Jump to content
Azure Lion

Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

Recommended Posts

RFI

New Waypoint action options

  • Divide Unit
  • Attach To (only valid for units that starts the sim as one joined unit and is later divided pr. waypoint action, thus they get their former wp callsign)

That way you can have 1/1 go left around a forrest and 1/2 go right around the forrest and then join them up in a team again after that. Opens up a lot of possibilities with AI's

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Maj.Hans said:

 

Crew-able M1TTB, even if using an "ersatz" interior or no interior at all.

+1

This has been commented on before.

Think its a good idea,

But how it would be implemented is another question. 

So many different fire control and sighting systems.

Not to mention thermal systems ballistic computers ETC.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finer control of map updates would be nice, with options to set friendly and enemy map updates:

  • For a players occupied vehicle. The only enemies shown on the map would be ones your vehicle has detected.
  • For a players occupied unit (platoon or section.) As above, map only shows enemies your platoon or section has detected.
  • For a players owned units. Again, map only showing enemies that units you own have detected.
  • For command vehicles only. Then only the CO vehicles, or maybe only command vehicles like the M113G4-DK OPMV, would have full map updates.

Share this post


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

+1

This has been commented on before.

Think its a good idea,

But how it would be implemented is another question. 

So many different fire control and sighting systems.

Not to mention thermal systems ballistic computers ETC.

 

 

Since it is a "WHAT IF FANTASY TANK"...

 

Drivers position: A Leo2 with reverse cameras

Gunner position: M1A2 fire control system

TC's position: M1A2 GPSE/CITV setup with a periscope array.

 

The main part of this vehicle that I am interested in is the auto-loader with a large number of rounds on tap, to use as a stepping stone to introduce newbies to the concept of limited ammo.  The frequent "stop to reload the ready rack" thing seems to drive them insane and has, as a matter of fact, driven every one I've tried to get into SB away from it.  Since we still don't have a difficulty option to make "everything" ready short of completely unlimited ammo, this is my next best option.

Share this post


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

Finer control of map updates would be nice, with options to set friendly and enemy map updates:

  • For a players occupied vehicle. The only enemies shown on the map would be ones your vehicle has detected.
  • For a players occupied unit (platoon or section.) As above, map only shows enemies your platoon or section has detected.
  • For a players owned units. Again, map only showing enemies that units you own have detected.
  • For command vehicles only. Then only the CO vehicles, or maybe only command vehicles like the M113G4-DK OPMV, would have full map updates.

Also a radio contact report filter, or at least different coloured text for contact reports from units in your company/under your command etc.

The frequency and amount of contact reports, waypoint reports etc can become unhelpful and frustrating

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Rotareneg said:

Finer control of map updates would be nice, with options to set friendly and enemy map updates:

  • For a players occupied vehicle. The only enemies shown on the map would be ones your vehicle has detected.
  • For a players occupied unit (platoon or section.) As above, map only shows enemies your platoon or section has detected.
  • For a players owned units. Again, map only showing enemies that units you own have detected.
  • For command vehicles only. Then only the CO vehicles, or maybe only command vehicles like the M113G4-DK OPMV, would have full map updates.

Happy for these to be options but the whole idea of a Battlefield Management System (BlueFor tracker, FBCB2 , etc.) is to provide as much situational awareness as possible.

 

For any western vehicle (M1 family, Bradley, CR2, Warrior, Leopard, Marder, etc.) from the early 2000s, onwards the default for this should be "map updates on".

 

e.g. I lase an enemy tank - that enemy appears on the screen of every tank in the Battlegroup.

 

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, Maj.Hans said:

 

Since it is a "WHAT IF FANTASY TANK"...

 

Drivers position: A Leo2 with reverse cameras

Gunner position: M1A2 fire control system

TC's position: M1A2 GPSE/CITV setup with a periscope array.

 

The main part of this vehicle that I am interested in is the auto-loader with a large number of rounds on tap, to use as a stepping stone to introduce newbies to the concept of limited ammo.  The frequent "stop to reload the ready rack" thing seems to drive them insane and has, as a matter of fact, driven every one I've tried to get into SB away from it.  Since we still don't have a difficulty option to make "everything" ready short of completely unlimited ammo, this is my next best option.

+1

For a Fantasy tank say maybe a T-14 or a M1 TTB with a fire control based on real world advance fire control systems.

Edited by Marko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mortar pits,concertina wire deployed as roads are smaller bunker emplacements for the grunts...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If i'm not mistaken, Esims goes off of actual Vehicle data. I agree it would be pretty cool to have a make up T-14 or fake systems for the TTB. But I doubt it would happened anytime soon or at all. But could be wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Assassin 7 said:

If i'm not mistaken, Esims goes off of actual Vehicle data. I agree it would be pretty cool to have a make up T-14 or fake systems for the TTB. But I doubt it would happened anytime soon or at all. But could be wrong

M1TTB is probably based on M1A1 FCS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, delta6 said:

Mortar pits,concertina wire deployed as roads are smaller bunker emplacements for the grunts...

