Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hey, everybody is free to criticize me, even here. This is not a dictatorship. It's perfectly legitimate to ask for any AFV that isn't there.

In a perfect world we'd have the time and resources to attack the issue in a more systematic manner. Unfortunately we can't afford this luxury, so you will have to rely a bit on your imagination here. The BTR-80 is a perfect substitute. General looks and capabilities are nearly identical. You have a point about that "generic" feel, but... well, you have to squint a bit harder for the forseeable future. I'm sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's just when all is said and done, I'm just surprised there is no BTR-70.

I can understand that "purist" stand point.

However at the end of the day anything from a BTR60PB (the first with a turret and a roof) on all look the same in my gunner's sight, all have similar cross country mobility, all look pretty much the same in the "observer" view and all carry out the same function - namely transport Infantry.

Compare this to the budding Brit player who will now have the beginnings of a playable CR2 but no APC / IFV at all to go with it. No Warrior, no Bulldog, no "plain jane" FV432.

Surely your requirement can be achieved using the exiting proxy whilst development work proceeds on vehicles that have no equivalent?

Personally from a Military customer point of view stuff like asymetric threat, multiple forces on the same map (Friendly, Threat, civilian, NGO, etc.), 3D infantry all rate higher on my personal "fix this" check list than multiple versions of effectivly the same vehicle.

But luckily its not my call. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer to drive around the sb battlefield in a purple humvee with shiny rims following crudely drawn arrows and faces/piccaso art. Battling it head on with tanks shooting out their gps and tracks. Pretty immersive and realistic enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Compare this to the budding Brit player who will now have the beginnings of a playable CR2 but no APC / IFV at all to go with it. No Warrior, no Bulldog, no "plain jane" FV432.

Well the M113 is pretty much the world's version of our FV432. :)

And the Pizarro is kind of like the Warrior, I have heard a ME army has Warriors with a Bradley Turret, minus TOW.

(The Bradley does seem a bit generic in campaigns these days)

And the G-Wagon is pretty much fit for fit a Land Rover Defender.

(Though 60% more expensive)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Official campaigns and scenarios" I'm guessing means they are created by Esim and included in an update. AFAIK Esim has a very small staff that has a very high workload. Everyone involved seems to be doing as much as possible to meet contractual obligations and still find time to add something for everyone into each update. Does that mean I get the exact object/vehicle/feature that I want to see added in the next update? Nope. But there's usually something I like. I suspect they are working on a lot of vehicles/features and whats ready by update time gets released and what isn't ready has to wait until next year. Hence the apparently random order things are released. I'm OK with that.

I'm just glad there are more updates. I'm not able to name a game that came out circa 1997 that's still putting out updates and patches. I'm sure there are some, but my point is that most games get a "one and done" patch by the developer (if even that) and its on to the next game. SB has pretty much given us something new every year.

So when people talk of a lack of immersion, I guess when they play, they disable exterior views, and disable the map display altogether, print a paper map, cover it in acetate and update it with a grease pencil by monitoring the radio, like we did in the 80s? The mission editor allows for this. I'm thinking they don't do this.

There is a .kmz file included in the install that shows the SW corner of many of the SB maps in Google earth. You can download a Military grid reference into Google earth and use it to find the grid for something and then enter the names of every city, river, mountain, whatever you want on whatever map you want. If you dont like the names on a map, change them. Don't wait for other people to do it for you.

There are people who have said they will make a .hgt map of a certain area of the world with a simple .ter file included for you if you simply post on the forum and ask. Keep in mind they cant instantly produce a map for everyone in the whole community, but they are helpful and usually work for no more than a "Thank you".

OOBs can be found on the net. Examples are:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/fm100-60.htm

http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm100-2-3.pdf

If anyone has played a Friday night game, they know of the complaints that are heard about a long briefing. Like many here, I have written orders for in real life. If anything close to them appear in a scenario, it doesn't get read. Folks just want the basics

Look,everyones opinion matters. Everyone wants a certain vehicle or feature and everyone loves a good scenario. But when someone says that all scenarios don't meet their standards and they cant even make one for themselves that meet that standard, then what is the answer to that?

What are the real differences between a BTR-80 and A BTR-70/60? Not much.They are almost identical in appearance. What if Esim did stop working on whatever they might be working on now to create a BTR-70? Is that worth not getting some other vehicle/feature in the next update? Not really.

Edited by Mogwa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So when people talk of a lack of immersion, I guess when they play, they disable exterior views, and disable the map display altogether, print a paper map, cover it in acetate and update it with a grease pencil by monitoring the radio, like we did in the 80s? The mission editor allows for this. I'm thinking they don't do this.

You're right, I do no such things...because create immersion for me, they do not. Nor would any of the other things mentioned in the original SB manual.

But when someone says that all scenarios don't meet their standards and they cant even make one for themselves that meet that standard, then what is the answer to that?.

You might as well argue that I program my own tank sim, man. I'm sorry I wasn't able to express myself clearer but I did try to explain why I have been unable to create scenarios to my satisfaction. I should add time constraints though.

What are the real differences between a BTR-80 and A BTR-70/60? Not much.They are almost identical in appearance..

Not much except one vehicle wasn't around during certain times so believe it or not, that's throwing me off. I love that both BMP-1 and BMP-2 are available, very similar to each other in length and girth, but there they are in their own existence. So here again, my surprise that a BTR-60, or BTR-70 is not available.

What if Esim did stop working on whatever they might be working on now to create a BTR-70? Is that worth not getting some other vehicle/feature in the next update? Not really.

I really appreciate you defending our beloved eSim and SB, but if said vehicle/feature would say be an Ariete, Stingray, or an LIW G6, then I would honestly have to say no, it's not worth it. I would rather have had a BTR-70. But trust me, I understand if those are the vehicles eSim needs to create to stay afloat, then so be it.

