Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

[Captain_Colossus]

I know it's been said before, but I feel like the scope of Steel Beasts could be expanded with amphibious operations if vehicles could climb out of the drink onto shore banks rather than being hung up or stalled on the steep banks. We have vehicles that can swim, they're just not as practical as can be for that reason.

I hope the water level can be raised to be more flush with the edges of river banks, or have a more gradually sloping of the shoreline to get there- you're almost there, just need more than a ravine filled partly with water as the only type of water obstacle.

[Gibsonm]

Please make the IED symbol solid so you can actually click on it and move it.

It doesn't matter how far I zoom in the outline remains 1 micron thick and its a PITA (for me at least) to click and drag on these to move them around.

I suspect they'll just detonate in place and provide a nice firework rather than actually something useful.

This is similar to the pain endured when trying to relocate Text as I spend 10 to 15 min randomly clicking on bits of it before I actually select it and can move it.

[Hedgehog]

I know it's been said before, but I feel like the scope of Steel Beasts could be expanded with amphibious operations if vehicles could climb out of the drink onto shore banks rather than being hung up or stalled on the steep banks. We have vehicles that can swim, they're just not as practical as can be for that reason.

I hope the water level can be raised to be more flush with the edges of river banks, or have a more gradually sloping of the shoreline to get there- you're almost there, just need more than a ravine filled partly with water as the only type of water obstacle.

This problem can be solved by editing the theme in the map editor.

Give the underlying water terrain more traction.

[Froggy]

Probleme is that the water level is the same for the whole map, resulting sometimes with ravine where it should be fordable... specially with hilly map.

[wilso845]

Challenger 2 : Loaders position crewable both loading and using the GPMG when turned out/ unbuttoned

Scimitar: the current scimitar in service has lase function where the gunner lases his target and uses the range graticules to manual aim and adjust.

Missing the thermal system for the gunner and commander. Uses BGTI system as well as NV capability

A system where the gun is kept tight when firing as it's not as inacurate as it is on the sim.

Titan Bridge Layer: with its 27m bridge.

Interchangeable bridges that can be ground dumped or stocked.

CRARRV: for recovery of challenger and warrior

Ability for troop level recovery e.g. Scimitar breaks down and is towed by the other troop vehicle.

This list is not just for british vehicles but I only know fully about these vehicles.

[Gibsonm]

Welcome!

Interchangeable bridges that can be ground dumped or stocked.

You can already do this.

[wilso845]

Welcome!

You can already do this.

Is it on the forum as I like idea of using 3 bridge assets but have ground dumped stock etc so they can do resupplys

[Rdubs]

Hi all,

First time poster. Bought SB Pro PE a few years ago, lost the dongle, but now am getting back into the sim even though have to pay for it again. Am getting my nose bloodied pretty well on that Hasty Defense scenario but it has made me long for a few features I can't seem to find. I did not read through all near-300 pages of this thread, I went back maybe 20, so apologies if some of these have already been covered.

1) Have an "embark if" condition related to the enemy being within a certain distance. For example I would like my M1's to open up at 2500-3000 meters but if the the enemy closes to within 1500 meters, fall back to the next BP. Right now I have to manually tell them to retreat and trying to manage multiple platoons it's easy to get sidetracked and not give the order to bug out until too late.

2) Have engagement ranges be weapon-type-specific. Can't tell you how many times my M3 scouts closest to the enemy see an enemy scout 3,000 meters away and to shoot it the gunner lobs only two autocannon rounds at it every 5 seconds. Yes, I get trying to adjust fire and conserve ammo but all shooting two rounds at something 3,000 meters away does is give away your position without doing much damage to the enemy. It would be awesome to have something that says (mostly thinking Bradley's here) engage with the autocannon only if the target is under 2,000 meters.

3) Kind of related to the above, I wish there was an "anti-scout" posture my scout M3's could adopt where instead of giving away their position to tickle the enemy at 3,000 meters with an autocannon, the M3's would engage long-range contacts including enemy scouts with a TOW in order to ensure destruction of the enemy scouts as fast as possible. In order to "force" this what I have to do now is go into the scenario editor and replace all the scout M3's with TOW missile team squads, so they can only shoot the TOW. And it works like a champ, there are tons of dead enemy scouts before the main thrust attacks, but only because the missile team is forced to use the TOW's.

4) Also kind of ties in with the "2 rounds at a time" firing method, but it would be nice to have some kind of "unleash hell" mode where the gunner would fire massive streams of autocannon at close or highly threatening targets. I've seen a platoon of BMPs, or the flight of Hinds, show up at point blank range to the Bradleys and all the gunner does is go "on the way THUMP THUMP" as if two shots an appropriate way to deal with a guy about to launch an ATGM at you from 200 meters away. Same thing with the Hinds, the gunner will try to conserve ammo. Whenever I see one of these situations I have to force myself into the gunner's seat and unload like mad until the target is confirmed dead before releasing control back. Trust me, I completely understand efficient use of ammo, but there are times when copious amounts of firing is a lot better answer.

[Gibsonm]

Is it on the forum as I like idea of using 3 bridge assets but have ground dumped stock etc so they can do resupplys

Well its not in the forum but it is in the Wiki and you can select them in the Mission Editor.

You can have several bridges laid end on end to span a wider gap or you can setup a quasi bridging yard where you drop the bridge on the vehicle, go back, pick up another one, go forward, etc.

[Gibsonm]

Hi all,

First time poster.

Welcome back.

1) Have an "embark if" condition related to the enemy being within a certain distance. For example I would like my M1's to open up at 2500-3000 meters but if the the enemy closes to within 1500 meters, fall back to the next BP. Right now I have to manually tell them to retreat and trying to manage multiple platoons it's easy to get sidetracked and not give the order to bug out until too late.