There already is wire - three different types. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Map editor adition

 

The opposite "Wadi"

 

The ability to construct simple blocking berms - just like a wadi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Assassin 7 said:

If i'm not mistaken, Esims goes off of actual Vehicle data. I agree it would be pretty cool to have a make up T-14 or fake systems for the TTB. But I doubt it would happened anytime soon or at all. But could be wrong

I agree its very unlikely.

But giving the subject some thought.

I can actually see training value in having a opfor tank that's superior or even a match for the best western Tanks.

It would require a rethink in how say as a example. your Conducting a hasty defense or attack.

If your opfor could (in theory anyway) out range your AFV  allegedly the T-14 can spot and engage targets out to 8 km

And a new tube lunched ATGM with a even greater range  ( new 3UBK21 Sprinter ATGM with an effective range up to 12 km developed specifically for it.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Marko said:

I agree its very unlikely.

But giving the subject some thought.

I can actually see training value in having a opfor tank that's superior or even a match for the best western Tanks.

It would require a rethink in how say as a example. your Conducting a hasty defense or attack.

If your opfor could (in theory anyway) out range your AFV  allegedly the T-14 can spot and engage targets out to 8 km

And a new tube lunched ATGM with a even greater range  ( new 3UBK21 Sprinter ATGM with an effective range up to 12 km developed specifically for it.)

I  serious doubt it as far as the T-14 goes. 

https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-analysis-on-the-Russian-T-14-Armata-tank-How-does-it-compare-with-western-tanks-like-the-M-1-Abrams-Leopard-2-and-Challenger-2-It-seems-very-light-compared-with-current-generation-MBTs

Edited by Assassin 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to the whole "make something up" and "take a guess" remarks about the M1TTB, T-14, etc, I just want to point out that a simulator CAN have fictional or guesstimated elements without suddenly becoming a Sci-Fi fantasy game.

 

Every armor array and every penetrator featured in ProPE that is not modeled based on a complete technical data package and test results, is an estimate.  Nothing more, nothing less.  And that's OK, because we don't KNOW, so we do the best we can to make a good representation.

 

If the dev team throws together an interface for the M1TTB and sticks a line in the release notes that says "We really had no data, but this is a plausible way it might actually work, so when you design scenarios remember that this isn't intended as a high fidelity model" that's fine.  It's not like they just added an X-Wing or a Tie Fighter...  One of the great things about simulators is that you CAN try things out to see how they might work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I Agree - with Time being the limiting factor in development. I wanted to give the TTB an "M1A1+"  fire control system, but we just didn't get around it, yet (and we won't by June).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ssnake said:

I Agree - with Time being the limiting factor in development. I wanted to give the TTB an "M1A1+"  fire control system, but we just didn't get around it, yet (and we won't by June).

What about allowing PE helicopters the same functionality as the PRO version?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

What about allowing PE helicopters the same functionality as the PRO version?

Map size would be a issue with implementing such a feature in the pro version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see vehicle’s MRS systems implemented into PE. Also it would be interesting to have the crew dazed say after a hard hit causing damage. Example would be under damage report “Gunner dazed” with a count down until he regains his awareness and if your in that position then your screen dims in and out as if your in a daze. Just ideas 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Assassin 7 said:

 Also it would be interesting to have the crew dazed say after a hard hit causing damage. Example would be under damage report “Gunner dazed” with a count down until he regains his awareness and if your in that position then your screen dims in and out as if your in a daze. Just ideas 

 

yes. crews teleport to each other's positions instantly, which means that vehicles can recover quickly from serious hits and continue to fight. this would mean a tank like a t-55 has an advantage over a t-72 by virtue of having more crew members which can instantly move to the gunner's pos to resume fighting- the effect is as if the gunner wasn't knocked out at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

request a distance script in the mission editor

 

eg.,  this unit surrenders if this unit can see at least x enemy forces within 50 meters  (100 meters, 500 meters, etc)

 

currently there is no practical way to script a unit to behave in this way based on what it sees or doesn't see within a certain distance, only if it can see opponents or friendly units anywhere or in a specified zone- so it's difficult to script a certain behavior

based on finer scales rather than broad regions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Marko said:

Map size would be a issue with implementing such a feature in the pro version.

how so?

 

The AH1 fires TOW's....they are no different than ground TOWs. 4k range

 

Doctrinal rules for employment of attack aviation still apply. A squad of infantry fighting in a 1km x 1km isn't going to get air support. 

Edited by Apocalypse 31

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

how so?

 

The AH1 fires TOW's....they are no different than ground TOWs. 4k range

 

Doctrinal rules for employment of attack aviation still apply. A squad of infantry fighting in a 1km x 1km isn't going to get air support.  

...it does, In Call of duty!  😎

Share this post


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...