I have been keeping my fingers crossed and squinting harder into the future.

Mogwa, thanks for the OOB links, I will surely check them out. Also, I'm very interested in what orders do look like in the Army so if you had any examples, I would greatly appreciate you showing me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not much except one vehicle wasn't around during certain times so believe it or not, that's throwing me off. I love that both BMP-1 and BMP-2 are available, very similar to each other in length and girth, but there they are in their own existence. So here again, my surprise that a BTR-60, or BTR-70 is not available.

the BMP-1 and BMP-2 are noticeably different.

the BMP-1 has a 73mm gun with a range of 1300m, and an 8-man infantry squad.

BMP-2 has a 30mm gun with a 2500m range and 6-man squad.

BMP-2 also has a 2-man turret that allows it to be traversed unobstructed instead of the obstructive TC hatch in the BMP-1 hull.

now compare the BTR-80 with BTR-70.

both has a 14.5mm gun. BTR-80 has 8 man squad, BTR-70 has 7-man squad. mobility is identical. armour is identical. they even look nearly the same, except the BTR-70 has smaller side doors that open downwards, instead of the BTR-80 2-part doors, and sloped rear hull. there would be no tactically significant difference in engaging a BTR-80 vs a BTR-70, except the BTR-70 might catch fire more easily than the BTR-80 because of the gasoline engines.

now with a BMP-1 and BMP-2 you have to employ very different tactics, both using them, and engaging them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Explanation of OpOrders see pg H-11 through H-19 http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/service_pubs/101_5.pdf

This is a great reference for writing OpOrders. As you can see, most of this couldn't possibly apply to an SB scenario. I don't have any actual OpOrders to show you. If you read those pages, half of which are a shell you can use to fill in with your own imagination, you will have a working OpOrder. Omit lines that dont apply or fill the line with "IAW the SOP" or something similar. If you actually type that into a briefing window, you'll see why peoples eyes glaze over and they don't bother to read it. You may want to use a Frago format. Its shorter and simpler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good technical points about the BMP.

That FM looks like it can be a great tool. Thanks for sharing! I'm also against long essays (like my previous post) but for now I'm gathering as much info as I can on how to do things. Eventually I will want to whittle stuff down to a frago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel your pain, Scrapper. We don't have proper Opfor kit for a Soviet motorized rifle regiment. But you come close to one. It would be nice if there was a dedicated scenario development team, but I can appreciate how we have the opportunity to create with relative ease. Heck, I could spend hours in the mission editor, and not even touch a pre-fab mission, and be happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Heck, I could spend hours in the mission editor, and not even touch a pre-fab mission, and be happy.

That's just grand. Don't forget to upload the work results afterwards. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, I intend to write “orders” for both the ADF campaign and the individual scenario briefing.

You are more than welcome to have a look (http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?p=193499#post193499)

We use the “SMEAC” structure:

Situation

Mission

Execution

Admin and Log

Command and Signals

But as others have mentioned a set of “orders” can range from several hundreds of pages with Annexs, traces, etc. through to brief verbal orders to “follow me!” depending on the size of the units involved, the complexity of the task, the time available, etc.

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just grateful i can finally afford computer powerful enough to run this sim and am impressed with what e sims has accomplished here. SB 1was great, Pro is awesome and will be grateful for any improvment as it comes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ssnake, in reading one of your replies in another thread, I just wanted to apologize here if I appear to have been ungrateful with what SteelBeasts has had to offer thusfar. Given that no other title offers what SB has and does, I have been and continue to be, at your mercy.

Looking forward to your next update!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not expecting gratitude. You are paying customers and have a right to voice your opinions and preferences. All I'm asking for is a minimum of understanding that, while we try to do whatever we can for all PE users, we are operating under economic constraints which limit our freedom to decide about certain development priorities.

I categorically reject the suggestion of some people that if only we'd lower the price of SB Pro PE and concentrated on community demands we could make up for the money that we make with customizations for training purposes.

I am not at liberty to discuss details. But I can assure you that I know of no hard facts whatsoever suggesting a price-dependent elasticity in customer demand or even a potentially large enough market to overcompensate the losses that we'd make by abandoning the market for training solutions. Like it or not, we depend on military sales, so that's what dominates our development roadmap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ssnake, sometime ago you mentioned an upcoming press release after the word on the Challenger 2 broke. What's the status of the release?

Thanks,

Pete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there might be some confusion. The press release: I think it will happen when he is able to do it. As for the actual release of the next update: at the end of the year (as usual) at best, and that will probably be announced in that press release, whenever that happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent out four press releases to a few specific contacts this week actually, but will consolidate all of them into one larger newsletter with a few more details in it. Not quite sure when I'll find the time, hopefully in the next days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I sent out four press releases to a few specific contacts this week actually, but will consolidate all of them into one larger newsletter with a few more details in it. Not quite sure when I'll find the time, hopefully in the next days.

Sounds like Ssnake has conjured a little black book for eSim. :)

What items on the_List will be revealed this time?

**All Hail the_List!!**

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you know of “the List’s“ existence you already now too much.

The black Transit van arriving outside your house and filled with guys from the 22nd Regt attests to that.

The 40mm concussion grenade should be coming through the window right about .... NOW!

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So thats why that Chinook was buzzing at zero feet last night.....

Sic 'em Chuck.

Try not to kill 'em, we just want to send a message.

**Muffled thumps**

Ssnake next time you want to talk.

Don't send one of these twerps.

*Thump*

"Ow."

Chuck Norris, Best. Bodyguard. Ever.

:biggrin:

the_List was mentioned it must be appeased!

**All Hail the_List!!**

Edited by Hedgehog
appeasement

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...