Jump to content

M1A2 what does it take


oscar19681

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It's pretty easy:

1. Become head of state in a country

2. Ally with the United States

3. Say "we have weak army, need M1-Überpanzer"

4. Get M1A2 from your beloved ally

5. Contact Ssnake

6. Sign contract with esim

7. Get M1A2 in SB Pro

Seven steps to happiness! :) Good luck oscar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's pretty easy:

1. Become head of state in a country

2. Ally with the United States

3. Say "we have weak army, need M1-Überpanzer"

4. Get M1A2 from your beloved ally

5. Contact Ssnake

6. Sign contract with esim

7. Get M1A2 in SB Pro

Seven steps to happiness! :) Good luck oscar!

Step 5a: Negotiate Suspension Animation

-Rump

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does it take to implement the m1a2 into steel beasts somewhere along the line? I mean the m1a1 is beginning to show its age when pitted against for example the leo2e

Give me your soul. noo thats the smoke from pot, ur soul , UR SOUL !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you can take a shortcut and push the egyptian army to add their monkey model M1A2s as well.

Ya, that gets me thinking, Hosni is getting pretty long in the tooth there. Oscar, you could move to Egypt and lead a coup when he kicks off and then get that M1A2 and most importantly those suspension animations you have always wanted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you had gone to ITEC you would be entitled to ask such questions.

When saying so have you even considered why i couldnt go to itec? You make it seem as if i was to lazy to go there in the first place which was not the case. So if one was prevented to go to itec one would not be entitled to ask questions like these? Give me a break ! I thought (at least over here) we are living in a free country

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently the reasons for not attending are unimportant. From reading the post on the 1st poll (http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=13274&page=2) it seems that, other then actual Esim personnel, only people that attended ITEC are aware of the contents of the list, the priorities of developement, and they alone may pass judgment on additions to the sim that are desired by us mere mortals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently the reasons for not attending are unimportant. From reading the post on the 1st poll (http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=13274&page=2) it seems that, other then actual Esim personnel, only people that attended ITEC are aware of the contents of the list, the priorities of developement, and they alone may pass judgment on additions to the sim that are desired by us mere mortals.

So i as a customer my not in any situation pass jugment on adiditions to the sim? Sorry but that doesnt make any sense. As a customer i may ask for anything to be included in the sim when i please. If it really is implemented in the sim is offcourse up to e-sim. Offcourse the militairy customers have more to say about what makes it into the sim since they pay the big bucks. But i,m a costumer nonetheless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well the indirect approach would be to send Hughes, Thalis and General Dynamics broke and then the US Army / USMC would come cap in hand to eSim asking then to develop the various vehicles in SB Pro so they could replace their no longer supported multi million dollar, size of shipping container, purpose built, simulators.

Then you as a “second tier” customer would eventually get what you are after. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

As much as I secretly hope for a big deal with the US, I fear it just as much. VBS development is now totally dominated by US requirements. And if the US doesn't want the results be made available to the public it's not going to happen. It could very well be that the US might decide to pour millions of dollars into eSim, require us to hire a dozen other programmers, hand over the source code, and close down or separate the Personal Edition from the rest of the development. In that case we would get to do the M1A2SEP, but you'd see diddly squat.

I'm not saying that the current situation is the best possible for you, but it could be a lot worse in both cases, that eSim doesn't make enough money, or a terrible amount of it. I for one am not looking forward to a life of being a senior manager exclusively tasked to deal with financial planning and deal negotiations, totally disconnected from the actual software development and the consumer market. Having PE is a good corrective to keep in mind the overall usability and not to drown in minutiae of special requirements that are of interest only to a tiny minority even among the professional users.

The Pizarro is a good example in some way as the now implemented version in SB Pro PE is a good compromise between showing the individual elements of the Pizarro while still maintaining a core of commonality with established user interface elements. We could just as well plug in the official Spanish version but that would kill much of the fun that one can currently have with the thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I absolutely understand your feelings about a deal with the US. What you describe is not only possible, but would be the likely outcome. That being said weren't TacOps Cav(version used at Ft Knox) and Tacops 4(?) essentially the same product? Perhaps the bureaucracy could be talked into a similar arrangement.

Also if large amounts of money infused into Esim by a deal with the US, perhaps a parallel release could be developed for consumer use. Different enough to mollify Uncle Sam and still keep average joes like us happy.

Mog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is SB really that good that featuring a vehicle would/could expose "secret" information to unwanted hands?I think SB is is really really got, but certainly not this "good".

We don't get to see the armor / penetration values, and these are supposed to be rough estimates anyway /if I recall it correctly from another thread/.

You cannot use most of the stuff even inside the "fully" modeled vehicles. All you get is to see how the interior layout is built up, and use the sights etc. I just don't really see how SB could become a threat in "unwanted" hands. IMO the strongpoints of this Sim lie rather in the command & control abilities rather than the featured vehicles itself.

I'd be happy to see a new tank like the M1A2 in the sim even if it meant that its simulation wasn't "100%" accurate to the real tank, just about 90% ;)

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...