Maj.Hans Posted October 28 Share Posted October 28 Remove the empty night sight protective cage from the Leopard1V (which doesn't seem to function anyway!) so it looks more like the Leopard 1A1A1. And skin it like a 1A1A1..... ....Maybe even a playable Leopard 1A1A1.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Colossus Posted October 28 Share Posted October 28 not per se a request, but an acknowledgement of present circumstances- with the coincidence of drones, the adaption of various measures: ERA tiles installed on vehicles not normally associated with them, cage armor, barn armor and so on- to stay current with developments you will need some kind of modular option to install optional external solutions in the mission editor (as is done with some optional weapons mount) rather than presumed that they are hardwired to the model (i.e., among other schemes T-72B and m1 and leopard tanks can now carry ERA tiles) no easy task, obviously requiring major re-working of the underlying code, including spotting routines (barn and cage armors for instance may offer increased protection at the expense of losing camouflage for their obvious presence) not that esim is unaware of this, but there is probably no way around it to stay current 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parachuteprone Posted October 28 Share Posted October 28 (edited) Just keeping up with the drone tech will be a challenge. Watched a video of a thermite drone (Dragon drone). Scary, almost looked like something from a sci-fi movie. Edited October 28 by Parachuteprone 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Colossus Posted October 28 Share Posted October 28 it looks as though the evolution of things is accelerating from robotics to computers to genome mapping and engineering to AI- even the people all around us are looking quite weird from the perspective of inventing styles in order to stand out to the point that trends come and go quite just in order to keep up with somehow trying to be relevant or noticed the drones are surprising because they are basically at bottom a toy that has been adapted to be one of the most game changing and lethal options out there. on some level it should not be too surprising because in hindsight they were always there for quite some time in some form or another of RC toy that available relatively inexpensive and attainable for hobbyists, it is just that the idea probably would have sounded ridiculous or pie in the sky 30 years ago i think in order to adapt steel beasts to something which is changing so rapidly at least for the vehicles, the basic interface should change, for example a friendly graphical interface where users can rotate 3D vehicle models in the mission editor and drag and drop arrays and attachments onto the vehicle at specific points; (i also conceived of a way of stringing together campaigns and operations using an easier method such as dragging and dropping missions into graphical tree branches or something of the kind) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted October 31 Share Posted October 31 I'd like to add one to my wishlist: Add WP/Smoke projectiles to the "IED" list. Add various colors of some certain smoke projectiles. Most likely the hand grenade projectiles as used by the infantry. This could be used to allow for signaling with smoke or colored smoke when building scripted scenarios where this may be desired. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart666 Posted November 1 Share Posted November 1 Flares would be a good compliment to that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted November 1 Share Posted November 1 58 minutes ago, Stuart666 said: Flares would be a good compliment to that. Except that: 2 hours ago, Ssnake said: Steel Beasts explicitly does not simulate night combat to a degree that we would consider it adequate. We do have day/night cycles, and there's some approximation in place for scenarios starting at dawn or to be completed by dusk. But we never claimed that all vehicles would behave adequately at full night conditions because a lot of other stuff would need to be in place, like illumination fire missions, flare traps, flare guns, active searchlights (NIR and white light), and the associated AI. In fact, when we introduced day/night cycles in version 3.0 and 4.0, I explicitly pointed out such limitations. Guess it's about time to remind everybody about this. I wouldn't mind at all to see all such elements in place one day, but that will require a new render and simulation engine. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted November 1 Share Posted November 1 3 hours ago, Gibsonm said: Except that: It will be here eventually. At least it should. Also that post is in reply to what I think is a bug rather than a lack of features. Seems like the AI does okay when night missions start at night, but struggles to switch over to night fighting when a scenario begins with enough light for day sights and goes into darkness. Playing the M60A3 (Passive) against AI T-64Bs I noted that I as the human usually got the first spot. It seemed like as soon as I fired, the entire force of T-64s was out for my head. But perhaps that is realistic, I just lit my whole tank up with muzzle flash. And then the fight was on. However with T72A vs T55, Is in a scenario that began with daylight but transitioned into darkness, Both sides struggled with spotting and gunnery after dark even to the point of driving into the enemy and making physical contact without engaging. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted November 1 Share Posted November 1 2 hours ago, Maj.Hans said: It will be here eventually. At least it should. Also that post is in reply to what I think is a bug rather than a lack of features. Seems like the AI does okay when night missions start at night, but struggles to switch over to night fighting when a scenario begins with enough light for day sights and goes into darkness. Playing the M60A3 (Passive) against AI T-64Bs I noted that I as the human usually got the first spot. It seemed like as soon as I fired, the entire force of T-64s was out for my head. But perhaps that is realistic, I just lit my whole tank up with muzzle flash. And then the fight was on. However with T72A vs T55, Is in a scenario that began with daylight but transitioned into darkness, Both sides struggled with spotting and gunnery after dark even to the point of driving into the enemy and making physical contact without engaging. The reason why I posted it was because the quote talks to night fighting in general, not just an issue with a sight. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted November 1 Members Share Posted November 1 3 hours ago, Maj.Hans said: Also that post is in reply to what I think is a bug rather than a lack of features. You may think so. I think it's exactly as limited as it was implemented. Muzzle flash makes you visible to the AI, until you break line of sight. It's an okay-ish compromise, but was never intended to be more. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted November 1 Share Posted November 1 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ssnake said: You may think so. I think it's exactly as limited as it was implemented. Muzzle flash makes you visible to the AI, until you break line of sight. It's an okay-ish compromise, but was never intended to be more. If that's the current implementation then perhaps it's a little bit lacking all around and needs improvement. For example, muzzle flash makes me visible when I am otherwise not visible, but with a certain degree of error in range and azimuth, which drifts and increases with the passing of time, until after 3-5 seconds I am "lost" even if I did not break line of sight. Make AI NVG spotting work like daylight at 1/2 of the current "visibility" range according to weather. Make NATO Passive IR sights like the M60A3 and Warrior capable of spotting a target out to an arbitrary distance. For example let's say 1000 meters OR 3/4 of the total "visibility" distance, whichever is less. Make Soviet passive IR sights either equal, or work out to only 80% of the distance of the NATO ones, depending on era/generation. Then just roll with it and see what happens. I understand doing it correctly would take a whole freaking re-write, but I'm sure something could be worked out in the meantime so that it's at least playable. ETA: Maybe this belongs in the category of "After the 5.0 Update"... Edited November 1 by Maj.Hans 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted November 1 Members Share Posted November 1 2 hours ago, Maj.Hans said: Maybe this belongs in the category of "After the 5.0 Update"... Yes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted November 6 Share Posted November 6 The ability to "Lock" the eye view to certain elements. Right now, on most/all vehicles, when you go "head out" your eye view is totally independent of vehicle movement, as if you have a stabilized head. I'd like the option to lock azimuth to the turret or hull rotation. The ability to instruct the AI how to behave when I operate the TC's machine gun. Default to our current operation of things. Allow the TC to select to either have only the driver stop driving, or to have the whole crew continue as normal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted November 6 Members Share Posted November 6 As a tank commander, you have a poor sense for the hull orientation. Sure, if the turret is at an extreme angle, or if the tank is driving fast, you'll get an idea. But the only reliable point of reference is the turret. And your "view experience" in real life is kinda stabilized. Your eyes orient on the horizon and "lock" on objects in the distance; head and upper torso tend to counteract turret rotation. It's not good enough to have a stable view when using binoculars, but the current implementation in Steel Beasts is basically the best recreation of a vehicle's commander that we could imagine. So, no "azimuth lock" for you, sorry. You can have the driver stop anytime. Hit S. Not sure how you want the rest of the crew "behave as normal". If you want to actually hit something, the gunner must either keep his sight trained on your target, or stop moving the turret. This is what the US tank manual calls for, so that's what we implemented. And with a human crew in a network session you can give all the commands that you like. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSe419E Posted November 6 Share Posted November 6 I wish locking the F8 view to the turret was still possible. I know you cut it off because you thought that it gave an unfair warning when it zoomed in on a target but that is not what I want. I just want the view to align with the turret for video purposes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted November 7 Members Share Posted November 7 You can do so with the Camera Animation Window: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSe419E Posted November 7 Share Posted November 7 Yes, but you can't do it in a multiplayer session. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted November 7 Members Share Posted November 7 True. Try the SmartCam option (File menu). It might be available even in multiplayer, though it probably works right only with AI controlled turret crews (that is, automatic zoom on detected targets). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted November 7 Share Posted November 7 On 11/6/2024 at 1:08 AM, Ssnake said: Not sure how you want the rest of the crew "behave as normal". If you want to actually hit something I want the option for them to keep moving for when I'm not necessarily trying to hit something. Frequently, suppression is more my goal and I'm happy to send some bursts in a general direction. As for locking azimuth, it would be useful in the sim due to having to drive and command, if not accurate. Locking to the turret is more realistic especially in stopped firing positions. I feel like it would be particularly useful on the M1 in the overhead cover position due to how the hatch and supports keep getting in the way as the turret scans. Plus, in the sim, while the AI drives you can wind up looking backwards...Not so great! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted November 8 Members Share Posted November 8 8 hours ago, Maj.Hans said: I want the option for them to keep moving for when I'm not necessarily trying to hit something. How would the AI know your intent? Mind-reading user interfaces have not yet been invented, and if they will, the EU will outlaw them within a year or two. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted November 8 Members Share Posted November 8 8 hours ago, Maj.Hans said: As for locking azimuth, it would be useful I have never disputed the utility value of such a feature. But getting disoriented as a Leopard 2 or M1 commander is part of the job experience. I have witnessed Leopard 2 commanders jumping from the turret heck onto the engine deck - or so they believed - when the tank was loaded on a railcar, which stood on a railroad dam, and the tank had the turret in 9 o'clock position, so down he went for about eight meters. Fortunately he landed on crushed stones which are so much softer than concrete, so he just sprained an ankle and seriously bruised his one leg, hip, arm, and parts of his torso. If you want certainty where the tank is going, use the 3D command interface. Click your platoon symbol (or your tank), pick "Advance to", and click a spot in the terrain. That's how you do it in real life too, you give a command to the driver and let him execute it. Granted, our drivers aren't the smartest and will go for your target in a straight line. But you're trying to command a tank - a job that task saturates most people in full - and to drive it at the same time. Another option is the external observer's position where you'll never be in doubt which way the tank goes. But then you can command the tank a little bit less. These restrictions are intentional, for an educational purpose. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted November 8 Share Posted November 8 2 hours ago, Ssnake said: How would the AI know your intent? Mind-reading user interfaces have not yet been invented, and if they will, the EU will outlaw them within a year or two. A drop down menu. Vehicle -> TC MG -> Normal, Continue, Halt Only. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Colossus Posted November 8 Share Posted November 8 14 hours ago, Ssnake said: How would the AI know your intent? Mind-reading user interfaces have not yet been invented, and if they will, the EU will outlaw them within a year or two. maybe with some modification to the existing architecture if designating reference points on the map with attached conditions (open fire / hold fire at TRP 1 (2, 3, etc) if...trigger 1 (2, 3, etc) is true or some other dialogue condition is true or not true; or in the future if simple voice commands were included, "gunner, heat (or whatever TRP (1, 2, 3 etc)" otherwise computer controlled units - tanks, IFVs, helicopters crew served weapons and so on could never suppress a target area while on the move under the existing system as far as i can tell - either "suppress here" can only be attached to static waypoints, or units open fire when there is a bead drawn on seen opponents only; i do not recall seeing any other condition when computer units can open fire 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted November 9 Members Share Posted November 9 Improvements of AI and user interface are definitely on the agenda for our future V5 development. Suppressing on the move is definitely desirable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted November 9 Share Posted November 9 5 hours ago, Ssnake said: Suppressing on the move is definitely desirable. That's mostly how I seem to be using the assorted TC MG's that are available. I find that I usually prefer to engage targets with the main gun and gunner. I'd like to simulation to continue to default to the current, expected, and textbook behavior, but to be able to use a drop down menu from the TC's position to inform the crew that I don't want them to stop what they're doing when I go to the TC's MG. This would be particularly useful in two situations: 1. When in vehicles like the entire M1 series, Centauro, T-72 series, ASLAV-25, NZLAV, etc, to be able to jump onto the TC's MG and provide suppression fire after telling the gunner to "Fire and Adjust" when engaging infantry with Coax, or other similar scenarios. 2. Make the M60 gunner understand that when I press F4 to go to the vision blocks, I want him to keep scanning and engaging. The F4 vision block view currently causes the gunner to freeze, which I don't want! A new wishlist item for you: Now that the 105mm ME-456A1 from the Centauro has been adjusted to correct the previously exaggerated penetration performance, copy it over to the other 105mm armed platforms to allow them to select a more modern (hypothetical or not) 105mm HEAT round. 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.