Jump to content

Steel Beasts: Content Wish List


Azure Lion
 Share

Recommended Posts

I wish for

  • Ability for Drones / FAC to call indirect ( ATG missiles from choppers and or guided bomb from planes [perhaps from ground units if such capability exist?])

_____________________

 

Why?

 

After watching this DCS Apatche tutorial for indirect missile firing.   https://youtu.be/RtEGuTgouUQ

 

I kind of now understand why AFVs would have Lazer warning systems.  Before I though it was kind of useless novelty thing.  That warns you 2-4 seconds before you are going to die. 

but this..  that guy on ground or UAV actually paints target for indirect (Helo / aircraft Missile, guided bomb maybe even or drone missile?) 

Then the system on T-90  and Armatas start to make sense. 

  • Break line of sight
  • block lazer with smoke to get wrong or no returns. 
  • know where you're lazed from
  • and report to other friendly forces.

This is what would be most useful for ground forces to practice.

 

We do currendly have

  • cv9035 NL
  • DF30 and DF90
  • T-90 and Armata series of prototypes
  • Possibly something else?  

That can detect when those are being lazed.  So number of those vehicles is very little for effect of this training for ground forces.

 

However if we would get some artillery kind of way... from outside map aircaft  guided bombs support..    or perhaps  ability that helicopters like Apatche could fire missiles indirectly to target. Perhaps there are ground systems that can do that as well  (maybe classified stuff though)   

 

 ->  This possibly could add one more valuable training aspect to ground forces threat simulation in steelbeast 

and make FAC team / drones more useful and even more deadly and give more value to these systems in existing and future vehicles.

 

 

 

Edited by Lumituisku
took away spoiler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Lumituisku said:

I wish for

  • Ability for Drones / FAC to call indirect ( ATG missiles from choppers and or guided bomb from planes [perhaps from ground units if such capability exist?])

_____________________

 

Why?

  Reveal hidden contents

After watching this DCS Apatche tutorial for indirect missile firing.   https://youtu.be/RtEGuTgouUQ

 

I kind of now understand why AFVs would have Lazer warning systems.  Before I though it was kind of useless novelty thing.  That warns you 2-4 seconds before you are going to die. 

but this..  that guy on ground or UAV actually paints target for indirect (Helo / aircraft Missile, guided bomb maybe even or drone missile?) 

Then the system on T-90  and Armatas start to make sense. 

  • Break line of sight
  • block lazer with smoke to get wrong or no returns. 
  • know where you're lazed from
  • and report to other friendly forces.

This is what would be most useful for ground forces to practice.

 

We do currendly have

  • cv9035 NL
  • DF30 and DF90
  • T-90 and Armata series of prototypes
  • Possibly something else?  

That can detect when those are being lazed.  So number of those vehicles is very little for effect of this training for ground forces.

 

However if we would get some artillery kind of way... from outside map aircaft  guided bombs support..    or perhaps  ability that helicopters like Apatche could fire missiles indirectly to target. Perhaps there are ground systems that can do that as well  (maybe classified stuff though)   

 

 ->  This possibly could add one more valuable training aspect to ground forces threat simulation in steelbeast 

and make FAC team / drones more useful and even more deadly and give more value to these systems in existing and future vehicles. 

 

 

 

 

Well again you can do this already (at least call in artillery and air strikes). There are artillery PGM that can be used for that (if that's what you mean by "guided bomb") but not paveway type ordnance.

 

The limitation is that you need a player flying the UAS to do so.

 

If you let the AI do this you wouldn't need players, just fly the UAS on a search pattern and as long as it wasn't shot down it could just clear the map for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Gibsonm said:

 

Well again you can do this already (at least call in artillery and air strikes). There are artillery PGM that can be used for that (if that's what you mean by "guided bomb") but not paveway type ordnance.

 

The limitation is that you need a player flying the UAS to do so.

 

If you let the AI do this you wouldn't need players, just fly the UAS on a search pattern and as long as it wasn't shot down it could just clear the map for you.

