Jump to content

Steel Beasts: Content Wish List


Azure Lion
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Kilo60 said:


I’d be more than satisfied if additional map objects used the existing footprint of objects of similar size and design.  I.E. houses, factories and apartment buildings.  


Just give us different skins with more variation on existing objects!  Even some color variations would be great in breaking up the repetitiveness…

 

Ah I thought you were talking about bus shelters, kiosks, yet more fences, that sort of thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Captain_Colossus said:

define vehicle numbers or IDs in the mission editor- i saw this done in the DCS World mission editor- users can assign any number they like to individual vehicles through the mission editor rather than have the same "211" assigned to every T-72 or something similar

 

 

You mean "bumper numbers" that are visibly displayed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Captain_Colossus said:

yep

 

Right, so not the "unit id" as per the Mission Editor (the label displayed in the lower right hand corner when you click on the unit in the Mission Editor) which is then used for the various "embark if ..." type statements.

 

Edited by Gibsonm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

correct- referring to the decals rendered on the vehicles. this feature seems to have been intended to eventually have a useful system to have unique numbers for different vehicles, but never really developed further. as result, it isn't much of advantage over users photoshopping what have you onto the vehicles before the decal system was implemented; in this case, i think for it to work as intended, it's all or none- if all vehicles have the same decals or recycle a limited number of decals, you may as well have no decals, since there are no unique identifiers in either case

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, bloodycut said:

Camouflage nets and other stuff to add on tanks' covers. 

 

These take time to put up and take down.

 

We usually work on the basis that if you are on 30 min NTM or longer you put nets up.

 

I'm not sure many people would want to play a scenario where they start the game with nets up and their CO says "go" but they can't actually do anything for 30 mins.

 

There is an option for the M-577 to have either nets up (and not be able to move) or nets down (and be mobile) but not to actually erect the nets (or take them down) during a mission.

 

Or do you mean have them just rolled up and "stowed" (they tend not to be very neat) on the vehicle?

Edited by Gibsonm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I meant exactly that rolled up thing. Then, is long time camouflage for delayed attack in one position where the enemy has been let close enough for ambush? Or for example keep the tank in hidden place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Gibsonm said:

 

These take time to put up and take down.

 

We usually work on the basis that if you are on 30 min NTM or longer you put nets up.

 

I'm not sure many people would want to play a scenario where they start the game with nets up and their CO says "go" but they can't actually do anything for 30 mins.

 

There is an option for the M-577 to have either nets up (and not be able to move) or nets down (and be mobile) but not to actually erect the nets (or take them down) during a mission.

 

Or do you mean have them just rolled up and "stowed" (they tend not to be very neat) on the vehicle?

I know of and have used nets that take closer to 3 minutes to set up or take down than 30. Now sure using the 30 minutes you get the net set up a lot better, but still you can have the vehicle under nets in just a few minutes.

Now would bringin this improve the gameplay in any way or be a needed feature? That im not sure of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Maic said:

I know of and have used nets that take closer to 3 minutes to set up or take down than 30. Now sure using the 30 minutes you get the net set up a lot better, but still you can have the vehicle under nets in just a few minutes.

Now would bringin this improve the gameplay in any way or be a needed feature? That im not sure of.

 

What I'm talking about roughly is:

 

1. Siting the vehicle.

2. Removing the antennae's.

3. Closing the hatches.

4. Rolling out the tarp.

5. Rolling out the cam net on top of the tarp.

6. Putting the polls and pegs out and raising the net.

7. Rolling the tarp back up (crawling around between the net and the tarp).

8. Re-attaching the antennae's.

9. Confirming the turret and weapons work (cover the arcs, etc.).

10. Ideally confirm you can reverse out without pulling the net down.

11. Applying supplemental local cam (foliage, dirt, etc.).

 

If you can do that in 3 mins, good luck to you.

 

Pulling the nets down is basically the reverse.

 

Edited by Gibsonm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well obviously you cant do all that, as I said the result in 30 minutes of work is a lot better than the one after just three minutes. However what you can do is:
Drive the vehicle off road, shut off the engine, take two nets net out from turret stowage, spread one net over the front of the turret and over the gun and one net over the back of the turret, and back of the hull and maybe even even find a birch or two to lift the net off the vehicle at some points

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Maic said:

Well obviously you cant do all that, as I said the result in 30 minutes of work is a lot better than the one after just three minutes. However what you can do is:
Drive the vehicle off road, shut off the engine, take two nets net out from turret stowage, spread one net over the front of the turret and over the gun and one net over the back of the turret, and back of the hull and maybe even even find a birch or two to lift the net off the vehicle at some points

 

Well in my army that's not "putting cam nets up" that's a short halt in the shade.

 

This is why software developers face such a challenge as we now have two vastly different definitions of "putting cam nets up". ;)

 

As a training tool, that we partially fund, we would be after my definition - if we were to request it.

Edited by Gibsonm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Options in the script editor:
- the helicopter is on the ground,
- engines are off;

- playable machineguns in helicopter doors,

- mining with a helicopter.

Simulate such a helicopter crash!

