Jump to content

Steel Beasts: Content Wish List


Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Yeah... we had a nice but primitive automatic behavior. Then came the refinements. After the refinements, the exceptions to the rules. Then the xceptions to the exceptions, and the special cases. At some point the constant tinkering broke it to the point where nobody could read the code that was originally written, so we have to start all over. But people wanted to have things scriptable. So that's then what we concentrated on.

In the meantime we have worked on getting more (semi) autonomous behavior going, mostly to address idiotic behavior. When done we can start expanding this and adding more and more cases of automatic responses and routines. But this time we'll make sure not to end in a similar situation as before, which takes time.

 

Very understandable, especially from a code-mess point of view.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing what you come up with.  In terms of scenario building, the old system wasn't perfect, but at least I could easily organize a very simple "line of troops marches ahead of line of PC's" type attack that made a convincing representation of a whole mess of angry soviets coming after you.

 

This is something that I can and have scripted around, so it's less of a problem, although sometimes it requires more effort to ensure that I don't have all troops simply converge in the middle of the line or wedge of PC's and all end up clustered in one giant ball.

 

I think it's actually during missions that I miss having something simple and primitive at my disposal, like an easy way to go "Oh crap, we've blundered into enemy troops, everybody get out and stay 100 meters ahead of their PC!"

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 7.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Marder IFV *with* a working, vehicle mounted, MILAN-2 launcher:

1. Even IF it has to be a separate vehicle.

2. Even IF only the AI can use the missiles.

3. Even IF it has to be implemented incorrectly.

4. Even IF the whole separate vehicle is only AI.

 

In all seriousness this is really killing me that every time I make a scenario with Marders they have to be treated like glorified M113s and can't be relied upon to fight off a T-55...  I know there is a technical problem here and choices blah blah blah but C'mon, gimme some MISSILES!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rad said:

For Challenger 2. And machine gun M240 with telescope on this tank.

 

I think the Loader's weapons (Along with the Commander's use of personal weapons like sidearm and/or carbine) would be in the category of "nice to have" for me, but I think this is sadly something that the ProPE team has kinda put on the back burner for now.  Even if these don't get modeled, perhaps in the future we'll have a key command similar to the ALT+B for infantry hatches to tell our loader to get up out of the hatch and shoot.

 

Having said that, I'll second this for "some point in the future".  I'd like (as a human TC) to be able to pull out an M4/M16/G3/AK5/whatever and engage sometimes.  Perhaps this kinda thing can come along with the ability for us to shoot our own weapon when commanding an infantry squad?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
51 minutes ago, Gibsonm said:

What you really mean is several "unit number randomiser"s since almost every country has a different call sign numbering scheme.

 

A not correct, but at least somewhat immersive way would be to have the callsign templates show up on the vehciles as decals. This will not be fitting for all nations...but a somewhat doable solution.

 

The chevron for company ID is also somwhing rather widely used nowadays... add a STANAG platoon/vehicle symbol on the turret back and you'll have a solution that be workable for the game.

Given, it would not be a correct  solution for all militaries training software.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

One day, I hope for a way to fire rifles and RPG manually...SB Infantry often makes me want to cry

 

 ...true sharpshooters

Distance to targets less then 70m, AI fires 25 shots---> misses ALL

 

I hate that

SS_21_48_24.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 9:41 PM, stormrider_sp said:

I would like to have Extra Wide Formations for those desert scenarios where one company attacks on line and covers ~5km wide of ground.

 

 

Hear hear

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Rad said:

They are NOT a snipers.

This is a gross understatement ;-)

At this ranges, it would have to be possible to strip down the rifle and hit them with the rifle parts....with more accuracy then the shooting the AI was doing

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed - at 70m we should have hit something, even with a pistol, let alone a modern assault rifle with a built in scope, zeroed and used by a group of trained Infantryman (remember this is a fireteam / squad, not a lone individual) esp. after 25 rounds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gibsonm said:

Agreed - at 70m we should have hit something, even with a pistol, let alone a modern assault rifle with a built in scope, zeroed and used by a group of trained Infantryman (remember this is a fireteam / squad, not a lone individual) esp. after 25 rounds.

 

but maybe these soldier were graduates of Storm-trooper academy xD

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, geoweb35 said:

Add more missions with easy scenarios for single player, this will be perfect for new players

 While youre waiting ;)

https://www.steelbeasts.com/files/

 

And if none of that stuff takes your fancy, you can make your own scenarios in the Mission Editor

Edited by Bond_Villian
Link to post
Share on other sites

-An additional method of engagement/shell fuze combo ('type of round' in the fire support panel);  HE and DPICM mix, in the same vein as the shake and bake 'HE and Smoke mix' option that's currently present.  

- Basic complement of lines/graphics/TRPs/text that are bound to the "arty overlay" and can therefore be hidden or shown as desired.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Breakthrough7 said:

-An additional method of engagement/shell fuze combo ('type of round' in the fire support panel);  HE and DPICM mix, in the same vein as the shake and bake 'HE and Smoke mix' option that's currently present.  
 

Pretty sure that's not feasible in RL on the gun line - one fire unit firing both of those natures. Also I seem to recall (could be wrong) that HE going off in the same place is not the best for the DPICM bomblets.

 

If I'm right (I'll need to check with my Gunner colleagues) then I don't think it should be there - happy to use two fire units though (one firing HE, the other DPICM) to achieve the same result.

 

4 minutes ago, Breakthrough7 said:

- Basic complement of lines/graphics/TRPs/text that are bound to the "arty overlay" and can therefore be hidden or shown as desired.

Can't you already achieve that by the currently classification of that as "information" and just turning that overlay on or off as required?

 

A fourth switch would seem to complicate things (and use up screen real estate)?

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...