Jump to content
Ssnake

SB Pro PE 2.6x general information

Recommended Posts

The reticules in SB Pro are always matched to whatever HE round may currently be loaded in a vehicle, depending on the individual scenario. The one that you are using for reference shows a different field of view (look at the dimensions of the horizontal markings), and it may have been made to match a different HE round.

If Retro says that there's also something with an engine limitation - okay, that may play a role, and I'm sure we're going to address it at some point as well.

Both HEF rounds should have same ballistics, only the warhead is different composition. The flight path of shell, if taken with the reference to the coax, thus suggests too flat trajectory if those range marks correspond the sim's calibration.

This might help to recheck: http://www.kotsch88.de/tafeln/st_125mm-hef.htm (this website has also tables for HEAT and KE)

Ssnake, dont get me wrong, I just thought that this might be worth a look into so that you guys squash some last minute bugs if they are there...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:) tho it's still worth a double check... the manuals I have all correspond to the sight photo I gave in my first post on this topic (coax vs HEF relative range marks).

Unfortunately (for the argument) our M84 (improved T72M1 clone) always had different FCS and optics so I cannot comment with a first hand experience on the vanilla 72M1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WTF...how in ye gods name did i not see that??

Note to self; must spend more time playing rather than map building!!

just checked...is there a hot key to use NVGs not a thermal imager?...im missing something...we are talking INF right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well. choose a squad, hit F7 I think it is so you get the role of the squadleader, then just hit "+" key (or whatever key you got as alternative) for NVG :) Voila!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As we are allowed to(and the official videos have all been posted)...I'll give you something to think about:

Which of these vehicles is the one with the most firepower?

SS_18_14_34.jpg.4f4e13c709053f2280d15e58

SS_18_14_34.jpg.4f4e13c709053f2280d15e58

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaarrr…found the problem, I had messed with hotkey options, Jesus…its like waking up in the Matrix or something, life will never be the same! Thanks Kingtiger!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beauty lies in the eye of the beholder - but in any case it is true that the Bradley too received a serious update (3D interior, several fixes in the fire control system).

Followup on the above: does the update include the TOW level/bubble device that lets a user know he's on too steep of a slope to engage?

Too many times, I've gotten smacked around the German countryside for choosing a BP with less-than-ideal grade. :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just been watching the version 2.6 videos again, and one thing I'm curious about is the FPS impact from the 3D infantry.

To all those who have played/tested the sim, what are your thoughts on this?

Do they have a major impact, so lowering details in other areas is required, or is it (hopefully) minimal?

Cheers all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Followup on the above: does the update include the TOW level/bubble device that lets a user know he's on too steep of a slope to engage?

Too many times, I've gotten smacked around the German countryside for choosing a BP with less-than-ideal grade. :biggrin:

Yes.

I've just been watching the version 2.6 videos again, and one thing I'm curious about is the FPS impact from the 3D infantry.

To all those who have played/tested the sim, what are your thoughts on this?

Do they have a major impact, so lowering details in other areas is required, or is it (hopefully) minimal?

Cheers all!

Very little, which has been a pleasant surprise. Even Mog's stoneage PC seems to run it OK :diable:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Very little, which has been a pleasant surprise. Even Mog's stoneage PC seems to run it OK :diable:

Excellent!! :biggrin:

Looking forward to this update!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes.

Very little, which has been a pleasant surprise. Even Mog's stoneage PC seems to run it OK :diable:

yes this is something worrying me also, do we have any numbers on the "very little"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:) tho it's still worth a double check... the manuals I have all correspond to the sight photo I gave in my first post on this topic (coax vs HEF relative range marks).

Unfortunately (for the argument) our M84 (improved T72M1 clone) always had different FCS and optics so I cannot comment with a first hand experience on the vanilla 72M1.

If better data comes along then I am sure the ballistics would get changed. Otherwise, who cares? The rounds go where they need to go at the appropriate ranges marked on the sight. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I have a bit less of this cavalier attitude here, but I have to agree that in any case we may not be able to present a quick fix. As a first order approximation it will still work, though, especially if gunnery training with the T-72 is not your primary training goal, but multiplayer combat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
just a small question will the RBS 70 be crewable in this upgrade?

No, I don't think so. From what I've seen in other simulators of it, it's a wee bit more complicated to operate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If better data comes along then I am sure the ballistics would get changed. Otherwise, who cares? The rounds go where they need to go at the appropriate ranges marked on the sight. ;)

Hmmm... I do not understand these defensive replies. All I suggested in a good faith was to recheck the data if there could be a bug, because of the mismatch in the offset angles between coax and HEF.

Ssnake did post in another topic that SBP is, among other things, about ballistics (all 3 types). One would think that this would indeed be an important factor in an AFV sim. And more flat flight path can make LOS targeting easier, agree?

In the end even if it turns out that it is some limiting factor of the engine, at least it is now known and can be worked later on. If it is a bug, you can correct it before the release, which saves money.

The last thing in my mind was trying to point fingers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I have a bit less of this cavalier attitude here, but I have to agree that in any case we may not be able to present a quick fix. As a first order approximation it will still work, though, especially if gunnery training with the T-72 is not your primary training goal, but multiplayer combat.

Thank you for your reply Ssnake. If we could wait years for crewable T72M1, we can for a bit more for a fix too :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmm... I do not understand these defensive replies. All I suggested in a good faith was to recheck the data if there could be a bug, because of the mismatch in the offset angles between coax and HEF.

Ssnake did post in another topic that SBP is, among other things, about ballistics (all 3 types). One would think that this would indeed be an important factor in an AFV sim. And more flat flight path can make LOS targeting easier, agree?

In the end even if it turns out that it is some limiting factor of the engine, at least it is now known and can be worked later on. If it is a bug, you can correct it before the release, which saves money.

The last thing in my mind was trying to point fingers.

I simply made a statement that: 1) the sight adheres to the ballistics in SB so it works, and 2) if better data comes along it will get changed.

Everyone needs to lighten up. Anytime someone makes a comment in support of SB it is "being defensive". It is complete absurdity -- stop to victimization. Other than that, have faith that things will all work out in the end. :)

Edited by Volcano

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry if this has been asked before but i could not find out if it was , will there be any new scenarios in the new update??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoa, wait a second, what is Steelbeast's source for the T-72? Is it all Stefan's website? Or is it something else?

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...