Rotareneg Posted April 13, 2019 Share Posted April 13, 2019 Finer control of map updates would be nice, with options to set friendly and enemy map updates: For a players occupied vehicle. The only enemies shown on the map would be ones your vehicle has detected. For a players occupied unit (platoon or section.) As above, map only shows enemies your platoon or section has detected. For a players owned units. Again, map only showing enemies that units you own have detected. For command vehicles only. Then only the CO vehicles, or maybe only command vehicles like the M113G4-DK OPMV, would have full map updates. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted April 14, 2019 Share Posted April 14, 2019 5 hours ago, Marko said: +1 This has been commented on before. Think its a good idea, But how it would be implemented is another question. So many different fire control and sighting systems. Not to mention thermal systems ballistic computers ETC. Since it is a "WHAT IF FANTASY TANK"... Drivers position: A Leo2 with reverse cameras Gunner position: M1A2 fire control system TC's position: M1A2 GPSE/CITV setup with a periscope array. The main part of this vehicle that I am interested in is the auto-loader with a large number of rounds on tap, to use as a stepping stone to introduce newbies to the concept of limited ammo. The frequent "stop to reload the ready rack" thing seems to drive them insane and has, as a matter of fact, driven every one I've tried to get into SB away from it. Since we still don't have a difficulty option to make "everything" ready short of completely unlimited ammo, this is my next best option. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bond_Villian Posted April 14, 2019 Share Posted April 14, 2019 5 hours ago, Rotareneg said: Finer control of map updates would be nice, with options to set friendly and enemy map updates: For a players occupied vehicle. The only enemies shown on the map would be ones your vehicle has detected. For a players occupied unit (platoon or section.) As above, map only shows enemies your platoon or section has detected. For a players owned units. Again, map only showing enemies that units you own have detected. For command vehicles only. Then only the CO vehicles, or maybe only command vehicles like the M113G4-DK OPMV, would have full map updates. Also a radio contact report filter, or at least different coloured text for contact reports from units in your company/under your command etc. The frequency and amount of contact reports, waypoint reports etc can become unhelpful and frustrating 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted April 14, 2019 Share Posted April 14, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, Rotareneg said: Finer control of map updates would be nice, with options to set friendly and enemy map updates: For a players occupied vehicle. The only enemies shown on the map would be ones your vehicle has detected. For a players occupied unit (platoon or section.) As above, map only shows enemies your platoon or section has detected. For a players owned units. Again, map only showing enemies that units you own have detected. For command vehicles only. Then only the CO vehicles, or maybe only command vehicles like the M113G4-DK OPMV, would have full map updates. Happy for these to be options but the whole idea of a Battlefield Management System (BlueFor tracker, FBCB2 , etc.) is to provide as much situational awareness as possible. For any western vehicle (M1 family, Bradley, CR2, Warrior, Leopard, Marder, etc.) from the early 2000s, onwards the default for this should be "map updates on". e.g. I lase an enemy tank - that enemy appears on the screen of every tank in the Battlegroup. Edited April 14, 2019 by Gibsonm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marko Posted April 14, 2019 Share Posted April 14, 2019 (edited) 20 hours ago, Maj.Hans said: Since it is a "WHAT IF FANTASY TANK"... Drivers position: A Leo2 with reverse cameras Gunner position: M1A2 fire control system TC's position: M1A2 GPSE/CITV setup with a periscope array. The main part of this vehicle that I am interested in is the auto-loader with a large number of rounds on tap, to use as a stepping stone to introduce newbies to the concept of limited ammo. The frequent "stop to reload the ready rack" thing seems to drive them insane and has, as a matter of fact, driven every one I've tried to get into SB away from it. Since we still don't have a difficulty option to make "everything" ready short of completely unlimited ammo, this is my next best option. +1 For a Fantasy tank say maybe a T-14 or a M1 TTB with a fire control based on real world advance fire control systems. Edited April 14, 2019 by Marko 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delta6 Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 Mortar pits,concertina wire deployed as roads are smaller bunker emplacements for the grunts... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assassin 7 Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 If i'm not mistaken, Esims goes off of actual Vehicle data. I agree it would be pretty cool to have a make up T-14 or fake systems for the TTB. But I doubt it would happened anytime soon or at all. But could be wrong 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedgehog Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 46 minutes ago, Assassin 7 said: If i'm not mistaken, Esims goes off of actual Vehicle data. I agree it would be pretty cool to have a make up T-14 or fake systems for the TTB. But I doubt it would happened anytime soon or at all. But could be wrong M1TTB is probably based on M1A1 FCS 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assassin 7 Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Hedgehog said: M1TTB is probably based on M1A1 FCS Dunno, but here is an interesting site. http://warfaretech.blogspot.com/2015/05/m1-tank-test-bed-ttb-with-unmanned.html?m=1 some of the components are identical to components of the Stryker MGS Edited April 15, 2019 by Assassin 7 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 6 hours ago, delta6 said: Mortar pits,concertina wire deployed as roads are smaller bunker emplacements for the grunts... There already is wire - three different types. