Jump to content
Azure Lion

Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Technically, we're selling you SB Pro PE, a homework tool for our army customers who want to teach officer cadets and junior NCOs tactics with the help of a virtual simulation. Having been an officer cadet myself some thirty years ago I found (combined army combat) tactics to be an interesting and engaging topic so I was enthusiastic to seize the opportunity when a programmer asked me for my input to work on his "tank game".

Steel Beasts 1.0 is what happens when you lock an electronics engineer with programming skills and a C++ compiler and a tank soldier into a room for four years. This we designed for gamers (and maybe it shows that we weren't the most talented game designers ever since the elements of a training tool for tank officers are shining through in many places).

Steel Beasts 2.0 we then named "Steel Beasts Professional" because we were contacted by a number of defense market related customers if we could adopt our tank game to their specific requirements. And while we were working on that a number of Steel Beasts 1.0 players demanded that we make something available to them as well, but that meant that we had to adapt the scope, and the licensing conditions so that we could release it at a price that was near the upper edge of what might still pass as a consumer price level while it would not cannibalize the sales of the classroom version. And we figured that if we could offer our military customers a product variant that they could hand out to their students for "tactics homework" we might serve the needs of two customer groups with a single derivative product.

 

I remember well that in the first five to seven years at least I tried to hammer home in all our public communications that we did not market SB Pro PE as a game. To me, a game is designed to give preference, with every design decision, to entertainment value. The prime justification of a game, its purpose is to entertain. You can design a game with educational elements, but even for an educational game you want entertainment first, and education only where it doesn't take away the fun parts.

 

Steel Beasts Professional is a training tool. That means, it's designed to give preference to educational value. Whenever we have to choose, we go for educational. Entertainment value is acceptable as long as it isn't detrimental to the educational aspect.

 

The question of a user interface featuring a Lasso function and ad-hoc grouping of units like pioneered in Dune, Command & Conquer, or Starcarft is of course none that falls into the "fun" or "educational" category, that's purely a matter of good user interface. To that extent I'm entirely agnostic about this. But we also have to think about priorities. For the last six years that priority was the new terrain engine (and the new HE/fragmentation model in the last three), generally, improving the fidelity level of simulation results.

The next major topic is a redesign of the GUI framework so that in the future any work on the GUI is less maintenance intensive, easier to work with, supports very high and ultra high screen resolutions. And while we're working on that we will certainly review established practices. I do not intend to axe everything just because it's old. But I think we're witnessing right now the impact of a change in the handling of map files and the repercussions that it has with respect to established workflows and scenario design procedures that UI changes are not something universally positive. We want to be careful with this.

I'm glad that this product was and still is under continuous development with future projects and goals already set. The new handling of maps is a big step forward in the right direction; the repercussion can't be judged in the short term. Some people are easier to adapt to changes, some people just need more time. The GUI framework, just like the new map handling, in my opinion, have to prioritize always its long term benefits even if at the cost of some short term pain. We all had to learn to handle the sim once in the first place, in fact we are all still learning it, more so after every new update. Don't be too careful I'd say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someday,

a while from now,

distant and in the future,

over the horizon,

down the road, maybe,

by a twist of fate,

after a massive influx of capitol from an mysterious billionaire,

Pro PE comes to Mac OS 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CalAB said:

Someday,

a while from now,

distant and in the future,

over the horizon,

down the road, maybe,

by a twist of fate,

after a massive influx of capitol from an mysterious billionaire,

Pro PE comes to Mac OS 

Or even, dare it be said...Linux?  I, for one, am sure tired of Microsquash...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wish list:

 

1. M-48 both US and Israeli variants.

2. M-60 A1/A2 and Israeli variants

3. Strykers

4. Israeli M-3 Half Tracks

5. Israeli Shermans

6. Amtracs

7. Korean, Japanese and Chinese AFVs.

 

Its a lot of work to make vehicles playable, so I would be content to just be able to control the above.

 

More work on infantry and urban terrain. It would be nice to have multi level buildings and the ability for the infantry to occupy upper levels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, db_zero said:

multi level buildings and the ability for the infantry to occupy upper levels

Can't they do that today and for a while?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, thewood said:

Can't they do that today and for a while?

Yes.

 

Applying different tactics will determine which floors they occupy first.

 

All in the Wiki.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keyboard shortcut to activate the "detail camera" (great feature) without going to the menu , thanks! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Would it be possible to save the group selections in the saved tactic? It is a little tired to make all groups again everytime we want to try again. 

 

And also, When I make routes from control points in the previous map (or real time) and I make a route, I would like to connect the group to that routes, so all the group follows that route. Now is imposible as only the first vehicle selected is the one that follows even I put to all the group the group route to that initial point.

 

It would be very interesting also that we could manage easily group formations and speeds. right now appears lots of routes that has to be managed manually, and I suppose when we are in multiplayer, several players can do it, but in single is a nightmare.

 

Thanks!

 

Edited by Japo32

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Japo32 said:

It would be very interesting also that we could manage easily group formations and speeds. right now appears lots of routes that has to be managed manually, and I suppose when we are in multiplayer, several players can do it, but in single is a nightmare.

This has been discussed on the previous 2 pages of this thread. 'Preset groups' and 'copy and paste' routes being the options at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Japo32 said:

And also, When I make routes from control points in the previous map (or real time) and I make a route, I would like to connect the group to that routes, so all the group follows that route. Now is imposible as only the first vehicle selected is the one that follows even I put to all the group the group route to that initial point.

If i understand your question properly; i think you can get the desired result by creating a 'preset group' and connecting the group to a waypoint that has a route leading from it.

