Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

[Ssnake]

#1, version 5

#2, version 5

#3, version 5

#4, can you give me an example where this isn't the case?

#5, version 5 - eventually (but probably not initially)

[Parachuteprone]

I would like to be able to place a group of APC's . Highlight them and "set quality" without having to dismount all the troops and set their quality individually and then mount them again.

Even though vehicles cannot be set a quality level themselves, it would be nice if we could set quality of the units inside them.

The only way we can set quality as a group is to select "just infantry units".

It would be nice to be able to set quality for tanks as well for that matter.

You can lower the difficulty but then if you have more than two sides all the other sides will have their skills lowered or raised to the same level.

Thanks

 

[Apocalypse 31]

2 minutes ago, Parachuteprone said:

I would like to be able to place a group of APC's . Highlight them and "set quality" without having to dismount all the troops and set their quality individually and then mount them again.

Why not just have a Quality feature for the entire side? Much like uniform/appearance

[Parachuteprone]

Just now, Apocalypse 31 said:

Why not just have a Quality feature for the entire side? Much like uniform/appearance

 

Exactly, that was  just my long winded way of saying the same sort of thing

Hey, maybe the people at work are right !

I'll never admit it to them though Lol !

 

 

[Thorn]

8 hours ago, Ssnake said:

#1, version 5

#2, version 5

#3, version 5

#4, can you give me an example where this isn't the case?

#5, version 5 - eventually (but probably not initially)

Okay, semi-disregard #4. I never really paid enough attention to all the vehicles until I just tested it out just now. I thought Heat Blur was only for the player vehicle and not all vehicles. But now that I think about it, that could be an option that could be added to the settings in Version 5.0 - something that lets the user define how many vehicles Heat Blur works for. I'm not sure of the performance impact of all vehicles having Heat Blur on is? But I'd assume less vehicles with it on would improve performance some? Right now the option is either on/off in the settings. It could be refined to allow users to select "player unit heat blur only, player platoon vehicles only (no matter how many are in their platoon), 10 nearest vehicles only (including player vehicle), 20 nearest vehicles, and ALL vehicles. 

Also, not sure if this is a thing or not as I haven't played in a cold environment yet, but could little random puffs of human breath be added to ground units in cold environments? Especially if they are not wearing face coverings? I know snipers look for any little natural or unnatural details like that to spot enemy locations. Maybe add some guards and civilians that randomly smoke cigarettes and give off smoke and light in the dark? Little details like this are real world things that can be useful for spotting locations and it all helps to make the world look and feel more alive. 

 

Also again, not sure if it's a thing or not as I haven't been playing long, but are there chimneys that emit smoke from houses or factory buildings with smoke stacks? If not I'd like to request that. And if it's added, a setting in the graphics settings for it should be added similar to how I mentioned how Heat Blur could be refined to help reduce performance impact on weaker systems. Also, I'd think that hot chimneys or smoke stacks emitting smoke or even hot breath from human soldiers or civilians would show up and stand out in thermal imaging. 

 

  
 

Edited September 11, 2022 by Thorn

[Ssnake]

2 hours ago, Thorn said:

But now that I think about it, that could be an option that could be added to the settings in Version 5.0 - something that lets the user define how many vehicles Heat Blur works for. I'm not sure of the performance impact of all vehicles having Heat Blur on is?

We're confident that the performance penalty is so minimal that a binary switch is sufficient.

2 hours ago, Thorn said:

Also again, not sure if it's a thing or not as I haven't been playing long, but are there chimneys that emit smoke from houses or factory buildings with smoke stacks?

Yes, it's a random thing. Some do, some don't.

[Thorn]

2 hours ago, Ssnake said:

We're confident that the performance penalty is so minimal that a binary switch is sufficient.

Yes, it's a random thing. Some do, some don't.

 

Thanks for the reply! I can remember back in the day when heat blur in DCS Black Shark (the original) had major performance impacts on my system's performance but that was so long ago now I figured most systems that are relatively modern are able to handle it without much fuss. Thanks for the clarity on that though as well as the reply regarding smoke stacks/chimneys. 

[Gibsonm]

The ability for the Mission Editor to "jump to" a specific time stamp.

 

I'm currently testing a mission with a wet gap crossing.

 

I'm currently running the mission for 40 minutes or so to get to the crossing, just to find that the AVLB refuses to lay the bridge.

 

I then end the test, relocate the AVLB route some small distance away (< 10m) and then restart the test, to wait another 40mins to see if its now in the "right" place.

 

Being able to start at H+35 would be a boon.

 

Edited September 12, 2022 by Gibsonm

[Ssnake]

...save the mission in progress, then load that one for the tests?