 

I know all this.  I am actually most interested training use / comparison of units with / witout  Lazer warning receivers because missiles or bombs home into laser that designates target.

 

12 hours ago, Lumituisku said:

Why?

 

After watching this DCS Apatche tutorial for indirect missile firing.   https://youtu.be/RtEGuTgouUQ

 

I kind of now understand why AFVs would have Lazer warning systems.  Before I though it was kind of useless novelty thing.  That warns you 2-4 seconds before you are going to die. 

but this..  that guy on ground or UAV actually paints target for indirect (Helo / aircraft Missile, guided bomb maybe even or drone missile?) 

Then the system on T-90  and Armatas start to make sense. 

  • Break line of sight
  • block lazer with smoke to get wrong or no returns. 
  • know where you're lazed from
  • and report to other friendly forces.

This is what would be most useful for ground forces to practice.

 

We do currendly have

  • cv9035 NL
  • DF30 and DF90
  • T-90 and Armata series of prototypes
  • Possibly something else?  

That can detect when those are being lazed.  So number of those vehicles is very little for effect of this training for ground forces.

 

However if we would get some artillery kind of way... from outside map aircaft  guided bombs support..    or perhaps  ability that helicopters like Apatche could fire missiles indirectly to target. Perhaps there are ground systems that can do that as well  (maybe classified stuff though)   

 

 ->  This possibly could add one more valuable training aspect to ground forces threat simulation in steelbeast 

and make FAC team / drones more useful and even more deadly and give more value to these systems in existing and future vehicles.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Lumituisku
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/16/2022 at 9:42 AM, Gibsonm said:

Well I give up.

 

Everyone, just wish for anything / everything (regardless of whether it makes sense or not) and then complain that its not all implemented perfectly and immediately.

 

HI Mark

Well it is a Wishlist what is the point of a wishing list if people can't make wishes, and last i checked you are one off the big PRO customers so you already gets a lot of your wishes come true, and since it is a Wishlist it dossent need to make sense to you, it only needs to make sense for the guy that make wishes and most people aren't where you are if it makes sense they can wish what ever they want, i am fairly sure that there is a filter and an attitude from Esim that filters the wishes in the direction they want to take the product, and since you already pay for some of this you already have a big say in what we get so why do you keep trying to sensor this thread, you are allow to comment on if you think it makes sense but why insist that other people needs to agree with your point of view.
It is very arrogant to believe that the only opinion that makes sense is yours.

You are free to give an argument why you think it should be so and so but this last comment is just undignified and a tiny bit like whining.
So maybe try to see where people are coming from because that quote up there isn't helpful in any kind of way, it will just get people to dispise you, and its not very constructive.

I have always learned that a Wishlist is a form of brainstorming where to get everything on the board you don't comment on others wishes , that is something you do in a process after the brainstorm otherwise there will be ideas/wishes that wont be there because people are afraid of being ridiculed or belittled. (I am also aware that not all agree with me here).
I am fairly sure/ Hopeing that Esim does something similar with the wishes like grouping ideas into areas, and further into makes sense or not , easy , medium or hard to implement etc...... does it fit with market trends, what is happening in the world etc... is it for the next version or the one after that, making risk assessment just like any other software factory does that is worth its salt.

 

I am hopeing that you will be more open and recognize that it is not everybody that are at the same level as you and haven't read all 309 pages of this thread and others, and maybe don't agree with everything that makes sense to you but can be a valid and sensible wish anyway even if it isn't to you.

Ps. i wont comment on the last part except to say that , that one just make me sad on your behalf, (I actually consider it a personal attack on all the rest of us, you just don't write something like that in a public forum)


Just my 2 bits
MD

 

https://alcorfund.com/insight/idea-generation-2/

https://www.cleverism.com/18-best-idea-generation-techniques/

Edited by Major duck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not arrogance.

 

Its just a monumental waste of my time to respond to a post, explain that you can already do it (often posting screen shots and writing paragraphs), or that maybe it doesn't makes sense as a simulator as opposed to some sort of Waste of Time / War Chunder look alike.

