Questions about 3.0 Ask the Boss.

[Gibsonm]

From my POV, no problem at all with VUs or Scenario Designers to include Infantry (or give it an increased role), not that my opinion would count for much.

But that is world’s away from saying that the software itself will now have an increased Infantry “focus”.

[hoggydog]

Maybe I have mis-interpreted what I have read and heard about 3.0 but I would say that the more hand held anti-tank weaponry, and more in depth modelling of already included infantry weaponry as well as the nav mesh behaviour of infantry would indeed indicate more of an infantry focus than previous updates.

but it just comes down to language, and you being a colonial I will forgive you

[Tacbat]

Dude saying ambient sounds are irrelevant when listening for other vehicles is like saying trees and buildings are irrelevant when LOOKING for other vehicles.

Not at all Dude. The background noise doesn't matter to me. Whether a bird or cricket is chirping in my ear, or I hear the sounds of a urban environment, all I care about hearing is a vehicle engine. Hearing and seeing are two completely different things so trying to compare the two is futile.

Dude, where's your car?

[Tacbat]

Maybe I have mis-interpreted what I have read and heard about 3.0 but I would say that the more hand held anti-tank weaponry, and more in depth modelling of already included infantry weaponry as well as the nav mesh behaviour of infantry would indeed indicate more of an infantry focus than previous updates.

I would say that the functionality of the infantry has increased in SB3, but the name of the software remains unchanged which should indicate what the primary focus is.

[wolfstriked]

A little bit more tweaking and I have settled on SHIFT-W for move up and SHIFT-S for move down.I like it like this and gives me some of that fluidity I crave.:biggrin:I also put F1 view as SHIFT-S and allows me to now back out of map view with the same key.....huge plus for me!

Only things I would like to see still done are....

When you back out of map can the default mouse movement be to move the view?

Can the peri cancel key just cancel the override and not cancel out mouse movement.This causes you to have to press Lmouse again to take back control.I just wanna stop overriding the turret and not stop moving the TIM,periscope etc.

When you press the TC palm switch to override the turret in the M1 family can it automatically engage turret movement.Right now I press Mmouse and then have to bend my finger to click the Lmouse again.

These 3 things are not that big of a deal but when done over and over it starts to get annoying rather quickly.:frown:

EDIT,also the Lmouse that switches between view movement and ability to click on stuff at top of screen causes a few issues.IMO I think that this functionality should be removed from Lmouse since at times you go to click a switch and are not centered and you turn off mouse/view movement.Lmouse should be to click on switches or to click on optics and thats it.If you wanna click on stuff at top of screen you could press CAPS lock or something else.Sorry,thats all I swear!!

[Gibsonm]

Maybe I have mis-interpreted what I have read and heard about 3.0 but I would say that the more hand held anti-tank weaponry, and more in depth modelling of already included infantry weaponry as well as the nav mesh behaviour of infantry would indeed indicate more of an infantry focus than previous updates.

but it just comes down to language, and you being a colonial I will forgive you

Well I think there are more new / improved vehicle models than there are new hand held anti tank weapons (nine pages of screenshots in the gallery and maybe 10 pictures of Infantry weapons?) and the Navmesh affects both vehicle and Infantry.

So we fall back on "improved" infantry modelling.

[Lt DeFault]

Can the peri cancel key just cancel the override and not cancel out mouse movement.This causes you to have to press Lmouse again to take back control.I just wanna stop overriding the turret and not stop moving the TIM,periscope etc.

When you press the TC palm switch to override the turret in the M1 family can it automatically engage turret movement.Right now I press Mmouse and then have to bend my finger to click the Lmouse again.

I guess that's one advantage of using a joystick: what you describe is exactly how it works for me. No need for extra clicks.

Ever thought about trying a stick, or are you set on using the mouse?

[wolfstriked]

I guess that's one advantage of using a joystick: what you describe is exactly how it works for me. No need for extra clicks.

Ever thought about trying a stick, or are you set on using the mouse?

:eek2: Dude its driving me ape shit!!:biggrin: I wanna get a Hotas but the problem I have is the mouse allows me to hit 90 at gunnery range while the 3 joysticks I have I get into the 60 range.I have a Saitek aviator and two Logitech's are Wingman Extreme and the attack3.They seem too low resolution and when I move the stick a mm it seems to jump a good amount and not allow the fine tuning needed in SB.

[wolfstriked]

I guess that's one advantage of using a joystick: what you describe is exactly how it works for me. No need for extra clicks.

Ever thought about trying a stick, or are you set on using the mouse?

Forgot to add in that I feel that the simulation is geared towards control handles/joysticks being that the real armies will use them while mouse kinda got a backseat.By fixing these little niggles I think mouse would be fine.

[TankHunter]

Ambient noise would be nice. Hearing the adhan in the distance at the prescribed time or a pissed off local taking over a mosque's loudspeakers would be nice. Not saying it should be a high priority thing, but it would be nice. Certainly wouldn't sacrifice a mildly interesting playable vehicle for it.

[Gibsonm]

Forgot to add in that I feel that the simulation is geared towards control handles/joysticks being that the real armies will use them while mouse kinda got a backseat.By fixing these little niggles I think mouse would be fine.

Making assumptions is a dangerous thing.

We don't use joysticks in our classrooms and only have a limited number of control handles.

Most of our machines are equipped with a mouse.

