Poll :biggrin:

[Hackworth]

I already mentioned it in another post about map editing but I think its worth mentioning it here again.

For me one the most "missed" things on this sim is the removal of external view when doing multiplayer sessions.

I know I have been told that this was due to some issues related to where people spawn where their vehicle is destroyed.

I have not a solution for this mostly because other sims I have played include the option to remove the external view so I guess this is something related to the SB engine.

However said this I will keep waiting for the day E-sims can give us an option to remove external view from multiplayer sesions. I consider this as a serious cheat that kills the inmersion feeling this excellent sim offers in single player.

It is funny we can restrict people to access the driver, or the gunner or even the TC station but we allow them to "take a look" outside gaining visuals no real tanker would ever get, ie, take a look around a corner before moving in a city or to some extend take a look over the hill before exposing my turret.

When in multiplayer, you are forced to use this cheat because you do not know if the other side is using it as well and we have no means to know if they do.

I really wonder if the military customers have to endure this as well on their profesional training session. LOL anyway there you have the NCO yelling over your shoulder "Are you cheating, soldier????????" :biggrin:

Well my two cents, I hope one day on a future release we can have this "realism" option enable for multiplayer. I will wait patiently

Please add this request to the Poll :biggrin:

you can disable the external view from the mission editor

see attached.

thanks Parachuteprone. it's still a WIP. you'll see it soon in the download section.

[Tacbat]

you can disable the external view from the mission editor

Apparently, that doesn't work in MP.

[Wardog]

Challenger2 , now that would be awesome, plus every thing else too

[Furia]

you can disable the external view from the mission editor

see attached.

It does not work on Multiplayer and for this was my request.

I have been told on this forum that this is due to the need that people from destroyed vehicles join your tank without jumping by surprise into your gunner or TC possition.

I can name lost of sims that have multiplayer and offer you the option to eliminate external view.

I would trade having no external view in MP instead the posibility that people from destroyed units can join you or they have to request permision or simply stay on their destroyed vehicle (no external view either there):redface:

For me this issue is a very serious issue that takes away a big chunk of inmersion and realism this great sim offers. Who cares to use TC periscopes?

This is what a real Pizarro Commander would view from his turret while moving on a city street.

And thus if careless, he would meet his fate.

This is what I Pizarro Commander on the same sittuation would see if using the "Wonder View" (external)

The use of the Wonder view could mean the difference between being killed or kill. On single player, the mision creator can remove this feature but not on multiplayer.

On multiplayer you have no means to know if your enemy is using it. Would you cross those streets without using it knowing that maybe your enemy is using the wonder view?

Same goes about target location and spatial awareness.

This is what a Leopard 2E Commander would see from his hatch on a realistic sittuation.

And this is what he would see using the "Wonder View"

A significant difference, isn't it?

I know E-sim is aware of this issue but I would like this to be added on the future polls and comunity requests to the developers.

After all, most of us who bought this great sim, we want it real.

[Tacbat]

Let me ask you this:

Can the TC climb out of the tank to peek around the corner of buildings in SB?

Can the TC stand on top of his hatch to look over a berm in SB?

Does external view compensate for this in an abstract manner?

Answer either yes or no.

[Phalanx]

Like the idea of real world weather and Russian stuff also a challenger would be good too.

[Furia]

Let me ask you this:

Can the TC climb out of the tank to peek around the corner of buildings in SB?

Can the TC stand on top of his hatch to look over a berm in SB?

Does external view compensate for this in an abstract manner?

Answer either yes or no.

The answers is:

YES

and

YES

Now Please answer me:

Would the commander of a tank while moving around of an enemy city full of hostiles, disembark his tank to peek around EVERY corner, while exposing himself to small arms, snipers... and to leave his tank without TC?

Would the TC make his tank (platoon/company) stop EVERY berm in a desert so he can climb on top of the turret to take a look while his unit is a sitting duck?

Answer either YES or NO?

[PJ-Maybe]

The answers is:

YES

and

YES

Now Please answer me:

Would the commander of a tank while moving around of an enemy city full of hostiles, disembark his tank to peek around EVERY corner, while exposing himself to small arms, snipers... and to leave his tank without TC?

Would the TC make his tank (platoon/company) stop EVERY berm in a desert so he can climb on top of the turret to take a look while his unit is a sitting duck?

Answer either YES or NO?

I guess thats going to depend on what Factor sun screen he was wearing if any..... From experience it's not the TC that gets out for a sneeky peek but the Loader. With UAV use over active combat zones these days there is no need to disembark whilst in an Urban Zone. But what every conflict has ever shown is the necessity for any combatant to adapt and over come when the intel is not there. I would rather lose the loader than the Tank.

[Hackworth]

i was never a tanker but IIRC, Archangel was the bigest proponent of keeping F8 view for the very reason that we could not get out of the tank to recon short distances. in other words, yes, it happens frequently from what i understand. Also, not every company or battalion comander is going to have assets like UAVs. they all have loaders though :biggrin: they're cheaper too.

i didn't know it was goofed up in Multiplayer, but then, at least it is a feature. it's just goofed up, or disabled for multiplayer. if it's disabled, then i see your point. if it's a bug, then it'll get fixed one day.

[Furia]

Although I personally dislike this option because the view you get it is surely not the one dismounted person, I would just be happy if we have the option to enable/disable it for multiplayer missions.

So if somebody wants to use it and the rest of people on the match is ok with it, so they can have it, but for some of us that do not want this "peeking out of corners or climbing into turrets", would be great we could disable it for all players in an specific match.

Another feature for this great sim :cul:

[Mogwa]

Many was the time as a loader on an M-1 I was told to hop out and have a look at something. There isnt enough situational awareness without the F-8 view and there may be too much with it. Deal with it. There are many things that can be enhanced in the sim but there are only so many hours in a day. Everyone has there favorite change they want made. The most you can hope for is someone who is with Esim tells you its "on the list". That and a buck will get you a cup of coffee. This is a minor issue if you ask me (and you didnt), if you dont like it, dont use F-8. Dont worry about everyone else.

Mog

[Furia]

Well for me it is an issue that ruins my multiplayer matches.

The way I see in Sb is that loaders as crewable persons are not enabled that I know so we should not have "loader view" mounted or dismounted.

Do not take me wrong, I get your point and I reckon in some very specific circumstances a dismounted person would be most useful.

On IFV we have this sorted out using our dismounts to do the recon for us.

If E-Sims considers that Tanks also have to have the capability to take a look around, well they could add just "one dismount" making the role of dismounted loader so people can "take alook around"

Anyway I think in most hot combat conditions this would not be a good idea and hot combat consitions is what we reproduce most of the time in SB since I do not think people in multiplayer matches spend 4 hours making a reccon patrol on a city with an MTB without infantry support.

I wonder how many people uses the TC periscopes while in contact when they have the Wonder View

Anyway as I said before, I am not asking for the feature to be removed or excluded and asking the people to bear with it but all I am asking is that scenario makers have the option to enable or disable the F8 external view in MP scenarios as well as they do have in SP.

Puzzles me why it is possible in Single Player and not in Multiplayer and why people that likes to use External view does not compain about this being enforced by the scenario maker.

Can we have both ways, enabled and disabled?