Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

[Mirzayev]

4 hours ago, Lumituisku said:

As for F8..  I don't like turret fairy position..  that alone gives human player tanks unfair advantage on multiplayer when a turret fairy joins up and starts telling where enemies are.   Loader unbuttoned view could solve that problem too.  

 

Or just make it a rule to "not do that," and not welcome back repeat perpetrators to your games. 🤷‍♂️

 

CO some Company and larger missions where you have a lot of engineers, artillery, and logistics assets to manage. You will quickly come to LOVE F8. 

[Ssnake]

To me, F8 is a necessary evil.

[DarkAngel]

IRT the loading position and the references to the M40 RCL.

 

The M40 came up in a conversation (about something else) with the programmers. I took it upon myself to remake the model so that it could be made crewable. I did it as a secret project (even from other team members) and Esim were happy to accept it (thanks Nils and Co). The situations where it could be used in game (M113 and Technical ) all relied on the gunner also being the loader. I set the model up so that the loading sequence could be animated and controlled by the user. When it came time to import the model both Ed (V) and Lukas liked the idea and, I am grateful to say, implemented what i'd done.

 

So basically it was all un-official until it was accepted.

 

For this one item I like the idea of manual loading, it makes it feel more tactile and with some practice you can reload it faster than the AI can. Not by much, but milliseconds count when you are trying to kill a tank with a light unit.

[Maj.Hans]

Honestly I was thinking the coding time for a click-race for the interior for a loader could be skipped to save time for other things but if the community really wants it...
*Shrug*

 

I was mostly interested in the loaders other jobs, rather than the loading.

 

In fact I wish on the new 90mm gun-tank-wheel-car-thing I could have that click procedure automated for me when I'm trying to TC that thing!

[Ssnake]

On 3/30/2022 at 1:03 PM, Ssnake said:

If as a human player you ... want to ... operate the AA MG, ... that requires a disproportionate amount of effort

 

On 3/30/2022 at 1:03 PM, Ssnake said:

In version 5 we may reevaluate ..., and as a consequence we might then also get the capability to have a more versatile (AI) loader that could be substituted by a human if so desired.

 

On 3/30/2022 at 9:04 PM, Ssnake said:

if a human player could operate the AAMG, then I'd want an AI loader to do that competently as well. But that's not in the cards, with version 4

 

On 3/31/2022 at 9:12 AM, Ssnake said:

we simply can't have an AI loader shoot his MG; it's one of those  design limitations ...

In short, "not possible in 4.x".

Okay, Fool's day is here, can we please put the topic to rest now?

I don't think how I could express myself any clearer, it's not going to happen anytime in the next two or three years.

[dejawolf]

12 hours ago, Maj.Hans said:

Honestly I was thinking the coding time for a click-race for the interior for a loader could be skipped to save time for other things but if the community really wants it...
*Shrug*

 

I was mostly interested in the loaders other jobs, rather than the loading.

 

In fact I wish on the new 90mm gun-tank-wheel-car-thing I could have that click procedure automated for me when I'm trying to TC that thing!

 simply trying to accentuate just how shit that gun-tank-wheel-car-thing is  by forcing the TC to load

[Gibsonm]

15 hours ago, Maj.Hans said:

Honestly I was thinking the coding time for a click-race for the interior for a loader could be skipped to save time for other things but if the community really wants it...

 

I think "community" is a bit generous.

 

Some people want it and that's the point of the wish list thread.

 

@Ssnake though has pretty much confirmed that it wont be happening any time soon.

[Maj.Hans]

6 hours ago, dejawolf said:

 simply trying to accentuate just how shit that gun-tank-wheel-car-thing is  by forcing the TC to load

Thanks, I hate it.

Lol

[Hedgehog]

23 hours ago, Ssnake said:

 

 

 

Okay, Fool's day is here, can we please put the topic to rest now?

I don't think how I could express myself any clearer, it's not going to happen anytime in the next two or three years.

 

I recall the same being said regarding bouncing roadwheels and a playable T-72

[Rad]

SAM Starstreak against helicopters!

[Ssnake]

6 hours ago, Hedgehog said:

I recall the same being said regarding bouncing roadwheels and a playable T-72

True. And in both cases, additional badgering did not influence the decision at all.

[Ssnake]

5 hours ago, Rad said:

SAM Starstreak against helicopters!

RBS-70.

[Grenny]

4 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

RBS-70.

similar..but not the same...

[Ssnake]

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.