[Mogwa]

I dont know what mechanism in the tank the mouse is supposed to replicate. I don't remember the cadillacs being like a mouse. If its no big deal then I vote that we get rid of the arrow key pounding for manual traverse and elevation and just use a mouse or joystick. It doesn't matter. The Australians use a mouse instead of control handles and it isn't a gunnery simulator, right?

[Lt DeFault]

I wanna get a Hotas...

Keep in mind that plugging in a joystick doesn't disable the mouse. You could use the mouse for gunning and the stick for commanding.

[wolfstriked]

Making assumptions is a dangerous thing.

We don't use joysticks in our classrooms and only have a limited number of control handles.

Most of our machines are equipped with a mouse.

Schooled!:biggrin:

[wolfstriked]

Keep in mind that plugging in a joystick doesn't disable the mouse. You could use the mouse for gunning and the stick for commanding.

Thanks LT Default.Interesting idea to use joystick just for commanding and mouse for gunnery.Gonna try it out right now and if its good I am getting the T6000m tomorrow.:biggrin:

[CalAB]

I"ve used both joy/throttle stick and mouse. I find that the mouse works just fine. I've never had the experience of actually firing anything even close to what's modeld in this sim so it"s all good from my POV. I suspect that the gents who do this type of thing for a living aren't to worried about how close the computer gets to their station. real life can't be replaced.

[Marko]

From my POV, no problem at all with VUs or Scenario Designers to include Infantry (or give it an increased role), not that my opinion would count for much.

But that is world’s away from saying that the software itself will now have an increased Infantry “focus”.

I would disagree with that comment.

When you take every thing in to consideration.

There are as many playable IFV/APC,s as there are tanks.

I would speculate that's at the request of SB military customers.

Combined arms would probably be a better way to discribe

What i think the focus will be in the future.

For me personally playable tanks is why i got in to,and stay with SB

Given a choice i will always pick tanks over any other weapons platform

But i suppose SB will go where the market takes it.

[Gibsonm]

I would disagree with that comment.

As is your right.

[hoggydog]

pah, you start giving us rights and before you know it we will want votes

its a slippery slope

[Ssnake]

Moved the silly stuff here.

[Maj.Hans]

Will any new 105 mm or 120 mm main gun ammunition types (except DM11, which was announced in the screenshots) be introduced in v3.0?

On a related note, will the ammunition choices in the mission editor be set up a bit more freely to allow us to simulate a wider variety of ammo loads?

Right now it isn't possible to do a mixture of HEAT rounds and MPAT, for example.

[Ssnake]

No, I don't remember that we made any changes in that respect. Eventually we may make this more flexible, but on the other hand I don't think that there's a doctrine in any western army that would mix both MPAT and another HEAT round in the same tank as a mission pack in real life. MPAT simply is a more versatile and streamlined HEAT round with a few extras and a slightly reduced maximum penetration depth. With 120mm, you either use MPAT or HEAT, not both. If at all you add or replace HEAT entirely with a HE-frag (or PELE) round, and/or add some specialized ammunition like canister in small quantities.

To that extent it's not exactly a top priority item for us.

[Maj.Hans]

...on the other hand I don't think that there's a doctrine in any western army that would mix both MPAT and another HEAT round in the same tank as a mission pack in real life.

It was my understanding that during and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the standard M1 weapons load included both MPAT and HEAT rounds. I can only guess that they retained the HEAT rounds for use as a substitute HE round?

At the very least, it might be nice to be able to mix M908 'Obstacle Reduction' rounds in with other types, in the event that SB were ever to go as far as simulating their use against concrete fortifications like the Norks have.

Then again, this may just be from me playing far too many WW2 tank sims where having a whole bunch of different rounds to choose from isn't at all unusual. For example, a mixed load of AP, APCR, HE, HEAT, and Smoke wouldn't have been terribly unusual.

ETA: Not that this is going to stop me from buying 3.0. I'm pretty much in it for the Leopard1A5 and M1IP.

Cast all the turrets, and rack all the bustles!

[Gibsonm]

Then again, this may just be from me playing far too many WW2 tank sims where having a whole bunch of different rounds to choose from isn't at all unusual. For example, a mixed load of AP, APCR, HE, HEAT, and Smoke wouldn't have been terribly unusual.

Yes but when you consider a Sherman carried what 90 rounds you can have that variety.

When you drop to say 40 rounds on say a M1A2, you can't maintain the same variety without sacrificing quantities within natures.

When I was on Leo AS1 we had 59 rounds roughly broken up as:

75% APFSDS (44)

25% HESH (15)

Smoke and APERs (when carried) came out of the HESH slice but would not exceed more than 2 or each.

[Froggy]

No, I don't remember that we made any changes in that respect. Eventually we may make this more flexible, but on the other hand I don't think that there's a doctrine in any western army that would mix both MPAT and another HEAT round in the same tank as a mission pack in real life. MPAT simply is a more versatile and streamlined HEAT round with a few extras and a slightly reduced maximum penetration depth. With 120mm, you either use MPAT or HEAT, not both. If at all you add or replace HEAT entirely with a HE-frag (or PELE) round, and/or add some specialized ammunition like canister in small quantities.

To that extent it's not exactly a top priority item for us.

Leclerc as now 5 rounds that can be loaded simultaneously in the Autoloader:

120 OFLE F1B (Sabot, WHA )

120 OFLE F2 (Sabot, DU)

120 OECC F1 (HEAT)

120 EXPL F1 (HE, with 3 setting fuse)

120 OEFC F1 (Canister)