Jump to content
Azure Lion

Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

Recommended Posts

Not sure if this has been mentioned before, but the ability to set the camouflage pattern of specific units would be nice. 

 

For example, having Blue being a Battalion-sized US Task Force with an attached Germany Mech Infantry Company, with the German Mech Infantry Company not having US-looking Soldiers with M4s deploying from their Marders. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Different parties, different camo schemes. They can be allied. It's all there. You just have to either use a multi-party network session, or accept that some parties need to be fully scripted.

Share this post


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

Different parties, different camo schemes. They can be allied. It's all there. You just have to either use a multi-party network session, or accept that some parties need to be fully scripted.

... which doesn't allow what I described above to be done in an offline session with the player in control, hence why it is on the wish list.

Edited by Mirzayev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mirzayev said:

... which doesn't allow what I described above to be done in an offline session with the player in control, hence why it is on the wish list.

+1 for this.

 

I will say that I could probably live with the vehicle schemes, but I think it would be great if we could use the "Set Look of Infantry" tool to set the infantry to look like other countries' troops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mirzayev said:

... which doesn't allow what I described above to be done in an offline session with the player in control, hence why it is on the wish list.

Actually, it does in scenario Test Mode. It just requires your personal discipline not to mess around with OpFor at the same time. Just because you can do a lot more in Test Mode than to play a scenario doesn't mean that you have to mess around with everything. ;)

Share this post


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

Actually, it does in scenario Test Mode. It just requires your personal discipline not to mess around with OpFor at the same time. Just because you can do a lot more in Test Mode than to play a scenario doesn't mean that you have to mess around with everything. ;)

Its a question of convenience.

Especially in MP games, it makes player management easier when you have all players in one party. To have the "right" uniform in MN games add an extra bit of "feel"

 

But apart from uniform colour, more control over the infantry is the more pressing issue IMHO

Edited by Grenny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello!

 

If I had wishes, have those vehicles playable : 

 

I am no programmer here but Easy to do (iron sight or weapon system already implanted)

- Wiesel Tow

- 3.5T truck G - ZU-23-2

- 1.2 Technical T - RCL

 

Less easy but most system already included in other variants

- BRDM2-AT

- Leopard 1 A2

- T55 AM

 

More difficult 

- AMX 13

- BMD 2

- BMP 1

- PT76

- Shilka

 

Complex systems

- T80

- T90

- Leclerc

- TTB

 

 

Regards

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Grenny said:

Actually, it does in scenario Test Mode. It just requires your personal discipline not to mess around with OpFor at the same time. Just because you can do a lot more in Test Mode than to play a scenario doesn't mean that you have to mess around with everything.

;)

Its a question of convenience.

Especially in MP games, it makes player management easier when you have all players in one party. To have the "right" uniform in MN games add an extra bit im "feel"

 

But apart from uniform colour, more control over the infantry is the more pressing issue IMHO

Now, I understand that this is a wishlist thread and as such anyone can wish for anything. But the original wish was to have different camouflage options for allied parties. I pointed out that this was possible. Then the argument was "but not in single player" and I pointed out that is actually is, if you take the route through Test Mode. So, all that I did was to show that what the wish was about, it's basically there. Now you are diverting the discussion that managing multiple parties in multiplayer is more difficult. May well be but that's IMO an entirely different matter. Maybe we should work on player management in multi-party scenarios, and solve the issues of cross-party logistics and fire support.

Share this post


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

But the original wish was to have different camouflage options for allied parties. I pointed out that this was possible. 

 

No, this wasn't the original wish. The original wish is to have a different camouflage pattern by unit. 

19 hours ago, Mirzayev said:

Not sure if this has been mentioned before, but the ability to set the camouflage pattern of specific units would be nice. 

 

For example, having Blue being a Battalion-sized US Task Force with an attached Germany Mech Infantry Company, with the German Mech Infantry Company not having US-looking Soldiers with M4s deploying from their Marders. 

 

So, you can, for example, have different platoons, ALL ON THE BLUE SIDE, have a different camo pattern. IE, a Platoon of German Marders with German camo-patterns for the Soldiers as part of a US Tank Company. 

 

Sorry if we were talking past each other. 

Edited by Mirzayev

Share this post


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

Now, I understand that this is a wishlist thread and as such anyone can wish for anything. But the original wish was to have different camouflage options for allied parties. I pointed out that this was possible. Then the argument was "but not in single player" and I pointed out that is actually is, if you take the route through Test Mode. So, all that I did was to show that what the wish was about, it's basically there. Now you are diverting the discussion that managing multiple parties in multiplayer is more difficult. May well be but that's IMO an entirely different matter. Maybe we should work on player management in multi-party scenarios, and solve the issues of cross-party logistics and fire support.

I was not clear in my point I see.

With player management I meant:

 You have a few player in green...and a few in blue.

Blue looses a couple of vehicles, and now has spare players...while green still has uncrewed vehicles.  But blue players can not simply hop onto the green tanks (pause and rejoin, yes...but that break the "flow" a bit)

So that is a bit incovenient....

 

If the only reason to do mulity party would be to have the "right" weapons and uniforms for the dismounts...and "change uniform" for some platoons of the blue side, would be NICE, thats all.

 

 

Share this post


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

I don't disagree that it would be nice.

Why do I sense a "But" ?

😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't make it a priority because of the effort involved to rewrite data structures. It's one of those design decisions that were made 25 years in the past when you never expected to still be in this business in 2020. Now that we are, and that we expect to still be around in 2040, we need to rethink some of our approaches. But here, as always, needs go before wants.

