Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

[stormrider_sp]

20 hours ago, Maj.Hans said:

I would be QUITE happy if we were given the choice in the scenario builder to pick between "Marder 1A3" and "Marder 1A3 Milan" and it was simply thrown in as a separate vehicle.  It would be NICE to be able to mount and dismount the Milan but more often than not I find myself wishing it was mounted, or cursing up and down that my infantry have, once again, set my launcher up inside a shrubbery.

+1

[Froggy]

AMX13 crewable (sight only).

Would be easy to implement (no FCS).

We have the french user manual if needed.

[Gibsonm]

1 minute ago, Froggy said:

Would be easy to implement (no FCS).

Ah those famous last words.

[Gibsonm]

On 12/24/2019 at 5:08 AM, Maj.Hans said:

I would be QUITE happy if we were given the choice in the scenario builder to pick between "Marder 1A3" and "Marder 1A3 Milan" and it was simply thrown in as a separate vehicle.  It would be NICE to be able to mount and dismount the Milan but more often than not I find myself wishing it was mounted, or cursing up and down that my infantry have, once again, set my launcher up inside a shrubbery.

Yes but wouldn't that require the development of whatever FCS was used when the Milan was mounted on the Marder?

[Froggy]

Milan was not fired from inside. it was just an external mount of the firing post.

 

[Gibsonm]

15 minutes ago, Froggy said:

Milan was not fired from inside. it was just an external mount of the firing post.

 

 

Understood but I suspect they'd still need to do some "modelling" even if it was some button to press after F7, then Q and Q and then "something" to be in the MILAN sight picture.

 

Reloading might also need some additional delay imposed to reflect the new round being passed up from inside.

 

Edited December 25, 2019 by Gibsonm

[Lumituisku]

38 minutes ago, Froggy said:

Milan was not fired from inside. it was just an external mount of the firing post.

Same with Warrior.  

 

Edited December 25, 2019 by Lumituisku

[Froggy]

Alt+F3 as TC MG  on other vehicule per exemple?

And it will disable the AI gunner controls the time you are in the sight

Edited December 25, 2019 by Froggy

[stormrider_sp]

Modeling or not, thats a small price to pay for something most people wish.

 

+1 for IFV ATGMs

[Lumituisku]

1 hour ago, stormrider_sp said:

Modeling or not, thats a small price to pay for something most people wish.

 

+1 for IFV ATGMs

 

Around 6+ silent / new Steelbeasters in my gaming "Shack" wish for IFV ATGMs too. And would love demountable MILAN launcher -  Especially much those that are deep in love to Marder or British vehicles.   Harry, Crow, Cuico, Flamo, Rovel and Tungsten to nickname few. And I would love that too. 

[Gibsonm]

6 hours ago, stormrider_sp said:

Modeling or not, thats a small price to pay for something most people wish.

 

+1 for IFV ATGMs

"Wish" being the operative word.

 

You can wish all you like, doesn't mean you are going to get it.

 

Sorry to be a downer on Boxing Day but community "wishes" tend to be residual effort / labours of love for eSim and get implemented when / if they get a chance.

[thewood]

Don't have a horse in this Milan race, but isn't the name of this thread literally "Content Wish List"

[Gibsonm]

  

52 minutes ago, thewood said:

Don't have a horse in this Milan race, but isn't the name of this thread literally "Content Wish List"

 

Yep and I'm just saying not all wishes are granted.

 

I'd love to see it too but realistically I don't expect it.

 

Edited December 25, 2019 by Gibsonm

[Ssnake]

The specific challenge is that the Milan could either be a vehicle component OR an equipment item of the troops, and that the platoon leader is supposed to retain the freedom to decide to keep it mounted/to dismount it for each and every battle position. This would require a lot of coding contortions to make that possible, and we simply had other priorities.

[stormrider_sp]

3 hours ago, Ssnake said:

The specific challenge is that the Milan could either be a vehicle component OR an equipment item of the troops, and that the platoon leader is supposed to retain the freedom to decide to keep it mounted/to dismount it for each and every battle position. This would require a lot of coding contortions to make that possible, and we simply had other priorities.

How about leaving that technicallity for the scen designer to decide whos gonna get the optional weapon/milan?

[Gibsonm]

1 hour ago, stormrider_sp said:

How about leaving that technicallity for the scen designer to decide whos gonna get the optional weapon/milan?

But that's not the issue as I understand it.

 

The issue is having the flexibility of the weapon mounted at say Battle Position A but dismounted at Battle Position B. I think that's also the same reasoning that Ssnake has used the last 4 or 5 times that this request has come up.

 

Now unless you want to start spawning vehicles with it mounted for BP A then destroying that vehicle by say Trigger then spawning the dismounted option for BP B its going to get really painful, really quickly.

 

Anyway the guy who owns the store has made the call.

