Jump to content

Steel Beasts: Content Wish List


Azure Lion
 Share

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Gibsonm said:

Yes on the "kinda sorta" / squint harder plan, you currently (4.363) have:

 

image.thumb.png.16460e75f1bf5ae2e180f88e1ae68ebb.png

 

So a:

 

Challenger 2 - crewable

Chieftain Mk5 - non crewable.

T-62m 1972 - crewable.

 

 

 

ahhh

 

 

Challenger 1 Mk3   Not the Challenger 2

Chieftain mk11   Has StillBrew and the thermal site

 

I think T-62M is the type with Addon armor better FCS the T-62 m (model 1972)

 

Trying to round out the 80s Cold war

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EasyE said:

 

 

ahhh

 

 

Challenger 1 Mk3   Not the Challenger 2

Chieftain mk11   Has StillBrew and the thermal site

 

I think T-62M is the type with Addon armor better FCS the T-62 m (model 1972)

 

Trying to round out the 80s Cold war

 

I understand but the fundamentals of "squint harder" is that you accept that a Chieftain Mk 5 is a "reasonable" proxy for a Chieftain Mk 11 and similarly with the Challenger and T-62.

 

If you want an "exact" model, then you are currently out of luck for, at a guess, at least 2+ years (assuming someone devotes resources to creating them).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Gibsonm said:

 

I understand but the fundamentals of "squint harder" is that you accept that a Chieftain Mk 5 is a "reasonable" proxy for a Chieftain Mk 11 and similarly with the Challenger and T-62.

 

If you want an "exact" model, then you are currently out of luck for, at a guess, at least 2+ years (assuming someone devotes resources to creating them).

 

Oh a man can dream....

 

I doubt it is a priority........ That said, If SB every has pay modules like DCS I assure them I will open the wallet for these. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm curious, has anyone ever looked at improving Amphibious ops effects and options? You can kind of bluff it today but its not really useable.  vehicle model types, speeds in water, water obstacles, effects etc? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Like night combat, to do it right, it's a complex task. Tides, current flow dynamics, ... you'd want all these things to work. And then you have places like Inchon; it's a safe bet that it'd be one of the things that some users would want to try out first as soon as we claim that Steel Beasts can do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something for novice scenario designers:

 

A macro or similar process that walk people through the various choices (some of which are currently on menus where you need to know where to look).

 

A process (pop up screens or whatever) that asks you:

 

The Date

The Time

The Weather

Which side of the road do people drive on

Who can call Artillery

...

 

This "helper" would most likely need to be optional so that old hands weren't constrained by it, but it might make scenario design easier for new people without reviewers slamming their product for supposed rookie errors.

 

Edited by Gibsonm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This hinges mostly on the question how smart we can make the AI. It's no use if we enable barrel strikes and at the same time AI crews don't avoid them, so you ruin a company's guns mere minutes into a game session that is not in the desert.

But it's not forgotten; I spoke about this with one of the programmers the other week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

But that hardly is a "game changer" except in the rather meaningless sense that it's a change to the game Steel Beasts; it hardly is the disruptive change that will shift our perception of Steel Beasts which is typically associated with the term "game changer".

It's a pretty narrow focus of specific conditions where the ambushers will be successful more often (not that they are without success in such situations already). If the AI works allright, there will be a potential for damages from barrel strike, but it would rarely, if ever, materialize because the AI would prevent them from happening (and they can't happen right now). Even if we would implement a "panic reaction" routine where they rotate the turret in reponse to an ambush and do get a barrel strike as a consequence, the tank would likely be dead from the ambush before you could notice that half a second before it exploded it also had a barrel strike. It's a bit like rearranging the deck chairs on a sinking Titanic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well to me I think itd be a pretty big addition that would cause players to adjust the way they play in certin aspects.I think itd be a plus.But I see what your saying and your see your points.Maybe game changer wasnt the best choice of words,or your overtinking it😁😉

Edited by mpow66m
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...