EDIT; I just tested it and this does not work- the group does not 'merge' to the route. I thought i read somewhere that it worked that way now, but it doesnt

Edited by Bond_Villian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 7/4/2019 at 5:14 PM, Ssnake said:

 

With version 4.1, if you connect a preset group to a common waypoint from which a (road) March route starts, they will now start a more or less orderly convoy movement. Then, at the end of the March route (if no other route follows and no tactic has been set, the group will restore the formation (relative positioning to each other) that they had when they started the convoy movement.

@Japo32

Try this

Edited by Bond_Villian
emphasis added

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, so connection has to be made in a road, or a march route option only? Will try anyway...

 

I didn't know about the previous pages (I cannot read all of the wishing pages to see if was asked or not previously, but is good to know other people ask the same). 

I think there is a lot of improvement with preset groups. I think if the group could be graphically assigned as a box with all the content inside of it and you would open it with double mouse click and break it with shift+double click (or control+....); you could apply that that special unit, or box or whatever, same speed, formations, etc... 

I think this is important, to make single player manage possible in large scale battles (I know here are aliens that know how to manage all by themselves... but you know, we are rookies and we would like to spend more time in the 3D than in the map (which is the most important part of SB)

 

Also, please remember the option to save groups already set in the planification files (Pln). Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'd described in the Release Notes, I even updated the section for the 4.159 version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw the movement of the group when you press the Control+ key before the click mouse button. And I tried but didn't work also. Mabye I have to click one point before the already created single route to make coincidence of all routes to that point. Didn't try that. But still I would need to change in group the speeds and formation because all the lines are in the same position. Are not a single line, but all of all the units that form the group in the same exact position, and each one has to be modified independently. Something not easy to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Ok, I tried the march route, not in a road, and they didn't follow. The group is disperse when I connect to the single route. It would be nice to improve all the groups thing. It would give us the option to manage great number of units very easily.

I know this example is a game, so please don't tell me again that. But some good things can be imitated from Total War:

 

 

Edited by Japo32

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Japo32 said:

Ok, I tried the march route, not in a road, and they didn't follow. The group is disperse when I connect to the single route. It would be nice to improve all the groups thing. It would give us the option to manage great number of units very easily.

How to determine formation, tactic ect. How to adapt large unit formations to the terrain?

 

This is no small feat you ask for...

Edited by Grenny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose it is not easy, but they really do with the platoon formations when they move through woods. I know the AI won't never do it perfectly but at least they will save us from lot of micromanagement, and orders would be more similar as real life where a commander would say little orders to manage lots of units. Each right-mouse menu selection is like a phrase-order in real world... so communications would be endless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Japo32 said:

I suppose it is not easy, but they really do with the platoon formations when they move through woods. I know the AI won't never do it perfectly but at least they will save us from lot of micromanagement, and orders would be more similar as real life where a commander would say little orders to manage lots of units. Each right-mouse menu selection is like a phrase-order in real world... so communications would be endless.

Then this would be quiete gamey.

If you want to have steelbeasts as "real" time "strategy", you need delay between order and effect in the world...simply clicking a company and have it move would be totaly wrong.

In that sense having to chose and order every single platoon is more "realistic".

 

What SB does with platoon formations is ok(ish) for 60% of the cases, and off 40% the time....don't use it a reference

For a company size unit it get even more complicated. Different terrains and different situations warrant different manouvres and movementpattern...to get this done you'd need "real" AI, not just a computer game control software.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Then, the people that don't like that don't use it. When I have a flight simulator I can fly outside the plane or inside in the cockpit. I choose to fly inside always. 

If esimgames makes those tools, and there are people that don't like it, then don't use it to train as real life. I don't see problem with groups and orders simplified with real life. I am faster saying what I want than clicking over the units and choosing the orders from those menus. Even in real life I doubd that the new units are not connected via link as planes are, so you can give the units real time postions on a map. If it is not now, it will be soon.

But anyway. Everytime I propose something to be improved, there are always complains from old users about, those changes are more arcade for them. DCS has the option to choose simplistic flight dynamics and easy game method... We don't argue with the users that want to use those arcade modes. We just use the most simulation ones. No problem the coexistence of both systems. 

 

Here not. Here there is a fear of movements that may seem to be as arcade ones. This is a wishlist. If there are people that don't like those wishes ok, but I want to ask for them. Maybe the 90% of the people here wouldn't like them, but then I realize why when I look for new videos in youtube about steelbeasts, I don't find almost none, even with this new updated. Not so many users use it. All are happy about that here? Ok, no problem, but prepare to die in future if new players don't come to SB (maybe).

 

The strange thing is that I love hardcore sims, and never think that I asked something to make them more arcade. We then should remove the external view of tanks in the 3D, to make SB more realistic (I know there are matches that block that. Then, what is the problem if they block also those new tools I ask if they consider they are arcade, in their online matches? I don't see the conflict in the coexistence, and what I am asking is just the option to manage hundreds of units easier. If people don't need it, then great for you. Don't use them, but don't "fire" against them. eSimGames should be the only to decide what include or not, and live with their decitions.

 

(this is not an answer to you Grenny. This is a sensation that I have when I ask things here).

 

Thanks.

Edited by Japo32

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think the key issue is once again the people who provide most of the funding do not want what you are after and would not be too keen to fund it.

 

Other things in the Wish List may well be wanted by the military customers (Steel Beasts' core audience) and they may well be funded.

 

eSim has to walk a fine line between trying to do "pet projects" based on their funding and fraud (not suggesting this is the case, BTW) by diverting money from military contracts to do things that only some in the "consumer" sector want and that the military never asked for.

 

By all means wish for it, but you need to temper your expectations.

 

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love people who claim to love a game and expend all their energy in turning it into something else.

 

And why is this discussion happening in this thread again?  Din't the same guy go through this exact same discussion a month ago?

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...