 

Then often less than a page later the same person posts to same thing or some other random request arrives.

 

I didn't say close the thread. I said "I give up".

 

I'm also bored  with people who don't read what I type but infer/ imply comments that aren't there.

 

So roll on the next "we need IEDs" or "we need to be able to damage buildings", or "we need craters", ... or whatever other wish someone wants who doesn't bother to even look first.

 

Edited by Gibsonm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suggestion / consideration for future

 

  • Allow players to modify  map/BMS -callsign in multiplayer session.  So that for example. Player who lost A/11 vehicle.. but got reserve vehicle C/13  could be seen for example   A/11- (C/13)   Or that latter part would be only visible when clicking unit.  or something.

 

On a MP session when there has been casualties or damages and reserves are pulled into action / units have changed owner 

I have often witnessed a horrible mess recarding callsigns where players of not just 1 but many units have troubles to keep up what is going on, and what unit is doing what.  

Basically..  what I am seeing is that Keeping cohesion becomes very difficult towards end and there is lot of struggle to stay up to date what is happening.  

 

I believe that modern BMS systems probably allow changing callsign (it would make sense) if not, I think it would ge good to consider to allow that difference to PE version.  To make a better multiplayer experience. 

Edited by Lumituisku
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lumituisku said:

Suggestion / consideration for future

 

  • Allow players to modify  map/BMS -callsign in multiplayer session.  So that for example. Player who lost A/11 vehicle.. but got reserve vehicle C/13  could be seen for example   A/11- (C/13)   Or that latter part would be only visible when clicking unit.  or something.

 

On a MP session when there has been casualties or damages and reserves are pulled into action / units have changed owner 

I have often witnessed a horrible mess recarding callsigns where players of not just 1 but many units have troubles to keep up what is going on, and what unit is doing what.  

Basically..  what I am seeing is that Keeping cohesion becomes very difficult towards end and there is lot of struggle to stay up to date what is happening.  

 

I believe that modern BMS systems probably allow changing callsign (it would make sense) if not, I think it would ge good to consider to allow that difference to PE version.  To make a better multiplayer experience. 

 

Solution 1: players keep their original callsigns when manning the reserves after their original units die.

Solution 2: players take the name of their new callsigns when manning the reserves after ALL of their original units die. 

 

Decide on one before the game and brief it. 

 

As the Commander, keep a piece of scratch paper to note the change. 

 

Edit: It also helps to *try* to give somewhat matching callsigns; IE. A11 gets C11. I acknowledge this is not always possible. 

Edited by Mirzayev
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure Mark has explained this workaround a million times, but using drones to call for artillery including precision (BONUS and SMArt) can be simulated by playing in Test mode and using "View" on the map. As long as you don't fly ridiculously fast, this mode can simulate a quadcopter type drone with daylight CCD TV and thermal imaging. Overfly the target and read off the coordinates from the top left hand of the screen. You can call for a fire mission without even coming out of view. The only snags are:

1.  View cannot look directly down, but you soon acquire a knack for deducing when you are directly over the target. 

2. You often can't see that you have damaged a vehicle (particularly at night). Sometimes I cheat by lowering the drone/view to see if I can still hear the vehicle's engine.

3. You can't drop modified RKG-3 and PG-7 grenades from view.

Edited by ChrisWerb
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/3/2022 at 12:23 AM, Ssnake said:

If it was the same it wouldn't have a different name. But RBS-70 is in Steel Beasts right now. The missile is just Mach 2 rather tham Mach 3, but the range (Bolide 2) is 8km rather than 7. All in all it seems to be close enough in tactical capabilities to serve as a substitute.