Sure, it's still the 35min wait time initially. If you don't want that, save the mission under a test name, move the AVLB close to the crossing site, then test the routing from there. Once you know the perfect solution, change the original scenario accordingly. (e.g. in a second Steel Beasts window)

[Assassin 7]

M1A2- Arats option

            TUSK option

            CROWS 2- Option

            AI to Fire within Ballistic Solution Ranges instead of given Ammunition Wiki Ranges such as M829A3 is set to 4000m but the actual SEP Ballistic Ranges for Main Gun is 200-5000m. AI will identify but not engage after 4000m. AI smarter engaging too such as I enter the external view and back up the aI shoots the ground even though we are clearly out of the LOS. Would like for this to be investigated and fixed on all current SB Vehicles.
 

older bugs with PE customer Vehicles, Bugs to be fixed such as SEP FCS bugs reported. More realistic Engagements Times to be investigated and implemented on all Vehicles. AI reactions times to be investigated as some seem to have extremely incredible spotting abilities, an example of this is the Commander skews me to a target and I can’t even see it but AI is telling me to fire through the woods. Multiplayer to be investigated as since this release we have had several players dsyncing more often. 
 

Thanks
 

Edited September 12, 2022 by Assassin 7

[Apocalypse 31]

31 minutes ago, Assassin 7 said:

M1A2- Arats option

            TUSK option

            CROWS 2- Option

            AI to Fire within Ballistic Solution Ranges instead of given Ammunition Wiki Ranges such as M829A3 is set to 4000m but the actual SEP Ballistic Ranges for Main Gun is 200-5000m. AI will identify but not engage after 4000m. AI smarter engaging too such as I enter the external view and back up the aI shoots the ground even though we are clearly out of the LOS. Would like for this to be investigated and fixed on all current SB Vehicles.
 

older bugs with PE customer Vehicles, Bugs to be fixed such as SEP FCS bugs reported. More realistic Engagements Times to be investigated and implemented on all Vehicles. AI reactions times to be investigated as some seem to have extremely incredible spotting abilities, an example of this is the Commander skews me to a target and I can’t even see it but AI is telling me to fire through the woods. Multiplayer to be investigated as since this release we have had several players dsyncing more often. 
 

Thanks
 

I just want a zoom out button on the FCS, like real life, so I don't have to cycle 5 times to get 1 zoom level backwards.

[Rad]

Hellfire

[Thorn]

A cassette player? Players put their own mp3 or wav files into a folder and name them "Track01-10" with in-game cassette player popup of sorts (and/or assigned hotkeys) that lets you "Play, Fast Forward, Rewind, Skip Track, Previous Track." Of course it would have to come with the obvious warning not to share copyrighted files on this site but players could use their own files since all you'd be giving them is the tool to play their own music with in the sim. 

 

It could be useful for training purposes if someone like an instructor lets say wanted to record their voice to give instructions for their trainees to listen while performing the tasks the instructor gave to them via wav file format. So, an instructor could tell someone, "Once you load up into the mission, first thing to do is start up the cassette player. From there, follow my recorded instructions."  

 

If implemented it would nice to have an audio section for it that lets you raise or lower the output volume independent from other output sounds in the sim. 

 

This is actually a feature in the DCS World F-14b Tomcat module.  
 

Edited September 12, 2022 by Thorn

[Apocalypse 31]

50 minutes ago, Thorn said:

It could be useful for training purposes if someone like an instructor lets say wanted to record their voice to give instructions for their trainees to listen while performing the tasks the instructor gave to them via wav file format. So, an instructor could tell someone, "Once you load up into the mission, first thing to do is start up the cassette player. From there, follow my recorded instructions."  

There's already a media player in the Mission Editor that lets you embed/play .wav files during missions.

[Gibsonm]

2 hours ago, Thorn said:

It could be useful for training purposes if someone like an instructor lets say wanted to record their voice to give instructions for their trainees to listen while performing the tasks the instructor gave to them via wav file format. So, an instructor could tell someone, "Once you load up into the mission, first thing to do is start up the cassette player. From there, follow my recorded instructions." 

 

Sure but certainly in my experience, the Instructor is in the classroom / on the LAN so they can talk to the training audience, either using their mouth or using the radio for distributed sessions.

 

Instructors aren't really paid to just sit in the room and listen to recordings of their voice.

 

[Gibsonm]

13 hours ago, Ssnake said:

...save the mission in progress, then load that one for the tests?

Sure, it's still the 35min wait time initially. If you don't want that, save the mission under a test name, move the AVLB close to the crossing site, then test the routing from there. Once you know the perfect solution, change the original scenario accordingly. (e.g. in a second Steel Beasts window)

 

Thanks for that!

 

I was too far into the trees to think about the forest.

