Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

[Parachuteprone]

I would like to see some Chinese and N Korean AI equipment.

 

M51/M3 halftrak/T12/Jeeps with ATGM option/M48 for middle east scenarios.

 

Landing craft/ RHIB's etc. would be great.

 

Flares and white light headlights.

 

Perhaps a generic Air to surface missile/s under the support screen for close air support and a random chance that it could be shot down.

Don't want to get too detailed here but be nice to see the missiles fly.

 

I would also  like a simple Dynamic generator  (Even if its just units placed with simple engage/defend/dismount script)  There are so many options in the editor I doubt we will ever see this but I thought I would ask.

Sometimes its nice to not know anything about what is coming your way other than who the enemy is. Just a simple Beer and peanuts game that doesn't require finding or writing a scenario.

Some have said we could do random missions like this now but its beyond me.

 

Side A(Nation x) attacking/meeting side B(Nation y) -these the player could pick. - Date -(Here I think player might have to choose what equipment could possibly appear otherwise a huge database would be needed)

Force sizes randomized based on attacker/defender as are routes.

Player only knows his force makeup and simple objectives - Hold/clear etc.

 

 

And shell holes from Artillery

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 12, 2016 by Parachuteprone

[Marko]

3 hours ago, MAJ_Fubar said:

 

 

 

Well, except for slightly better hull armor, larger roadwheels, and the faster turbine engine, the T-80B is effectively identical to the T-64B (same turret), so I'd just squint harder and shoot for the T-64BV and T-72AV instead.

 But the T-80BV is so sexy

[RENEGADE-623]

the ability for the call sign template to be more detailed.  and again the ability for each vehicle to have its own bumper number. An M3A1 Bradley,  An M577, the ability to have o weapons mounted on an M113 type vehicle,  the ability for the repair m113 to look like an m113A2,  most of these I know have been mentioned before but thought I would mention them again

[MAJ_Fubar]

3 hours ago, Marko said:

 But the T-80BV is so sexy

Now, nobody mentioned the T-80BV.  In retrospect, this would be preferable to The T-64BV as it was deployed to East Germany in larger numbers and right in the middle of SB's cold war sweet spot, but the T-64BV is more relevant in current scenarios...I guess we'll need both.

[Marko]

1 hour ago, MAJ_Fubar said:

Now, nobody mentioned the T-80BV.  In retrospect, this would be preferable to The T-64BV as it was deployed to East Germany in larger numbers and right in the middle of SB's cold war sweet spot, but the T-64BV is more relevant in current scenarios...I guess we'll need both.

 

I was thinking along the same lines.

to be honest i have been wondering why the T-80/B model was not in last updated.

We have the T-64 and most of the T-72 variants the T-80U T-90. 

Not a criticism just an observation.

Edited June 12, 2016 by Marko

[Rotareneg]

On 5/15/2016 at 4:44 PM, Rotareneg said:

If you call FASCAM in the normal manner you can set the self-destruct timers, but the preset artillery calls don't have the option. You could repeat them after 30 minutes, but that'd be a bit harsh on the players if they breached it and then suddenly found it refilled with mines.

 

A little update on this: I just found that the FASCAM self-destruct setting in the mission editor's support menu does effect pre-plotted FASCAM, so you can make random minefields that last up to 3 hours.

[dejawolf]

On 6/12/2016 at 11:44 PM, Marko said:

 

I was thinking along the same lines.

to be honest i have been wondering why the T-80/B model was not in last updated.

We have the T-64 and most of the T-72 variants the T-80U T-90. 

Not a criticism just an observation.

 

time.

[Tread_Head57]

Looking for clarification here...my understanding is the T-80BV of ~1985 year model was equipped with a TIS. My main reason for wishing for a T-80B is to give the Soviet side a playable TIS-equipped vehicle for mid-eighties and later scenarios. Right now, playing the T-72M1 and (since the gunner sight is essentially the same) future T-72B1, Soviets are pretty much outmatched by NATO time period vehicles when comparing 1 on 1. Fixed magnification sights with no TIS struggle to compete with M1/Leo 2. I know this is realistic, but sometimes I crave a more "even" match up when playing Soviet side in small scenarios. If Soviets did not equip T-80's with TIS in the mid-eighties, when were they fielded in numbers? Thanks. 

[GSprocket]

The T80 didn't get thermal equipment until the T80U(M) in the early 1990s. (A few of the T80UK commander vehicles were also thermal equipped, and the Ukrainian T84 has thermal equipment.)

Few T72 were fitted with thermals - and even the early T90 was still using II sights.

In the 20xxs there were various projects to update various Txx series vehicles, but I'm not up to date with how many were actually completed and taken into service or with which militaries.

[BigBadVuk]

You ppl have big demands

 

Im happy with little things: scratches and marks on blocks in F4 view for all vehicles we have ( as SEP view ) , debris, dust, trickling rain on all sights and  M84A as playable vehicle ( altho T72 family introduced in 4.0 will do the trick completely)

 

From "big "things just one: real time lights from tracers, fires and explosions or lights from building etc..

[Ssnake]

2 hours ago, Tread_Head57 said:

Looking for clarification here...my understanding is the T-80BV of ~1985 year model was equipped with a TIS. My main reason for wishing for a T-80B is to give the Soviet side a playable TIS-equipped vehicle for mid-eighties and later scenarios. Right now, playing the T-72M1 and (since the gunner sight is essentially the same) future T-72B1, Soviets are pretty much outmatched by NATO time period vehicles when comparing 1 on 1. Fixed magnification sights with no TIS struggle to compete with M1/Leo 2. I know this is realistic, but sometimes I crave a more "even" match up when playing Soviet side in small scenarios. If Soviets did not equip T-80's with TIS in the mid-eighties, when were they fielded in numbers? Thanks. 

