Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

[Bond_Villian]

5 hours ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

Dreams and Wishes

 

RTS style controls for more efficient command & fewer mouse clicks to move units (I know, I know, some old grognard is having heart palpitations after reading this)

 

1. Assigning hotkeys to the movement types and allowing players to use them in the 3d view and on the map. You guys made that sweet UI for the UAVs. I feel like there is a lot of potential in it. The keys assigned are just an example. Obviously people use the WASD key for movement.

 

2. Let me play from F5 more efficiently:

a. Let me highlight the units and issue waypoint using a keystroke. In this example I highlight 4 vehicles and press the A button to give them an 'Engage' waypoint (which is also called ADVANCE in the 3d world. 

b. Each unit is given its own order vice the task force system we have no where all units get a weird offset waypoint. 

I agree that RTS style controls and hotkeys would really shine in the 'Combat Mission' mode/view at least

[Ssnake]

6 hours ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

You guys made that sweet UI for the UAVs.

Yeah, it's a bit of a prototype/study for our future work. Mostly an outlook to V5, not something that we'll implement for everything in future versions 4.

[Grenny]

Can we get an auto-tracker for the RBS-70?

 

[Assassin 7]

Wish for the Abrams X

 

[Assassin 7]

-Detailed Abrams Driver Station

-Abrams SEPv3’s

 

[Ssnake]

4 hours ago, Grenny said:

Can we get an auto-tracker for the RBS-70?

No, only for the RBS-70 NG.

[mpow66m]

5 hours ago, Assassin 7 said:

Wish for the Abrams X

 

50 % fuel savings is gonna be huge improvment.

[Parachuteprone]

Something that would be helpful would be if buildings that cannot be occupied be a different color on the map screen.

I don't know if that is doable now, I don't play with maps much.

 

[Gibsonm]

The ability for waypoints to adopt the formations of their preceding routes.

 

For example:

 

1. I create an Engage route:

 

 

2. I change the formation to Column (because I want them to take advantage of the road, whilst retaining the SA that Engage provides:

 

 

3. I change the tactic to None because I want them to continue:

 

 

4. However the waypoint without a tactic, retains the Wedge formation from the original Engage route:

 

 

5. In order to avoid momentary AI confusion as it goes from Column to Wedge and back to Column (not ideal on mountain tracks, forests, etc.) you currently need to click on the waypoint a second time and adjust the formation for that specific location to align with the route it took to get there:

 

 

Ideally setting to route formation to Column would ripple through to the tactic at the end, so you'd just need to just it once and change to None is part of an ongoing route.

 

Edited January 17 by Gibsonm

[Ssnake]

Usually I create a chain of March routes, and then change them to Engage. Fewer clicks required since it doesn't create the waypoint tactics at the end of each leg; once a waypoint is created, it's created with all its properties (tactics, formation, spacing); just removing the tactics doesn't change the rest --- and arguably, it shouldn't; nothing more annoying than when you want to change just one thing, but that changes other stuff, and then you need to reapply what you wanted to keep.

 

Mind-reading user interfaces are outlawed by European Union regulations.

 

Related to this is bug #3822, the request to insert waypoints into existing routes. Could be prioritized by your organization (hint, hint).

[Gibsonm]

OK I'll try that.

 

The other option is to reverse what I did above, namely select the formation then change the tactic. Changing the formation keeps the WP active (one less click) but unfortunately I tend to work my way down the list, and Tactic is above Formation.

 

Re the last sentence having a chat with stakeholders soon re priorities.

[Gibsonm]

Can we colour code natural obstacles in the map editor?

 

Often I see things like this on a map:

 

 

At first glance it looks like greenery and indeed it is vegetation.

 

However on closer inspection it reveals itself to be:

 

 

A small patch of AFV defeating, Passchendaele like (3rd Ypres), mud / swamp.

 

Is there any chance these can be coloured Red, or Orange or similar in the Map Editor, so that they tend to make themselves known when you glance at the map?

 

[Ssnake]

You can select the option in the Mission Editor to adopt the color scheme of the chosen map's Terrain Theme. And there, you could set the color of bog to anything within the RGM spectrum that looks appropriately alarming to you.

Note that any terrain under, I believe, 25% traction will receive the hardcoded teal color (unless the "use Terrain Theme colors" option overrides), not just terrain labeled as "bog".

[Gibsonm]

I was hoping that the map editor would be able to do it so that:

 

1. Map designers didn't need to edit the theme colours and

 

2. Scenario designers didn't need to do that every time they intend to use someone's map.

 

3. I didn't need to lose the clarity of not displaying the terrain colours while trying to script. I tends to leave that as optional for the player.

 

I know its possible to adjust the colour of a theme, but doesn't that create another Delta (i.e. one for swamp = green and another for swamp = red or some such)?

 

Edited January 22 by Gibsonm

[Ssnake]

You can always save the Theme of a map under a new name, edit its colors while remains otherwise unchanged, then apply the THM file to the scenario. The THM data will then be stored in the scenario file, no extra delta map.

[Apocalypse 31]

1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

You can always save the Theme of a map under a new name, edit its colors while remains otherwise unchanged, then apply the THM file to the scenario. The THM data will then be stored in the scenario file, no extra delta map.

And save the theme for future use. 👍

[Gibsonm]

2 hours ago, Ssnake said:

You can always save the Theme of a map under a new name, edit its colors while remains otherwise unchanged, then apply the THM file to the scenario. The THM data will then be stored in the scenario file, no extra delta map.

 

Ah OK.

 

I'll have a think, but I'd prefer to get on with doing the scenario, rather than the map as well, let alone turning the theme on and off repeatedly (I usually leave if off so I can see the routes etc. clearly) just to confirm if its a bog.

 

Thanks anyway.