Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

[EasyE]

Leo-1C2

 

For all us Canadians....

[wildbillkelsoe]

if possible to make unbuttoned view then F5 map view stick to unbuttoned view without going back down the hatch then climbing back up. Option for stay high in turret for TC unless under fire or contact is made.

[Bond_Villian]

Ive been watching some Combat Mission AAR's recently, and the way they portray 'soft factors' is really impressive. I wish SB did more to incorporate things like morale and leadership, command and control, experience and such like.

[Hedgehog]

An edit to the behaviour where if an MBT / IFV is on a retreat route driving forwards in the absence of a "seen" threat the Turret is pointed over the back deck.

[Maj.Hans]

On 5/13/2019 at 4:23 AM, wildbillkelsoe said:

if possible to make unbuttoned view then F5 map view stick to unbuttoned view without going back down the hatch then climbing back up. Option for stay high in turret for TC unless under fire or contact is made.

 

I will +1 this, sort of...

 

I would like for the TC to return to whatever level he was in when he exits map view.

 

I would like for, while the TC is in map view, the "B" button to work only to button up.  This way if we're looking at our map when we hear gunfire we can duck inside and slam the hatch.  I leave it up to the developers to decide if this should also kick the player back out to the F1/Eye view as if you have just had an "OH !@#$" moment and dropped your map to slam the hatch.

 

I would like, personally, to be able to tell my gunner to "Fire!" and/or to "Fire and adjust!" from the map view.

On 5/12/2019 at 9:28 AM, EasyE said:

Leo-1C2

 

For all us Canadians....

 

I would +1 this, but I'm not sure if I would rather see the Leo-1C2 or a Leoaprd 2A4M model.  The 2A4M model could also be used to represent other hypothetical Leo2A4 upgrades...

[wildbillkelsoe]

On May 15, 2019 at 6:44 AM, Maj.Hans said:

 

I will +1 this, sort of...

 

I would like for the TC to return to whatever level he was in when he exits map view.

 

I would like for, while the TC is in map view, the "B" button to work only to button up.  This way if we're looking at our map when we hear gunfire we can duck inside and slam the hatch.  I leave it up to the developers to decide if this should also kick the player back out to the F1/Eye view as if you have just had an "OH !@#$" moment and dropped your map to slam the hatch.

 

I would like, personally, to be able to tell my gunner to "Fire!" and/or to "Fire and adjust!" from the map view.

 

I would +1 this, but I'm not sure if I would rather see the Leo-1C2 or a Leoaprd 2A4M model.  The 2A4M model could also be used to represent other hypothetical Leo2A4 upgrades...

+1 on all the above. I also would like to order Proceed to from the 3D view or the TC/Gunner views and not only from the map as you may know where each route takes you, especially with EPLRS installed in the A2. Btw, love your Jägdgeschwader 52 logo. Il-2 fanboy!

Edited May 17, 2019 by wildbillkelsoe

[Apocalypse 31]

6 minutes ago, wildbillkelsoe said:

+1 on all the above. I also would like to order Proceed to from the 3D view or the TC/Gunner views and not only from the map as you may know where each route takes you, especially with EPLRS installed in the A2. Btw, love your Jägdgeschwader 52 logo. Il-2 fanboy!

Try the C button?

[Apocalypse 31]

Map board

 

[Grenny]

2 hours ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Map board

 

 

But the map should be place inside this:

 

[wildbillkelsoe]

9 hours ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Try the C button?

The C button works for single routes. Multiple routes need selection from map but if possible also from the interface outside the map, assuming the TC/gunner knows where they want to go.

[Apocalypse 31]

6 hours ago, Grenny said:

 

But the map should be place inside this:

 

I use this

[Grenny]

Nice.

 The backside is useable too?

(Our are "sysmetric", so you can have the map on the front side, orders/radio-charts on the backside)

The penholders yours has are good, we had to make them ourselfes using tape

[Maj.Hans]

20 hours ago, wildbillkelsoe said:

+1 on all the above. I also would like to order Proceed to from the 3D view or the TC/Gunner views and not only from the map as you may know where each route takes you, especially with EPLRS installed in the A2. Btw, love your Jägdgeschwader 52 logo. Il-2 fanboy!

I'll +1 some of those commands for vehicles with digital maps.  It's not totally horrible, but a little awkward with the current interface to have that thing right there but not really be able to use it, but that may honestly be one of the shortcomings of PC simulation vs being in a real tank.

 

And yes, back in the IL-2 1946 days I was a quite competent virtual Bf-109 pilot.

 

[Lumituisku]

After todays TGIF I have following wishes from me, and my friend Harry

 

- More detailed AI reporting if map updates are off, maybe not voiced, but the platoon commander's could give text reports on enemy type and estimated strength at a grid location

- Possibility to configure size of message box on bottom of screen.