 

Also the RBS-70 simulates Martlet well.  Martlet is the slower, unitary warhead/proximity fuzed missile that uses the same launcher as Starstreak and is better versus drones which might otherwise pass between the pattern of three darts employed by Starstreak. Martlet has already been employed in Ukraine, from the single shoulder launched Starstreak CLU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, ChrisWerb said:

I'm sure Mark has explained this workaround a million times, but using drones to call for artillery including precision (BONUS and SMArt) can be simulated by playing in Test mode and using "View" on the map. As long as you don't fly ridiculously fast, this mode can simulate a quadcopter type drone with daylight CCD TV and thermal imaging. Overfly the target and read off the coordinates from the top left hand of the screen. You can call for a fire mission without even coming out of view. The only snags are:

1.  View cannot look directly down, but you soon acquire a knack for deducing when you are directly over the target. 

2. You often can't see that you have damaged a vehicle (particularly at night). Sometimes I cheat by lowering the drone/view to see if I can still hear the vehicle's engine.

3. You can't drop modified RKG-3 and PG-7 grenades from view.

 

Or just use the UAVs (or UGV if you want a ground-based solution) already included in the game.

 

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php?title=UAV_Sperwer

 

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php/Micro-UAV

 

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php?title=UGV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mirzayev said:

 

Or just use the UAVs (or UGV if you want a ground-based solution) already included in the game.

 

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php?title=UAV_Sperwer

 

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php/Micro-UAV

 

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php?title=UGV

 

That is superb! I knew about the Sperwer and UGV, but had no idea the Micro-UAV existed in game. I'll have fun checking that out tomorrow!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mirzayev said:

Other random admin-related wish request:

 

The ability to print the displayed map while excluding unit icons. Sometimes you just want the base graphics.

 This is how I do a print map.

Map editor, select map, export to bmp, edit, print

 

Does this help?

or am I reading this incorrect? 1111656336_Sb2(2).thumb.png.a304598b11659c93f0d780636a069456.png

Sb1 (2).png

Edited by 12Alfa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mirzayev said:

 

You are reading it incorrectly.

-ability to print the displayed map while excluding unit icons-

Well I just did :) 

 

-while excluding unit icons-

Check  :)

 

- just want the base graphics.-

 done  :)

 

so, you dont want to print a displayed Map , and with graphics?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, 12Alfa said:

-ability to print the displayed map while excluding unit icons-

Well I just did :) 

 

-while excluding unit icons-

Check  :)

 

- just want the base graphics.-

 done  :)

 

so, you dont want to print a displayed Map , and with graphics?

 

Yeah, we aren't talking about the same thing man.

 

image.thumb.png.06771c5e59af9fbdd5e302e26b5edabe.png

 

What I am asking for is the ability to "print displayed map" without having unit icons on said printout. 

 

This is done from an Offline or Network session. Not from the Map or Mission editor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I think I see what you are asking for.

The ability to print while the session (single /multiplayer) in real time.

It will require 2 sessions running.

 

In mission editor:

1-creat 3 sides (red/blue/green)

2-in mission editor place party with a unit (green)

3-place graphics, copy to all sides

4-select eny side , remove graphics

5- save

6- start mission, select (green) on 2nd session

 

I see that green has graphics from (blue), red does not 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I appreciate you trying to find a workaround, I just wanna print the displayed map after opening a scenario, during the planning phase, without the unit icons. I don't want to go through a six step process for something that *could* be as simple as turning an option off before printing.

 

This is not a current feature in Steel Beasts, to the best of my knowledge. Which is why I am posting it as a wish. I don't see that as asking for anything unreasonable. 

 

Let's leave it at that and move on. 

Edited by Mirzayev
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well ok,

Myself , if creating a mission, it's little no effort for 3 sides, with 1 unit

 

After all its the mission editor 

 

 

1. create 3 sides

2. send graphics to all

3. remove from red.

 

no one said there was going to be math    :)

 

This workaround has bee there for a while and has been used, thats why it most likely not a top priory 

 

DISCLAIMER: my opinion, no knowledge of what E-Sims is doing, or going to do as for the wish list, or even if possible.

Edited by 12Alfa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, and I just got another idea:

In the mission editor, there is an option to add civilians en masse (like,m a battalion of them) and then just  put them where you want.

How about something like that for cars? It would be great to fill city streets in a town with cars to add major ambience to a setting. Plus, since actual tankers need to deal with civilians and their property it would serve a very realistic training option.

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...