Share this post


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

But here, as always, needs go before wants.

As it should be. 😀

Share this post


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

I can't make it a priority because of the effort involved to rewrite data structures. It's one of those design decisions that were made 25 years in the past when you never expected to still be in this business in 2020. Now that we are, and that we expect to still be around in 2040, we need to rethink some of our approaches. But here, as always, needs go before wants.

We just want to make sure you pick the "right" priorities 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

-M1A2 SEPv3

-TUSK II as optional add-on kit

-Abrams driver positions interior modeled

-added loader’s position view for M240 use

-Supply Trucks that Carry FOP’s where damage engine could be replaced Instead of waiting for engine repair.

- V2 Crows II System optional 

- V2 Emergency mode systems bugs fixed

-V2 ammunition index selection for CDU in commander station.

 

 

 

Edited by Assassin 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see some Copy paste options with the map editor, 

 

Also some more bunker/ trench options.  

 

Perhaps a 2a19 Rapira  100mm AT gun. Dug in and with good application of cameo, these options would be a very tough to spot and dig out and add some nice depth for attacking/defending scenarios. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simulated airborne drops.  Show the cargo planes flying through, and the easy targets gently floating down to the LZ.  Unless I'm missing something, to just have paratroopers magically materialize isn't so much fun.  Just a thought.  

Share this post


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

Simulated airborne drops.  Show the cargo planes flying through, and the easy targets gently floating down to the LZ. 

Airborne operations are generally conducted at the Brigade level, not something that fits the scale for SB. Definitely not something a company would ever do on their own.

 

Also, airborne operations are generally conducted out of contact for conventional forces. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Airborne operations are generally conducted at the Brigade level, not something that fits the scale for SB. Definitely not something a company would ever do on their own.

 

Also, airborne operations are generally conducted out of contact for conventional forces. 

I was wondering about that.  Wondering if this would work at the company and/or battalion level to capture airfields in the way Airborne Rangers do.  If not, then it's all good.  Less work to deal with on my next scenario project.  Air assaults will do.  

Share this post


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

I was wondering about that.  Wondering if this would work at the company and/or battalion level to capture airfields in the way Airborne Rangers do.  If not, then it's all good.  Less work to deal with on my next scenario project.  Air assaults will do.  

Depends entirely on how many transport aircraft you want to lose.

 

The last time I think this worked was during Suez when the the Brits dropped a Para Bde over an airfield (EL Gamil / Port Said) in Egypt with RAAF CAS / Fighter and RAN / RM spt oh I think the Israelis had chimed in too:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Gamil

 

Probably not your ideal single player SB scenario. ;)

 

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Airborne operations are generally conducted at the Brigade level, not something that fits the scale for SB. Definitely not something a company would ever do on their own.

 

Also, airborne operations are generally conducted out of contact for conventional forces. 

The one exception that I know of to this that readily comes to mind would be the Rhodesian's concept of Fire Force, where a Platoon-sized element would be airdropped after their advanced "Sticks" established a cordon of the AO.

Edited by Mirzayev

Share this post


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

Depends entirely on how many transport aircraft you want to lose.

 

The last time I think this worked was during Suez when the the Brits dropped a Para Bde over an airfield (EL Gamil / Port Said) in Egypt with RAAF CAS / Fighter and RAN / RM spt oh I think the Israelis had chimed in too:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Gamil

 

Probably not your ideal single player SB scenario. ;)

 

French paratroopers made several tactical jumps at compagnies or batallion level : Kolwezi (Zaïre) 1978, Kosovo 2004, Tombouctou (Mali) january 2013 and Menaka (Mali) september 2018

Edited by Froggy

Share this post


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

French paratroopers made several tactical jumps at compagnies or batallion level : Kolwezi (Zaïre) 1978, Kosovo 2004, Tombouctou (Mali) january 2013 and Menaka (Mali) september 2018

Sure but the context of the question was against a conventional enemy force on the ground.

 

I didn't say, or wish to imply that no one other than the British had done it.

 

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The ability to change unit type based on probabilities and or Trigger selection.

 

The ideal being one scenario with numerous options as opposed to multiple single option scenarios.

 

Currently if I want Red to vary based on Blue's unit selection I need to have several units on the map, both Blue and Red (with associated routes, etc.).

 

e.g.

 

Blue might have 1 x Tank Troop as its force.

 

If I want a range of choices I need say 4 x Triggers and 4 x Tank units with "spawn if .." commands.

 

Trigger 1 might = Shot Kal

Trigger 2 = M60

Trigger 3 = M1A1

Trigger 4 = M1A2SEP.

 

Ideally I'd like 1 x Troop unit on the map and one set of routes but a "change unit type if ..." or "set unit type if ..." command.

 

If I select Trigger 1, I get the Shot Kals, Trigger 2 the M60s, etc.

 

Ideally on Red I could then nest say "spawn if ..." and "set unit type ..." so that if Blue Event = Trigger 1 is set, then Red might have X% of spawning say a T-55 Platoon and Y% of spawning say a T-62 Platoon, but if Trigger 4 is set then it might be a T-90 / T-80U mix (I don't really want the Shot Kals to face off against the T-90s).

 

This way instead of say 4 x Blue Tank Platoons (all with spawn if ... commands), they could be replaced by one Platoon that would spawn but its type would change depending on the Trigger selected. Over on the Red side the relevant OPFOR could spawn tailored to match Blue's selection.

 

Thus one scenario could reflect variable Blue and Red with a common set of routes etc. instead of duplicating files and setting each one up for a specific circumstance.

 

Edited by Gibsonm

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...