- And option when right clicking on a unit on the map for it to produce a sitrep, including their damage and ammo state

 

This all, would not only make Multiplayer (where Enemy map updates are off) but as well  Would all make it easier to manage company+ sized missions in single player

[Grenny]

15 minutes ago, Lumituisku said:

After todays TGIF I have following wishes from me, and my friend Harry

 

- More detailed AI reporting if map updates are off, maybe not voiced, but the platoon commander's could give text reports on enemy type and estimated strength at a grid location

- Possibility to configure size of message box on bottom of screen.

- And option when right clicking on a unit on the map for it to produce a sitrep, including their damage and ammo state

 

This all, would not only make Multiplayer (where Enemy map updates are off) but as well  Would all make it easier to manage company+ sized missions in single player

The Mapupdates are in part intended to "simulate" units giving SITREPS.

Mapupdates off, only make sense really, when you have enough players to man each vehicle, or at least each subunit.

[Mirzayev]

12 hours ago, Maj.Hans said:

I'll +1 some of those commands for vehicles with digital maps.  It's not totally horrible, but a little awkward with the current interface to have that thing right there but not really be able to use it, but that may honestly be one of the shortcomings of PC simulation vs being in a real tank.

 

I'm not seeing the issue here at all. You can give orders to your Platoon in the 3D view without ever using the map, to include "Engage" tactics, or ordering your driver to move to a specific piece of terrain in the 3D world by holding control and right clicking. Steel Beasts is one of the most user-friendly simulations I have ever played when it comes to giving precise orders quickly to a large number of units.

 

@Lumituisku Honestly, for me playing with all map updates off is unrealistic in any modern scenario, unless you have fully manned units in multiplayer and there is a deliberate focus on the quality/frequency of SITREPs. Modern AFVs go so far as to give you the option to automatically populate an enemy icon wherever you lase, with the type being determined by the weapon and ammo selected. All of this, of course, being instantly shared globally. 

 

I do agree with the ammo status though. Poor ammo management is one of the few things that'll kick a good plan right in the teeth. 

[Bond_Villian]

2 hours ago, Lumituisku said:

More detailed AI reporting

Im of the opinion that 'less is more' regarding this; the amount of reports being generated in a large scenario becomes overwhelming. Different coloured text for reports from units under your command, or some kind of filter options for platoon/company/units under command, would help to bring your attention to the information that actually matters to you

[Lumituisku]

28 minutes ago, Bond_Villian said:

or some kind of filter options for platoon/company/units under command, would help to bring your attention to the information that actually matters to you

+1    That sounds like very, very good idea. 

 

Thus I still would like to be able to adjust size of that in game text box.

[Gibsonm]

The ability to save custom choices (ammunition selections, damage choices, etc.) to unit templates.

 

For example for a while now I've been using a work around for the ASLAV25 to allow the Crew Commander to dismount and conduct a dismounted close recce, while the vehicle remains in a hide nearby.

 

This takes advantage of the ASLAV25's built in capacity for a single dismount (aka the Crew Commander). The crewman when dismounted looks like a grunt as opposed to an AFV crewman but that's just a case of "squint harder".

 

The real issue for me is while I can save the vehicle plus the dismount in a template, I can't save the associated "Damage if ..." and "Repair if ..." settings associated with the Crew Commander being on or off the vehicle, namely:

 

1. Damage if ... radio if unit is not carrying troops (i.e. While the Crew Commander is dismounted, the vehicle receives no map updates)
2. Damage if ... Commander if unit is not carrying troops (i.e. While the Crew Commander is dismounted, there is no crew commander in the vehicle to provide hints, tips "There he is", etc.)
3. Repair if ... radio if unit is carrying troops (i.e. The Crew Commander is still in the vehicle using the radios, so there are map updates)
4. Repair if ... Commander if unit is carrying troops (i.e. The Crew Commander is still in the vehicle and is providing hints, tips "There he is", etc.)

The general intent being that the vehicle stays nearby (ideally in a hide) while the crew commander is off having a look, as opposed to exploiting this to provide the player with 2 units (a vehicle and a dismount) without penalty.

 

To work around the current inability to save these states in the template, you can select multiple vehicles and apply these damages to all at the same time. There is however a slight trap in that if you check the group it doesn't look like they are applied (no ticks) but looking at individual vehicles they are displayed.

 

Edited May 25, 2019 by Gibsonm

[12Alfa]

+1

 

[Splash]

3 hours ago, Gibsonm said:

The crewman when dismounted looks like a grunt as opposed to an AFV crewman but that's just a case of "squint harder".

I can save you a little bit of premature wrinkling from squinting, if you like. 