You do this in the Mission Editor.

Create a region, maybe called "leave now". Which has its outer edge at a range of 1,500m.

Use the "embark if" condition that you spoke of.

"Embark if" enemy Tanks in "leave now".

[Apocalypse 31]

Ability for troop level recovery e.g. Scimitar breaks down and is towed by the other troop vehicle.

"Self recovery", as it is called, would be great!

[MDF]

Welcome back.

You do this in the Mission Editor.

Create a region, maybe called "leave now". Which has its outer edge at a range of 1,500m.

Use the "embark if" condition that you spoke of.

"Embark if" enemy Tanks in "leave now".

You can also use these control logic features in the Planning Phase. You cannot do so once the Execution Phase starts.

[wilso845]

When tanks or vehicles wade to deep they can be recovered by the ARV as would be done in real life, and give the ARV the ability to winch as well as it's function to already tow.

[Gibsonm]

When tanks or vehicles wade to deep they can be recovered by the ARV as would be done in real life, and give the ARV the ability to winch as well as it's function to already tow.

Well again you can do that now.

The ARV will tow the vehicle out of the river / swamp / hole, etc. as long as it can get close enough (without drowning itself of course).

Its not limited to just vehicles with busted engines, track, etc.

[Froggy]

A part of the drowned vehicle has to be visible in order to select it for towing.

If it is not visible, it can not be recovered.

[Hedgehog]

Recovery vehicle front to recovered vehicle rear attachment would be nice.

[Eisenschwein]

Äh, No.

It´s better to connect Tanks Rear to Rear, because

- Damage Tank can Fire or Smoke

- Recovery Veh. is quicker forward

P.S.: What really would by nice is a Option "Tank can recover Tank", even the US have notice this now....

[Kingtiger]

Äh, No.

It´s better to connect Tanks Rear to Rear, because

- Damage Tank can Fire or Smoke

- Recovery Veh. is quicker forward

P.S.: What really would by nice is a Option "Tank can recover Tank", even the US have notice this now....

Plus when connecting rear to rear the recovering vehicle have better torque forward on gear 1 then on reverse, so you get a stronger pull then when reverse-recover.

/KT

[Grenny]

Maybe hedge was thinking about the Schnellbergeeinrichtung?

[Kingtiger]

= Tow Bar.:cool3:

[Kyle Harmse]

Some kind of crewable dedicated air defence vehicle, like the Tunguska? Also, non-nerfed 30mms on the Tunguska, with time fused rounds like on the CV9040- but set by a combination of search radar and LRF? Converting the Tunguska is going to allow us to accurately sim the Gepard as well

[Kyle Harmse]

Also, a Platoon wide Pop Smoke Command?

[Hedgehog]

Some kind of crewable dedicated air defence vehicle, like the Tunguska? Also, non-nerfed 30mms on the Tunguska, with time fused rounds like on the CV9040- but set by a combination of search radar and LRF? Converting the Tunguska is going to allow us to accurately sim the Gepard as well

With a crewable SPAAG, you have 2 ways of aiming.

Radar interface, which will require a fair amount of coding for interface Radar behaviour etc, for not much training value. (Which is SB's "Thing") (There is a sim linked below which addresses these issues, quite well.)

Or Optical, where you don't stand a hope in hell of hitting anything over 1km away.

If you want a Radar fix, try here:

https://sites.google.com/site/samsimulator1972/home

You'll see what i mean with the radar statement.

(It has the ZSU-23-4V1)

If you want Optical try the Bradley in the TC spot with the Alt F3 view.

As for timed rounds, I don't think the Russian stuff uses them, their ADA until recently followed the general approach of "Throw lots of steel BBs and/or 23mm bullets in their general direction and see if some of it sticks."

Can't comment on the Gepard.

RE:

The recovery vehicle, I thought attaching ARV rear to Crock Front when under fire was, well, daft

[Kyle Harmse]

With a crewable SPAAG, you have 2 ways of aiming.

Radar interface, which will require a fair amount of coding for interface Radar behaviour etc, for not much training value. (Which is SB's "Thing") (There is a sim linked below which addresses these issues, quite well.)

You're saying that I can give up on SB ever being a SPAAG sim, SP and/or towed Artillery sim, flight sim, financial adviser, psychic and coffee maker? Damn

Kidding aside, fair point. Even without coding the radar interface though, I live in hope of a very basic crewable SPAAG to blow Hinds up with Tunguska I think, and Gepard (later versions I know) both have LRF and thats already implemented everywhere- most pertinently with the C9040's programmable rounds.

Or Optical, where you don't stand a hope in hell of hitting anything over 1km away.

As for timed rounds, I don't think the Russian stuff uses them, their ADA until recently followed the general approach of "Throw lots of steel BBs and/or 23mm bullets in their general direction and see if some of it sticks."

Can't comment on the Gepard.

On Optical, you can have a reasonable level of success vs Hinds in the CV9040 at around 3.6km if you happen to be looking in the right section of sky as they stop and burst some 40mm on them before or during the AT-6's flight. Super risky though.

On timed rounds: I can't comment on the 23mm, though according to Wiki (I know, I know crap source) the Tunguska's 30mm rounds are air/impact fuzed with the A-670, which also has a self-destruct mode.

The Gepard is also a nightmare to find the *really* niggly technically detailed sources for, but it sounds like the DM70- its HE round- is also time fused, with self-destruct, according to the German Wiki article http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flugabwehrkanonenpanzer_Gepard.

Anyway, as you say, I'd rather SB focuses on its armoured warfare than implement stuff outside of its awesome armour-centric core

[Gibsonm]

If you want to know where most people stand on a more detailed implementation of Air Support (and as a result Air Defence) have a look here:

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=20855