[Lt DeFault]

2 hours ago, Ssnake said:

True. And in both cases, additional badgering did not influence the decision at all.

 

 

[Grenny]

10 hours ago, 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.

We still have a bug in this one though 😉

[Mirzayev]

Things I'd *still* like to see:

 

1. Use of multiple overlays and the ability to turn them on/off at will (MCOO, SITTEMP, OPS Graphics, etc). - Confirmed for version 5!

 

2. Overlays saving to .aar files for display when reviewing.

 

3. CH-47s (or some western equivalent) having a supply radius similar to the Mi-8 Supply.

 

4. Option to use mouse support for manual traverse (42 of 63 voting members favored this.)

 

5. "Fire AT Here" or some option similar to the "Fire HE Grenade Here" as already modeled to force an AT launch by infantry. 

[Rad]

Bulldozer break trees and does other works.

[Gibsonm]

3 hours ago, Rad said:

Bulldozer break trees and does other works.

 

 

You do know that the relevant armoured engineer vehicles can dig tank scrapes, etc. already?

[TSe419E]

14 hours ago, Rad said:

Bulldozer break trees and does other works.

Depending on the map/mapmaker trees can be knocked over.

[Hedgehog]

On 4/3/2022 at 1:48 AM, Lt DeFault said:

 

 

Touche, sir.

 

Infantry foxholes and other dug outs.

 

[Apocalypse 31]

1 hour ago, Hedgehog said:

Infantry foxholes and other dug outs.

I'm all about seeing improvements to infantry combat.

 

However, to add infantry entrenchment now, without any sort of improvement or addition of first person control for infantry would be absolutely overkill to an already challenged aspect of the game. 

 

Tanks fighting against dug-in infantry is a bit more fair, but there's only one way to clear trenches.....and its not with tanks. 
 

It's with hand grenades, bayonets, and lots of automatic weapons fire. 

https://d34w7g4gy10iej.cloudfront.net/video/1907/DOD_107073178/DOD_107073178-1024x576-1769k.mp4

Edited April 4, 2022 by Apocalypse 31

[EasyE]

4 minutes ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

I'm all about seeing improvements to infantry combat.

 

However, to add infantry entrenchment now, without any sort of improvement or addition of first person control would be absolutely overkill to an already challenged aspect of the game. 

 

Tanks fighting against dug-in infantry is a bit more fair, but there's only one way to clear trenches.....and its not with tanks. 
 

It's with hand grenades, bayonets, and lots of automatic weapons fire. 

https://d34w7g4gy10iej.cloudfront.net/video/1907/DOD_107073178/DOD_107073178-1024x576-1769k.mp4

 

I think more bunker types and some entrenched camouflaged AT guns would be nice.  A bunker set up that act as hidden AT nest etc. 

 

A 100mm 125mm towed AT gun isn't super useful today, but it would still cause issues for anything that isn't a modern tank or IFV, and be a fun addition to older mission creation 

[BlackDeath]

13 minutes ago, EasyE said:

 

I think more bunker types and some entrenched camouflaged AT guns would be nice.  A bunker set up that act as hidden AT nest etc. 

 

A 100mm 125mm towed AT gun isn't super useful today, but it would still cause issues for anything that isn't a modern tank or IFV, and be a fun addition to older mission creation 

Are there any dedicated AT towed gun still in service in any modern army?

I saw Russia used (and lost) a few 100mm MT-12 anti-tank gun but I guess their main purpose was actually artillery?

[Ssnake]

MT-12, SPRUT - yes, they still exist. To which extent they are reassigend to different roles, I can't say. The 100mm gun is probably no longer too useful in the anti-tank role (and probably not too useful as a field artillery caliber either ... but Russians just don't throw stuff away just because it's old and (almost) obsolete).

The 125mm SPRUT is approaching the upper limit of what's still useful to tow around. Then again, the smoothbore gun is entirely unsuitable for relegating it to an auxiliary artillery role. Without doubt, missiles are taking over. But they are more expensive per shot, and lower in the maximum volume of fire they can bring to bear. But you have to be very careful to be able to guide attacking tanks and IFVs into the kill zone of a whole anti-tank company where you could maximize this advantage. Nevertheless, as an anti-tank asset in a dug-in position a platoon of these guns may still have its place on the modern battlefield. That we are no longer setting up long trench lines doesn't mean that they no longer exist; since 2015 the whole Donbass is surrounded by an about 800km long infantry trench system.