 

Use the "Set look of carried troops" option for your affected vehicles, and set it as "AFV Crewman (US)" ... thus making any infantry you attach to the vehicle(s) look like a crewman, even when he dismounts. 
Still a little squinting involved since he's carrying an AK instead of an F88 ... but hey, baby steps.

 

You could also equip the 3D incarnation of your attached dismount/ersatz commander with binos by making him a one-member FO team using "Set unit type."

 

I believe those settings would also save in your template.

 

Just some thoughts.

[Gibsonm]

I'm not too worried about the squinting, its the effects I'm worried about (namely the lack of the Crew Commander on the vehicle).

 

However you are correct.

 

The "set look of carried Troops" can be determined by vehicle (another fiddly thing to mess around with for a 30+ vehicle ASLAV Sqn but anyway).

 

Also FWIW, the one man Infantry squad already comes with binos since he is the "squad leader". The other advantage is, they don't have the FO party mil symbol or indeed some super human ability to call in artillery - otherwise people would be dismounting them to increase the number of FOs on a given side.

 

My example scenario attached with a Callsign "12" having a mix of Grunt and Crewman dismounts. Notice the AFV crewman has binos (normally worn around the neck):

 

 

ASLAV25 dismounts test 4_023.sce

Edited May 26, 2019 by Gibsonm
Updated to reflect the ability to set different looks "by vehicle type"

[Splash]

I don't think it's that fiddly, since you can set the look of carried troops for one ASLAV-25 on your map and then apply it to all vehicles of that type with a single click.

But whatever. It was just a suggestion. Keep the grunts if you like.

 

Regarding the binos, I was referring to the 3D model and animation. (Pic below) Of course the player has access to the dismount's optics via the N key in either case. But your points about the icons and artillery-calling powers are well taken.

 

In exploring your test .sce though, I was puzzled by how the ASLAV-25s ignore the "damage if/repair if" settings when combined into a unit ("12"). So I guess the ability to "dismount" a "commander" only works when the vehicle is unattached? Or have I found a bug?

 

I also see that your ASLAV-PC vehicles in "12" have the same damage applied to the commander when the vehicle is unattached and the grunts dismount. That's not intended behavior, is it?  I tried editing the .sce to remove the damage logic from just the PC's, but was unable to make it stick when the unit was re-combined. Maybe another bug? 

 

Separately, since your ASLAV-25 dismount has the same callsign as his vehicle, the route logic doesn't seem to work. So you can't really script this for AI, can you? It's still a nice training tool for player-controlled vehicles, though.
 

 

[Gibsonm]

At the risk of derailing this thread:

 

2 hours ago, Splash said:

I don't think it's that fiddly, since you can set the look of carried troops for one ASLAV-25 on your map and then apply it to all vehicles of that type with a single click.

 

Noted, I'd forgotten that button.

 

2 hours ago, Splash said:

In exploring your test .sce though, I was puzzled by how the ASLAV-25s ignore the "damage if/repair if" settings when combined into a unit ("12"). So I guess the ability to "dismount" a "commander" only works when the vehicle is unattached? Or have I found a bug?

The damage is depicted if you say dismount the Crew Commander from "12A" and then detach "12A" from the rest of "12". I've no idea why its not represented when they are a collective unit.

 

If all six are travelling together I'd probably not see a requirement to dismount a crew commander - there's a bunch of grunts in the PC that can do close recce much better.

 

2 hours ago, Splash said:

I also see that your ASLAV-PC vehicles in "12" have the same damage applied to the commander when the vehicle is unattached and the grunts dismount. That's not intended behavior, is it?  I tried editing the .sce to remove the damage logic from just the PC's, but was unable to make it stick when the unit was re-combined. Maybe another bug?

Perhaps I inadvertently did it to all six vehicles and not just the 4 ASLAV25s?

 

I'll have a look.

 

Yes I'd applied the Damages / Repairs to all six vehicles.

2 hours ago, Splash said:

Separately, since your ASLAV-25 dismount has the same callsign as his vehicle, the route logic doesn't seem to work. So you can't really script this for AI, can you? It's still a nice training tool for player-controlled vehicles, though.

Ah hadn't checked that.

 

I suspect I could just change it to embark if troops or something, instead of call sign based.

 

The routes etc. were a demo / first cut that worked, but then I changed them to make the dismounts match the vehicle (so you could track who goes where) perhaps that broke the scripting.

 

Edited May 26, 2019 by Gibsonm

[Ssnake]

2 hours ago, Splash said:

Separately, since your ASLAV-25 dismount has the same callsign as his vehicle, the route logic doesn't seem to work. 

Yeah, that was a pretty bad bug since about the dawn of time. Cost us a good while to fix that bloody thing. Won't happen anymore with 4.1 (or late version 3.5s, for that matter).