 

Your best option is to use the T-72M4 for a "more balanced" type of scenario. That would give you thermals and the advantages that go along with it. IMO thermals are actually one of the prime examples where (military goods) export control actually worked very well. The Soviets didn't even realize what they were missing out until after the collapse of the Warsaw Pact.

[BigBadVuk]

Yes, but M4 is not playable

 

EDIT: While we are talking about night optics i have a question - Image intesifier. According to some literature i saw some of T72 licensed models in 80s ( M84A ( Ex YU ) , Lion of Babel ( Iraq) and some India used models ) used this technology. Being 3rd world country civilian i dont have the slightest idea how this would work and look. MY guess is that it is similar to night goggles view. Can any of you ppl with in depth knowledge of night optics explain, or just post a link with info so that we dont go into off topic.

 

Edited June 14, 2016 by BigBadVuk

[Tread_Head57]

19 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

 

Your best option is to use the T-72M4 for a "more balanced" type of scenario. That would give you thermals and the advantages that go along with it. IMO thermals are actually one of the prime examples where (military goods) export control actually worked very well. The Soviets didn't even realize what they were missing out until after the collapse of the Warsaw Pact.

 

Ssnake, I appreciate the suggestion, but I want to keep to realistic mid-late 80's vehicle match ups. I was under the wrong belief that the Soviets fielded TIS-equipped T-80's in the mid eighties. Still wouldn't turn away a playable T-80BV though. 

[Ssnake]

Well, the Soviets experimented with thermals, but to the best of my knowledge they were always fielded in very small numbers, so only the company commander vehicles were actually equipped with them. And their quality is said to have been rather bad. So we made the decision to revert the old SB1 simplification that gave the T-80 thermals, simply because it wasn't realistic.

 

Maybe, one day, we'll add a configurable fantasy tank.

[Panzer_Leader]

I was reading somewhere, it may even have been on this forum, that even today only approximately one-third of Russian tanks are equipped with thermal imaging. The Russians were also seen sending T-72B1s to the front during the height of the Ukraine conflict (I posted a link to the Jane's article at the time), so are still using these tanks in front line roles.

Edited June 15, 2016 by Panzer_Leader

[Vikingo]

Yep, A crewable T-72M4 in 5.0 will be the solution! 

Edited June 14, 2016 by Vikingo

[Tread_Head57]

How did the gunner's sights on the T-80BV/T-64BV differ from the T72B1? Were they all fixed magnification with relatively the same capabilities (outside of ATGM capability)? 

[Gibsonm]

For 4.x to be released.

[Marko]

4 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Well, the Soviets experimented with thermals, but to the best of my knowledge they were always fielded in very small numbers, so only the company commander vehicles were actually equipped with them. And their quality is said to have been rather bad. So we made the decision to revert the old SB1 simplification that gave the T-80 thermals, simply because it wasn't realistic.

 

Maybe, one day, we'll add a configurable fantasy tank.

 

I thought the T-80U in game lost thermal capability in the last update

I seem to remember reading you guys removed it.

As the T-80U was not equipped with it as standard.

As for a configurable tank sounds interesting.

Edited June 14, 2016 by Marko

[RENEGADE-623]

Yes they did marko, they reverted the simplification that gave the t-80 thermals, in other words, they removed the thermals.  At least that's how I read it.

[Marko]

25 minutes ago, RENEGADE-623 said:

Yes they did marko, they reverted the simplification that gave the t-80 thermals, in other words, they removed the thermals.  At least that's how I read it.

Your right I misread the post.

 

[Rad]

Sunheat

[Azure Lion]

 

[Maj.Hans]

On 6/14/2016 at 1:47 PM, Ssnake said:

Maybe, one day, we'll add a configurable fantasy tank.

 

I actually like that idea, and I've suggested something similar before.

 

First would be some NATO tanks with the older image intensifying night sights.  Since the M60A3 is going to be included, perhaps there could be a scenario editor option that would change it's thermal sights to use the NVG night vision like on the British Warrior IFV.  Then I think it would be an acceptable stand-in for the M60A1 RISE PASSIVE from the late 1970s, even if the FCS works completely different in the A3 model, the player experience would be enhanced by lacking thermals for earlier scenarios.

 

Second would be something to serve as a Leopard1A3/1A4 stand in.  My thoughts would be a scenario-editor option to add the NVG style night vision to the existing LeopardAS1, or to clone it with this feature and rename it Leopard1A4.  Yes, again, I realize that the FCS might be completely wrong, but still.

 

For the T-72, perhaps the mission editor could offer the option to convert the existing IR night sight into the much better NVG style view, or to replace it with a TIS type view?

 

I'm hoping that this stuff could be implemented through the "Optional Weapon" dialog boxes?  Ie...

 

M60A3(TTS) Optional Weapon > RISE PASSIVE

LeopardAS1 Optional Weapon > PZB 200 (Leo1A4)

Leopard 2A4 Optional Weapon > PZB 200 (Leo2A0)

T72B1 m.1984 Optional Weapon > Thermal Night Sight

and so on

[Bond_Villian]

You guys can have this ready for 4.0 right?

FOX recon vehicle

 

 

 

Edited June 18, 2016 by Bond_Villian
Humour