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bond_Villian Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 I think hes asking for wire as a line object in the map editor 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mav Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 Map editor adition The opposite "Wadi" The ability to construct simple blocking berms - just like a wadi 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marko Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 20 hours ago, Assassin 7 said: If i'm not mistaken, Esims goes off of actual Vehicle data. I agree it would be pretty cool to have a make up T-14 or fake systems for the TTB. But I doubt it would happened anytime soon or at all. But could be wrong I agree its very unlikely. But giving the subject some thought. I can actually see training value in having a opfor tank that's superior or even a match for the best western Tanks. It would require a rethink in how say as a example. your Conducting a hasty defense or attack. If your opfor could (in theory anyway) out range your AFV allegedly the T-14 can spot and engage targets out to 8 km And a new tube lunched ATGM with a even greater range ( new 3UBK21 Sprinter ATGM with an effective range up to 12 km developed specifically for it.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assassin 7 Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Marko said: I agree its very unlikely. But giving the subject some thought. I can actually see training value in having a opfor tank that's superior or even a match for the best western Tanks. It would require a rethink in how say as a example. your Conducting a hasty defense or attack. If your opfor could (in theory anyway) out range your AFV allegedly the T-14 can spot and engage targets out to 8 km And a new tube lunched ATGM with a even greater range ( new 3UBK21 Sprinter ATGM with an effective range up to 12 km developed specifically for it.) I serious doubt it as far as the T-14 goes. https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-analysis-on-the-Russian-T-14-Armata-tank-How-does-it-compare-with-western-tanks-like-the-M-1-Abrams-Leopard-2-and-Challenger-2-It-seems-very-light-compared-with-current-generation-MBTs Edited April 16, 2019 by Assassin 7 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 In regards to the whole "make something up" and "take a guess" remarks about the M1TTB, T-14, etc, I just want to point out that a simulator CAN have fictional or guesstimated elements without suddenly becoming a Sci-Fi fantasy game. Every armor array and every penetrator featured in ProPE that is not modeled based on a complete technical data package and test results, is an estimate. Nothing more, nothing less. And that's OK, because we don't KNOW, so we do the best we can to make a good representation. If the dev team throws together an interface for the M1TTB and sticks a line in the release notes that says "We really had no data, but this is a plausible way it might actually work, so when you design scenarios remember that this isn't intended as a high fidelity model" that's fine. It's not like they just added an X-Wing or a Tie Fighter... One of the great things about simulators is that you CAN try things out to see how they might work. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted April 16, 2019 Members Share Posted April 16, 2019 I Agree - with Time being the limiting factor in development. I wanted to give the TTB an "M1A1+" fire control system, but we just didn't get around it, yet (and we won't by June). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apocalypse 31 Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 9 hours ago, Ssnake said: I Agree - with Time being the limiting factor in development. I wanted to give the TTB an "M1A1+" fire control system, but we just didn't get around it, yet (and we won't by June). What about allowing PE helicopters the same functionality as the PRO version? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marko Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 21 minutes ago, Apocalypse 31 said: What about allowing PE helicopters the same functionality as the PRO version? Map size would be a issue with implementing such a feature in the pro version. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assassin 7 Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 I would like to see vehicle’s MRS systems implemented into PE. Also it would be interesting to have the crew dazed say after a hard hit causing damage. Example would be under damage report “Gunner dazed” with a count down until he regains his awareness and if your in that position then your screen dims in and out as if your in a daze. Just ideas 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Colossus Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 7 minutes ago, Assassin 7 said: Also it would be interesting to have the crew dazed say after a hard hit causing damage. Example would be under damage report “Gunner dazed” with a count down until he regains his awareness and if your in that position then your screen dims in and out as if your in a daze. Just ideas yes. crews teleport to each other's positions instantly, which means that vehicles can recover quickly from serious hits and continue to fight. this would mean a tank like a t-55 has an advantage over a t-72 by virtue of having more crew members which can instantly move to the gunner's pos to resume fighting- the effect is as if the gunner wasn't knocked out at all 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Colossus Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 request a distance script in the mission editor eg., this unit surrenders if this unit can see at least x enemy forces within 50 meters (100 meters, 500 meters, etc) currently there is no practical way to script a unit to behave in this way based on what it sees or doesn't see within a certain distance, only if it can see opponents or friendly units anywhere or in a specified zone- so it's difficult to script a certain behavior based on finer scales rather than broad regions 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apocalypse 31 Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, Marko said: Map size would be a issue with implementing such a feature in the pro version. how so? The AH1 fires TOW's....they are no different than ground TOWs. 4k range Doctrinal rules for employment of attack aviation still apply. A squad of infantry fighting in a 1km x 1km isn't going to get air support. Edited April 16, 2019 by Apocalypse 31 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 20 minutes ago, Apocalypse 31 said: how so? The AH1 fires TOW's....they are no different than ground TOWs. 4k range Doctrinal rules for employment of attack aviation still apply. A squad of infantry fighting in a 1km x 1km isn't going to get air support. ...it does, In Call of duty! 😎 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted April 16, 2019 Members Share Posted April 16, 2019 6 hours ago, Apocalypse 31 said: What about allowing PE helicopters the same functionality as the PRO version? As long as the implementation there is shit, no. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apocalypse 31 Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 48 minutes ago, Ssnake said: As long as the implementation there is shit, no. It's really not that bad. It's actually pretty awesome. 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.