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, 2023 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, 2023 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.

 

[Captain_Colossus]

request to add more boolean logic arguments and/or conditions to each expression - i like to program surrender or retreat routes attached to multiple possible damage casualty snd supply issues, which is limited by a few available logic strings

[cata]

I only recently discovered that when you click on, or was it mouse over, infantry casualties, if the call sign pops up they are wounded not dead. Being a terrible field commander, and endowed with an overly active moral impulse to try save those poor wounded souls. 

 

Would be great if i could task an amelance to a waypoint, and similar to a recovery vehicle, it had a radius within which it could recover casualties.  Then i could focus on more productive things, like preventing more casualties. 

[Ssnake]

There is a medic with each platoon sergeant (part of the platoon HQ) that can be sent to immediately apply medical assistance. Of course, if you're trying to handle a whole battalion as a single player, this would basically overwhelm you. Here's where playing cooperatively with several players pays off.

The chances of restoring troops to fighting status will differ dramatically with the training quality level of your troops. And yes, medevac vehicles add another percentage to the chance of resurrection. But a good platoon medic will make a lot of evacuations unnecessary.

[Major duck]

I would like that 
 

For all 30, 35, and 40 mm versions 

[Grenny]

26 minutes ago, Major duck said:

I would like that 
 

For all 30, 35, and 40 mm versions 

Much of the target detection part is basicly still fantasy. The radars of the APS are not well suited to detect (slower) UAV...

Optical detection systems have teh advantage of beeing passive. But they must get much more reliable, and their detection range must improve

[Major duck]

On 2/10/2023 at 8:12 PM, Grenny said:

Much of the target detection part is basicly still fantasy. The radars of the APS are not well suited to detect (slower) UAV...

Optical detection systems have teh advantage of beeing passive. But they must get much more reliable, and their detection range must improve

Yes but are you sure as i have just seen this released and i am pretty sure that Esim would need to develop it as well

https://militaryleak.com/2023/01/29/eurotrophy-unveils-electro-optical-eo-sensors-for-trophy-active-protection-system/

[Retro]

On 1/4/2023 at 9:01 PM, Gibsonm said:

In a perfect world (may well not be possible) the smarts behind the power-line object would have some sort of algorithm that said to itself:

 

No stanchions within 5m [for example] of a road, or a house, or a river, or a lake, or ... so the map designer could draw the line confident that when the engine resolved it, the stanchions would be in the "right" place.

 

Actually there's some code there but right now the 'no stanchion' distance is 1m so we might have to tweak that. There's no check vs other objects, but it does check vs bodies of water (not the 'stream' line actors though). Note that right now, if such a 'collision' is being detected, the code simply does skip the creation of pylons.

 

Sooo I guess we might at least tweak that 'avoidance radius' a bit.. (actually, looking at the screenshot, I'm wondering why it doesn't already skip creating the pylon hmm)

[Hedgehog]

A hot key to tell the Platoon to swap sides.

 

In the context of platoon layout.

3 1 4 2 to switch to 2 4 1 3

Or 1 2 to switch to 2 1

 

Is best used when using a partially manned platoon