SS_15_59_55.jpg

Edited by Rad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

- for supply trucks, possibility to choose ammo type and quantity carried for each one (with default being unlimited)

- Same for fuel trucks

- Be able to share ammo among vehicles in the platoon (or above)

- Fire RPGs manually!

- A more detailed driver position

- If driver is down, other crew takes place / if tc and gunner are down, loader takes position/ if only 1 crew left, he can switch between position while waiting for support

- Ability to dismount crew from vehicles for scouting

 

Edited by BlackDeath
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A great deal of realism could be added simply by altering the skins of the trees. Good as they are right now, shadows were not taken into account when they were made and trees appear to glow from the inside. It's a simple but time consuming task to alter them (if I had the time I'd do it myself) with shadows, and the tree trunks as well.

I've tried but I just can't get the time down.

 

Edited by iamfritz
spelling check
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, BlackDeath said:

- A more detailed driver position

=> for which vehicle and in what way "more detailed"?

- If driver is down, other crew takes place / if tc and gunner are down, loader takes position/ if only 1 crew left, he can switch between position while waiting for support

=> already abstracted, so whats the point?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/12/2022 at 10:36 AM, BlackDeath said:

- for supply trucks, possibility to choose ammo type and quantity carried for each one (with default being unlimited)

 

I'm not sure why you want both the default of "unlimited" and the granularity to specify natures?

 

Why would a scenario designer go to all the effort of specifying truck X has 5.56, truck Y has 7.62 if all you want is the same as the one truck carries "unlimited quantities of everything" approach?

 

There are hundreds if not thousands of different ammunition natures in use across the sim:

 

Small arms.

40mm grenades.

Claymores.

Hand held short range anti armour weapons.

Longer range RCL type weapons.

ATGMs.

Mortar ammunition.

Artillery ammunition.

IFV ammunition.

Tk ammunition.

 

There's a list here: https://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php?title=Ammunition_Data

 

Do you really want a situation where your tank (which is equipped with say 120mm DM63) and the guy on the truck says "sorry we only have DM53, move along"?

 

On 3/12/2022 at 10:36 AM, BlackDeath said:

- Same for fuel trucks

 

Again I've lived the dream of having fuel trucks with Standard Petrol, Super Petrol, Diesel, aviation fuel and needing to ensure you got the right fuel for your generator, vehicle, etc.

 

Luckily some armies have standardised on say JP-8, but not all.

 

Again if you want the first truck to carry diesel and the second to carry aviation fuel, that's fine but I suspect players will be frustrated in your scenario when the truck with "their" fuel is destroyed.

 

Logistics is a very complicated science and it along with Artillery, Aviation, etc. tends to be abstracted in Steel Beasts.

  

On 3/12/2022 at 10:36 AM, BlackDeath said:

- A more detailed driver position

 

The "good" thing about the current driver position is that one size fits all (with a couple of exceptions).

 

If you want the driver's position for every vehicle to be more detailed (do you mean needles on gauges move as RPM change or something?) then that's going to be a massive amount of work.

 

Again its not really envisaged being a tank driving simulator.

 

Edited by Gibsonm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Grenny said:

 

The driver isn't currently replaced... which honestly is a good thing, IMO. Makes mobility kills due to personnel *mean* something, and forces you to put some thought into how to recover said vehicle. 

 

This would be lost if you can just "throw another crew member in there." 

 

Also, 100% agree with keeping things related to logistics (or the sustainment warfighting function as we call it in the US) being abstract. There is a LOT that goes into a logistics chain, and Steel Beasts is really not a great simulator for it, IMO. The point is to *think* about sustainment, which it currently does very well. If you ignore it, you're gonna be hurting. If you plan for it, then good job. 

Edited by Mirzayev
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Mirzayev said:

The driver isn't currently replaced... which honestly is a good thing, IMO. Makes mobility kills due to personnel *mean* something, and forces you to put some thought into how to recover said vehicle. 

 

This would be lost if you can just "throw another crew member in there." 

 

There is quite a few other ways to get mobility kills besides driver being dead so you'd still have the need for recovery.

 

Anyway, my guess is IRL one of the crew would try to assume driver position for the tank not to be a sitting duck (at least for well trained crews, conscripts might want to bail out) which might take a while, especially under fire.

 

Admitidly, instantaneous switch between crew isn't an answer either. 

 

1 hour ago, Gibsonm said:

 

I'm not sure why you want both the default of "unlimited" and the granularity to specify natures?

 

The "good" thing about the current driver position is that one size fits all (with a couple of exceptions).

 

If you want the driver's position for every  vehicle to be more detailed (do you mean needles on gauges move as RPM change or something?) then that's going to be a massive amount of work.

 

Again its not really envisaged being a tank driving simulator.

 

Thinking about it, most battle don't last that long so I guess you are right about no need for this one

 

1 hour ago, Gibsonm said:

The "good" thing about the current driver position is that one size fits all (with a couple of exceptions).

 

If you want the driver's position for every  vehicle to be more detailed (do you mean needles on gauges move as RPM change or something?) then that's going to be a massive amount of work.

 

Again its not really envisaged being a tank driving simulator.

 

Well, that's a wishlist, isn't it? 🙃

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...