macieksoft Posted November 2, 2013 Share Posted November 2, 2013 Are there any plans to expand some vehicles i future?I mean adding some switches in M1A1 and M1A2 to make "starting not battle ready" possible? Same with Bradley that do not have working turret control panel.Why some vehicles have most of the switches working (like Centauro, Pizzaro, Ulan) while other like Bradley do not have even basic turret power or stabilisation switches clickable?I like M1A2, its very nice but it could be modelled a bit better. More important switches could be working. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted November 2, 2013 Share Posted November 2, 2013 Are there any plans to expand some vehicles i future?I mean adding some switches in M1A1 and M1A2 to make "starting not battle ready" possible? Same with Bradley that do not have working turret control panel.Why some vehicles have most of the switches working (like Centauro, Pizzaro, Ulan) while other like Bradley do not have even basic turret power or stabilisation switches clickable?I like M1A2, its very nice but it could be modelled a bit better. More important switches could be working.Simples: someone paid for that.From my user point of view: Why would I want to go through the complete startup sequence for the vehicle in a game? For some vehicles i would be busy for half an hour. Besides, many of the start-up things can never be modeled, as they'd involve real handwork(like filling the ready racks...getting the belt into the feeder systems and so on) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rotareneg Posted November 2, 2013 Share Posted November 2, 2013 I'm still waiting on the interactive loaders position! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfstriked Posted November 2, 2013 Share Posted November 2, 2013 I'm still waiting on the interactive loaders position! I just read something interesting about the "loader" in M1A1.It stated that Platoon leaders and commanders should put the second most experienced crew member in this duty.All this time I thought the loader was the least experienced yet now I see they have a huge responsibility of RPG/ATGM watch when no contact has been reported. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tjay Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 Are there any plans to expand some vehicles i future?I mean adding some switches in M1A1 and M1A2 to make "starting not battle ready" possible? Same with Bradley that do not have working turret control panel.Why some vehicles have most of the switches working (like Centauro, Pizzaro, Ulan) while other like Bradley do not have even basic turret power or stabilisation switches clickable?I like M1A2, its very nice but it could be modelled a bit better. More important switches could be working.You have to remember that SB Pro is a real life military simulator. For this type of procedure training the military can use their actual vehicles. It doesn't cost anything in fuel or resources. So they don't need it to be simulated - which would simply add to the cost. (IMHO, as ever, of course). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aop Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 aop, you have no idea what you are talking about.Thanks for you super valuable input.True thanks to SSnake for quite long and comprehensive answer.Still I think there are a lot more simmers out there that this game currently doesn't reach. I don't personally play any kind of simulator games as training tools, I just play them because they offer much more challenge and depth than 99% of games out there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stemik Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 Are there any plans to include Chinese vehicles down the road? Just asking. How about tutorials for the vehicles that just got added?Also, I agree with the pricing and copy protection- at least we know the people who get it want to have a true tank sim. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoggydog Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 Also remember that the majority of SB Pro owners don't play online so having our uber elite gaming community watered down in some way when the plebs get their hands on our beloved game isnt really a valid reason to restrict access.Tank games are back in the news people, PC gamer magazine (in the UK) currently have a WoT special edition for sale in WH Smith for £10!Its up to us as a community to promote this game not bombard esim with suggestions on how to get the masses involved.go to your forums, talk to your friends and big up the Beast! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stemik Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 Speaking for myself- I don't want the masses involved. I'm happy w/ the tight little group we got now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marko Posted November 3, 2013 Author Share Posted November 3, 2013 Speaking for myself- I don't want the masses involved. I'm happy w/ the tight little group we got now. Agreed. I like the community the way it is as well. But as the Roman Octavian said, we expand or we die. Were lucky to have SB at all, if it were not for the military contracts We would not have a large percentage of the playable vehicles that we have. If esim could generate a much higher percentage of there profit from PE sales I'm pretty sure that It would reflect in future upgrades. In the form of customer generated content. back on topic. The indo pak war 1971 mite make for a good focus 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tacbat Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 Thanks for you super valuable input.Anytime. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tacbat Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 Speaking for myself- I don't want the masses involved. I'm happy w/ the tight little group we got now. Unfortunatly we're already getting interest from some less than desireable individuals. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying Penguin Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 Unfortunatly we're already getting interest from some less than desireable individuals.I'm sorry, I'll get my coat and see myself out......;-) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tacbat Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 I'm sorry, I'll get my coat and see myself out......;-)Yapp, hat-coat-door, you know the drill ;-) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted November 3, 2013 Members Share Posted November 3, 2013 Are there any plans to expand some vehicles i future?I mean adding some switches in M1A1 and M1A2 to make "starting not battle ready" possible? Same with Bradley that do not have working turret control panel.To be honest here: The super-complex vehicles in SB Pro are to demonstrate our competence to tackle such procedure simulation. The more basic vehicles are either the results of old projects where the customer didn't want any more complexity (usually to keep the development costs really low), or they are our way to generate some interest among armies that use these or similar vehicles so that they will contact us to expand the state of the work to a point where these armies could then use SB Pro for their training.Available programming time is still scarce, even if the number of programmers have quintupled over the past three years. The new programmer still need to learn the ins and outs of the code and cannot yet work at full capacity in all areas - e.g. Miro Torrielli is our specialist for 3D rendering, so he more or less single-handedly undertook to modernize the Steel Beasts engine. It took him about 15 months to do so - you are currently seeing the results of his work - but during those 15 months he couldn't learn how to program a new combat vehicle. That should come at no surprise here.If, for whatever reason, our partial implementations of a vehicle do not generate interest among the user nations it depends a bit on the community if we can gather enough information to improve the depth of our simulation. If at least a part of the community demonstrates elevated interest and some helpful information beyond what one can find out with two or three hours of Google searches we may decide to improve a model. Failing that we will probably not spend a lot more effort on it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apocalypse 31 Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 So just make it easier to program vehicles....duhhhhhh! :bigsmile: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted November 4, 2013 Share Posted November 4, 2013 Not forget to mention: I many cases the are players who'd like to give more detailed info about the vehicles. But if they do...S2 will come down on them but a good kickin ;-) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azure Lion Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 For me, I've always preferred sims over games as sims are usually grounded in physics and reality whereas games generally are not.As far as the next crew-able vehicle to make a debut in SB, I'm hoping the Leopard 2A7 becomes popular enough amongst the military clientele. Especially if it has the kind of zoom levels as the M1A2 SEP. :luxhello: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.