Jump to content
Azure Lion

Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, ChrisWerb said:

I'd argue that the T-15 is a highly distinctive looking vehicle and that most times you open fire at way less than 3km with an MBT main gun.  It is also entering service long after many western vehicles upgraded from 1st Gen or they entered service after later TI generations became standard. I do take your point about IDing vehicles though I think you can at least tell if something is "tank derived" reasonably reliably if in the open at a fair distance from most angles.

I'd argue that statistically, most times modern MBTs engaged each other were in open desert spaces at distances between 2 and 3.5km.

Edited by stormrider_sp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How likely is it to encounter a BMP T-15 in an open desert environment?

 

Not saying that it's inconceivable, just that your statistics may not apply. In fact, the more high-res terrain databases we'll have in SB Pro over time, I suspect that the average engagement ranges may decrease significantly. If you remember the first video of the high-res terrain engine that we published in 2016, if you use the same terrain with a 12.5m grid rather than 78cm, engagement ranges can drop from 1500...2200m (depending on the location) to - on average! - under 500m. Micro variations in the terrain (such as sand dunes) will play a big role in some cases (not so much in others). It appears to me that this effect is somewhat underestimated/overlooked simply because for a good while the necessary data and the technology to utilize them for quantitative statistical analysis simply wasn't available. Now that it is, we'll discover new things.

Share this post


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

How likely is it to encounter a BMP T-15 in an open desert environment?

 

Not saying that it's inconceivable, just that your statistics may not apply. In fact, the more high-res terrain databases we'll have in SB Pro over time, I suspect that the average engagement ranges may decrease significantly. If you remember the first video of the high-res terrain engine that we published in 2016, if you use the same terrain with a 12.5m grid rather than 78cm, engagement ranges can drop from 1500...2200m (depending on the location) to - on average! - under 500m. Micro variations in the terrain (such as sand dunes) will play a big role in some cases (not so much in others). It appears to me that this effect is somewhat underestimated/overlooked simply because for a good while the necessary data and the technology to utilize them for quantitative statistical analysis simply wasn't available. Now that it is, we'll discover new things.

I think you misunderstood what I meant. I meant that statistically (in the real world), most modern MBTs engagements happened in open desert and/or large distances: Gulf War (largest american tank battles in history: Medina Ridge, 73 Easting, Battle of Norfolk...), Yom Kippur War (Sinai and even Golan); as compared to the short ranges of the european cold war that never went hot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/21/2019 at 8:05 AM, ChrisWerb said:

I know a demountable MILAN launcher on the Marder has been asked for a lot and I would love to see that

I would be QUITE happy if we were given the choice in the scenario builder to pick between "Marder 1A3" and "Marder 1A3 Milan" and it was simply thrown in as a separate vehicle.  It would be NICE to be able to mount and dismount the Milan but more often than not I find myself wishing it was mounted, or cursing up and down that my infantry have, once again, set my launcher up inside a shrubbery.

Share this post


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

I would be QUITE happy if we were given the choice in the scenario builder to pick between "Marder 1A3" and "Marder 1A3 Milan" and it was simply thrown in as a separate vehicle.  It would be NICE to be able to mount and dismount the Milan but more often than not I find myself wishing it was mounted, or cursing up and down that my infantry have, once again, set my launcher up inside a shrubbery.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/24/2019 at 5:08 AM, Maj.Hans said:

I would be QUITE happy if we were given the choice in the scenario builder to pick between "Marder 1A3" and "Marder 1A3 Milan" and it was simply thrown in as a separate vehicle.  It would be NICE to be able to mount and dismount the Milan but more often than not I find myself wishing it was mounted, or cursing up and down that my infantry have, once again, set my launcher up inside a shrubbery.

Yes but wouldn't that require the development of whatever FCS was used when the Milan was mounted on the Marder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Froggy said:

Milan was not fired from inside. it was just an external mount of the firing post.

 

 

Understood but I suspect they'd still need to do some "modelling" even if it was some button to press after F7, then Q and Q and then "something" to be in the MILAN sight picture.

 

Reloading might also need some additional delay imposed to reflect the new round being passed up from inside.

 

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Froggy said:

Milan was not fired from inside. it was just an external mount of the firing post.