[Thorn]

Not sure if it's already a thing or not? If so, I haven't found out how to do it if it is. But it would be nice to be able to use the mouse wheel to zoom in/out while viewing the player's vehicle from observation view. I'm used to that in other simulators so I find myself constantly scrolling my mouse wheel up and down in observation view with no effect which is driving me nuts LOL! I keep doing it expecting a different result each time. According to Vaas (Far Cry 3) I meet the definition of insanity. 😲😫🤣😭🤣

 

 

 

[Mirzayev]

6 hours ago, Thorn said:

Not sure if it's already a thing or not? If so, I haven't found out how to do it if it is. But it would be nice to be able to use the mouse wheel to zoom in/out while viewing the player's vehicle from observation view. I'm used to that in other simulators so I find myself constantly scrolling my mouse wheel up and down in observation view with no effect which is driving me nuts LOL! 

 

Press F8 again in the observer's view to go to the overhead view (if enabled in the scenario by the author.) This provides an 'RTS-ish' view where you can use the scroll wheel to zoom to your hearts delight. 

 

 

[Rad]

ATF Dingo 2

[Grenny]

51 minutes ago, Rad said:

ATF Dingo 2

Already in game.

So your point is?

[mpow66m]

With the peri?

[Grenny]

23 minutes ago, mpow66m said:

With the peri?

He talked about that"ATF Dingo 2"

That is already in game...

 

And on the picture, that is a radar system. He said nothing about radars...

[Volcano]

Regarding the M1A2, the SHIFT+N to zoom out of thermal sight is do-able, as well as the 5000m extension of M829A3 engagement range. It's a known issue that we just haven't got around to, but the former issue might be more do-able now that the T-72B3 behaves that way (and the latter might be very easy to do, actually, but an investigation is required to what approach to take).

 

The stuff about 'fixing all the other M1A2 bugs', well, not likely to happen given that we have over 3000+ known bugs and enhancements. From time to time something might be do-able, but every single vehicle has "bugs" in regards to the cut off of where we choose to stop simulating. The MRS update missing from the M1A1 for example -- is that a bug or an enhancement?  Non functional driver's position (no gauges) or non-functional switches in other positions? Bug or enhancement? Challenger 2's non-functional HESH ballistic computer behavior? Bug or enhancement? Who knows what will happen going forward, but the point is (as mentioned before) it's not like things are being intentionally overlooked.

 

Regarding the AI shooting the ground, yes of course -- the best thing to do here is to provide a test scenario in the Support Forum that reproduces the situation (that isn't a full blown scenario) and we can very easily do something about it. It's not one thing that causes it, its a multitude of conditions that occur (which are usually vehicle specific), so its not like we can just change one thing to fix it in every case. A particular case has to be observed, then dissected. The "AI" consists of a ton of conditions and variables colliding with each other chaotically and then "something happens" (that is basically the AI in any game, in summary). 😳 But at least internally when this is observed, we are usually able to make a new empty scenario, go to the same spot on the map, and place the same firing vehicle and same target vehicle in the same positions (some screwing around with it required) to reproduce the situation and have addressed them as we become aware of them. 

 

Regarding the AI being able to spot things by seeing a singular pixel through the trees, or whatever, again if a test scenario can be provided then we can evaluate it. This is one of those areas that AI is particularly good at. We don't want them completely brain dead at spotting heat signatures or back illuminated (skyline) silhouettes through woods for example, but we also don't want them seeing something the user would never ever see. This is nearly impossible to balance. 

 

 

[Assassin 7]

15 hours ago, Volcano said:

The stuff about 'fixing all the other M1A2 bugs', well, not likely to happen given that we have over 3000+ known bugs and enhancements. From time to time something might be do-able, but every single vehicle has "bugs" in regards to the cut off of where we choose to stop simulating. The MRS update missing from the M1A1 for example -- is that a bug or an enhancement?  Non functional driver's position (no gauges) or non-functional switches in other positions? Bug or enhancement? Challenger 2's non-functional HESH ballistic computer behavior? Bug or enhancement? Who knows what will happen going forward, but the point is (as mentioned before) it's not like things are being intentionally overlooked.

As I understand this, the basic thing that I was asking referred to the M1A2 as far as subsystems goes is the FCS modes to be fixed or at least work as they do work in the Leopards. I understand that there are many enhancements such as the MRS systems that you probably already have in your military version that the PE doesn’t have (not complaining). The point of the other wishes which was mentioned before this last patch which I did notice a difference with the AI spotting abilities and reaction times which are more realistic now. Before this patch they were extremely fast at spotting you and would engage you rather unrealistically fast. I’m not seeing it now. I never said that you guys are overlooking the bugs. Thanks for the patch and I will submit a bug report if I’m still getting calls to targets I can’t see. Also I’m glad to hear that something may be done about the solution ranges, looking forward to that when it comes

Edited September 16, 2022 by Assassin 7
Grammer

[mpow66m]

8 hours ago, Grenny said:

He talked about that"ATF Dingo 2"

That is already in game...

 

And on the picture, that is a radar system. He said nothing about radars...

Ahhhh thought it was a peri.yes the Dingo is in there.