Jump to content

My wishes for the to-do list.


Steel_Hamster

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 165
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

There's native girls living in Canada,wonders never cease. I'll check in with the misses and get back to ya!!

Lol. Well we have at least a year so I should be able to find someone around here who would admit to being "native".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Already in preparation, but will still take some time. Whenever a vehicle is being updated, we'll also prepare it for a decal system that will automatically assign symbols and numbers. We could have had it years ago, but some .mil customers chickened out and settled for the magic ID function instead. Well, admittedly it was a much faster solution.

So, we're doing this on our own, "between jobs" so to speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nobody ever think about normal lights on vehicles?

ok, tactically may be irrelevant (NVG and TS do the job) or not...!!!

simply drive to point A at point B in the night is futile

ok most of the time just sitting in the TC position and command a move thru TS do the job

but when you need to crew the driver position (fine driving to specific task like cossing a laydown bridge or something like cover behind a obstacle or building) in the night is fustrating

in the wishlist already is the nightvision to driver added, but the normal (an IR) light may be added as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If SB had a level feature I could isolate each and every action; recon on level one, mech infantry level two, heavy armor level three..you get the idea. Editing the scenario after play testing would be a breeze.

You can already do that, and here's how using recce as an example:

1. Drop your units on the map, and route them as required.

2. Create a new waypoint and then route every recon element to that one waypoint. Just a simple direct route will do, nothing complicated.

3. On the right-hand side of the map screen, look at the "routes" toggle switch (On, Pick, Off) and select "Pick".

4. Click on any recon element, and the routes for all the recce units will be displayed.

5. Now you can see what your recce routes are doing separately from all other units.

6. Save the scenario before play testing, then delete the shared waypoint and save the scenario as a "test".

7. Run the test scenario, and make adjustments as required on the original scenario. (You can have a second SB window open with the mission editor running so you can adjust things as you see them happen during the test in the other window).

This should help you keep all the routes clear in your plan.

Here ends the lesson. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(You can have a second SB window open with the mission editor running so you can adjust things as you see them happen during the test in the other window).

Can you elaborate this a bit more please?

How can we open a second SB Window? You mean I can have one window with the Editor while at the same time the game runs in misssion test mode?

How do you do that?

:shocked:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disclaimer:

I'm very new to Steel Beasts, so maybe with more time my following opinion will change.

With that said though in the scenarios I have played thus far I think unscripted AI is going to be a huge wish of mine. Or at least more dynamic and adapting AI. For a game that's mainly built for SP, for us civvies at least, the AI is really going to be a fundamental and crucial aspect of the game. I played a few scenarios in which I was able to gun enemy troops from a Leo without them moving or responding at all. They all layed there in perfect formation despite the impending consequences. I assume I can chalk that up to the scenario designer for not inserting the proper conditions for that particular unit. But, it'd really be awesome if despite the given presets (or lack of) that the AI could realize it's in a no-win situation and at least have fallen back to the woodline that was directly behind them. Just one example. But, again just my opinion that AI would top my wish list. Even if we agree that the AI is outstanding, however for this type of game it's always important to continue to upgrade and make improvements to it where applicable. Improved AI can have a larger impact on the game than new scenarios or tanks.

One mans opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember when the first steel beast was in the development stage, the remarks of the reviews and the designer interview was a game focused in the gunner position.

In SB PRO SP seems to me that the main focus is in the tactical Company commander funcionality, without the proper AI behavior to avoid the micromanaging units.

no just in the other unit forming the force team, or the general behavior of the OPFOR attacking the own forces (proactive flanking, counterattaking and so on) that limits the real-time tactical challenge to a pre-set rigid behavior, but the simple action to pop smoke to avoid a incoming ATGM seems to be mentally over-the-intelligent to command of a AI TC in #2 tank

well, i need more flying hours in SB P PE but that are my first thought...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Something quite different: I'd like to have the version information on the installation media, in a file in the installation media's root directory, and/or in the installer - just reinstalling Pro PE now (2.460 before 2.483) and I am still not sure if I'm in fact executing the 2.460 installer (or something else) because nowhere does it state its version..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not even in the properties page for the installer?

The file name is recorded in both Setup.ini, and the version properties of Setup.exe

You can also use the file's datestamps to ensure you aren't mixing packages, and that you have the most recent files.

In any case 2.460 is the version on your replacement CD, and 2.483 is the downloaded files.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm now a proponent of shadows added to the environment after seeing them in certain unnamed games- not for the eye candy department, but functionally the depth they add to terrain features and the camouflage given to units as they really help to break up their profiles. I think in the past I wasn't so interested in this, but now I notice more that Steel Beasts' color palette is relatively bright, units in or near woods or located in towns are relatively easy to spot compared to what I've seen in the more recent crop of military oriented shooters. I imagine it would be challenging to program spotting and detection penalties, and it may raise hardware requirements for high detail shadows, but I don't think it's a tax on the gain of mere entertainment purposes- it really does create a more realistic challenge with the added bonus of increasing graphics appeal for the eye candy crowd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Better route finding by the AI. The AI will plow into trees for too long before realizing all that's needed is a 7 foot adjustment in order to get on a clear path. Also witnessed a tank attempt to pass through a deep river with large embankments once the bridge it was suppose to cross became blocked. Needless to say the tank destroyed itself. In that situation the AI needs to hold position until further orders or find another route.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the vehicles have tow cables, but there seems to be no way for any vehicle other than dedicated recovery to tow a friendly vehicle. No disabled vehicle (blown track in a minefield, suspension shot away, etc.) can be dragged under cover and protection. No vehicle bogged in a stream or otherwise incapacitated can be recovered by platoon or other vehicles even though, in the real world, there are drills and procedures to do just that. Any chance of this feature being included in due course?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Is it feasible? Yes, sure.

Ist it desirable? Yes, absolutely!

Can it be done without exceptional effort? Probably.

Is there room in the development schedule? Hell, no!

The problem is that we have about a gazillion new features or feature improvements that are competing for limited programming time. So our focus is to work on those elements that add a fundamentally new dimension. The ability to tow any vehicle with any other vehicle is desirable, but the functionality to tow vehicles is already there, so we're talking about a "more of the same" type of innovation which can't be given priority simply because there are so many other items waiting for their implementation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fully understood. Thanks for the reply. Just making a suggestion.

FWIW, I still recall our troop("platoon") radio SOP for a bogged vehicle. The stuck vehicle would come on the subunit radio net and report "High Stump." One or two vehicles would move to the stuck vehicle while the remainder of the troop took up defensive fire positions protecting the recovery op. Hook up the tow cables, get him unstuck, and move on. Last part of the drill took place on return to base at ENDEX: drinks for the troop paid for by the bogged crew commander! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I fully understand your request. After all, this "internal" retrieving of stuck unit is much faster than waiting for the lone M88, which would be reason alone to justify the development. It's just that in the classroom version, the instructor can quickly drag a stuck vehicle to a new location to resolve such a problem, so it is much less of a problem there than in the PE.

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...