Same with Warrior.  

 

FV510-Warrrior-Iraq-with-Milan-firing-po

photo_2019-12-25_13-57-15.thumb.jpg.51416857a600b2b4ac04e646f6565beb.jpg

Edited by Lumituisku

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alt+F3 as TC MG  on other vehicule per exemple?

And it will disable the AI gunner controls the time you are in the sight

Edited by Froggy

Share this post


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

Modeling or not, thats a small price to pay for something most people wish.

 

+1 for IFV ATGMs

 

Around 6+ silent / new Steelbeasters in my gaming "Shack" wish for IFV ATGMs too. And would love demountable MILAN launcher -  Especially much those that are deep in love to Marder or British vehicles.   Harry, Crow, Cuico, Flamo, Rovel and Tungsten to nickname few. And I would love that too. :D

Share this post


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

Modeling or not, thats a small price to pay for something most people wish.

 

+1 for IFV ATGMs

"Wish" being the operative word. ;)

 

You can wish all you like, doesn't mean you are going to get it.

 

Sorry to be a downer on Boxing Day but community "wishes" tend to be residual effort / labours of love for eSim and get implemented when / if they get a chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  

52 minutes ago, thewood said:

Don't have a horse in this Milan race, but isn't the name of this thread literally "Content Wish List"

 

Yep and I'm just saying not all wishes are granted.

 

I'd love to see it too but realistically I don't expect it.

 

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The specific challenge is that the Milan could either be a vehicle component OR an equipment item of the troops, and that the platoon leader is supposed to retain the freedom to decide to keep it mounted/to dismount it for each and every battle position. This would require a lot of coding contortions to make that possible, and we simply had other priorities.

Share this post


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

The specific challenge is that the Milan could either be a vehicle component OR an equipment item of the troops, and that the platoon leader is supposed to retain the freedom to decide to keep it mounted/to dismount it for each and every battle position. This would require a lot of coding contortions to make that possible, and we simply had other priorities.

How about leaving that technicallity for the scen designer to decide whos gonna get the optional weapon/milan?

Share this post


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

How about leaving that technicallity for the scen designer to decide whos gonna get the optional weapon/milan?

But that's not the issue as I understand it.

 

The issue is having the flexibility of the weapon mounted at say Battle Position A but dismounted at Battle Position B. I think that's also the same reasoning that Ssnake has used the last 4 or 5 times that this request has come up.

 

Now unless you want to start spawning vehicles with it mounted for BP A then destroying that vehicle by say Trigger then spawning the dismounted option for BP B its going to get really painful, really quickly.

 

Anyway the guy who owns the store has made the call.

 

That's not to say it might appear at some point, remember it took quite a few years (a decade ?) to get a playable T-72 variant.

 

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well...

 

As a simple man then I would like a simple solution:

 

make the Milan post de facto fixed on the IFV.

 

the standard infantry setup for the marder already have Milan's, so I personally don't see the need to dismount it.

 

and as the Milan posts have been standard on the marders from the 1a1 forward then it seems reasonable to assume that they are there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on another note then I would give my left foot for a semi-crewable T-80.

 

so basically just a gunners sight, with NO interiors or any other details.

 

And if Santa was extra generous then the same for aT-90 and BMP-3.

 

This would shift OPFOR a full generation forward and create the possibility of much better scenarios.

 

both for TvT and TvOPFOR

 

 

Share this post


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

could either be a vehicle component OR an equipment item of the troops

I wish for content where Milan was only a vehicle component...How about that?

I understand that it could/can/is be dismounted from and mounted to the vehicle, perhaps even during the time-frame of a typical scenario.

Right now the choice is made for the user: they are "Locked In" to having the launcher go with the troops.

 

I am wishing for the alternative option to have them be "Locked In" to having the launcher stay with the vehicle.  Nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/25/2019 at 5:55 AM, Lumituisku said:

Same with Warrior.  

 

FV510-Warrrior-Iraq-with-Milan-firing-po

photo_2019-12-25_13-57-15.thumb.jpg.51416857a600b2b4ac04e646f6565beb.jpg

 

Same for the M113G with Milan launcher mounted.

 

And, furthermore, the same goes for the US Army M113 with Dragon mounted.

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...