 

That's not to say it might appear at some point, remember it took quite a few years (a decade ?) to get a playable T-72 variant.

 

Edited December 26, 2019 by Gibsonm

[Nike-Ajax]

well...

 

As a simple man then I would like a simple solution:

 

make the Milan post de facto fixed on the IFV.

 

the standard infantry setup for the marder already have Milan's, so I personally don't see the need to dismount it.

 

and as the Milan posts have been standard on the marders from the 1a1 forward then it seems reasonable to assume that they are there.

[Nike-Ajax]

on another note then I would give my left foot for a semi-crewable T-80.

 

so basically just a gunners sight, with NO interiors or any other details.

 

And if Santa was extra generous then the same for aT-90 and BMP-3.

 

This would shift OPFOR a full generation forward and create the possibility of much better scenarios.

 

both for TvT and TvOPFOR

 

 

[Maj.Hans]

5 hours ago, Ssnake said:

could either be a vehicle component OR an equipment item of the troops

I wish for content where Milan was only a vehicle component...How about that?

I understand that it could/can/is be dismounted from and mounted to the vehicle, perhaps even during the time-frame of a typical scenario.

Right now the choice is made for the user: they are "Locked In" to having the launcher go with the troops.

 

I am wishing for the alternative option to have them be "Locked In" to having the launcher stay with the vehicle.  Nothing more.

[Maj.Hans]

On 12/25/2019 at 5:55 AM, Lumituisku said:

Same with Warrior.  

 

 

Same for the M113G with Milan launcher mounted.

 

And, furthermore, the same goes for the US Army M113 with Dragon mounted.

[Gibsonm]

5 hours ago, Nike-Ajax said:

well...

 

As a simple man then I would like a simple solution:

 

make the Milan post de facto fixed on the IFV.

 

the standard infantry setup for the marder already have Milan's, so I personally don't see the need to dismount it.

 

and as the Milan posts have been standard on the marders from the 1a1 forward then it seems reasonable to assume that they are there.

 

Except then people like Grenny and Kingtiger, et al who can usefully employ the MILAN dismounted away from the vehicle, would rightfully complain that the MILAN is still bolted to the Marder in some vehicle hide away from where its needed.

 

That's the problem, you can't give the Platoon a MILAN bolted to the vehicle and one loose inside for the dismounts to carry because they only have "one" (not "one" of each).

 

Edited December 26, 2019 by Gibsonm

[Gibsonm]

5 hours ago, Maj.Hans said:

I wish for content where Milan was only a vehicle component...How about that?

I understand that it could/can/is be dismounted from and mounted to the vehicle, perhaps even during the time-frame of a typical scenario.

Right now the choice is made for the user: they are "Locked In" to having the launcher go with the troops.

 

I am wishing for the alternative option to have them be "Locked In" to having the launcher stay with the vehicle.  Nothing more.

 

But that denies the opportunity of dismounted anti armour attacks - arguably the more survivable option for Panzer Grenadiers than trying to use it from the vehicle.

 

Either / or (vehicle mounted or carried) is a compromise with attendant pluses or minuses and no doubt either view will not be truly happy until its properly modelled - with the one launcher being able to be used on the vehicle or dismounted from it.

 

Edited December 26, 2019 by Gibsonm

[Breakthrough7]

One ok solution for simulating the dismounting of milans from Marders if they were present would be to set the vehicle's missile launcher to --damage if (missile launcher)--unit this--is not carrying troops.  And --repair if (missile launcher)--unit this--is carrying troops.

[Gibsonm]

46 minutes ago, Breakthrough7 said:

One ok solution for simulating the dismounting of milans from Marders if they were present would be to set the vehicle's missile launcher to --damage if (missile launcher)--unit this--is not carrying troops.  And --repair if (missile launcher)--unit this--is carrying troops.

Except those types of settings apply across a Platoon.

 

For example a Platoon sized Battle Position with say one MILAN dismounted and one mounted would have the mounted MILAN useless in that solution.

 

Caveat: Trying to recall if a standard PzGdr Pl had 2 MILANs or not. The Germans seemed to have differing TO&Es every few months.

 

I'm sure if it was simple, and resulted in a reasonable solution, they would have done it by now.

 

Edited December 26, 2019 by Gibsonm

[Breakthrough7]

30 minutes ago, Gibsonm said:

Except those types of settings apply across a Platoon.

 

For example a Platoon sized Battle Position with say one MILAN dismounted and one mounted would have the mounted MILAN useless in that solution.

It's imperfect for sure, though in testing with Bradley's as stand-ins for Marders w/Milans, detaching the vehicle from the platoon mitigates problems associated with blanket-platoon-logic settings.  It's not a 100% or even 90% solution, and it could be gamed by dismounting Milan teams, and keeping a fire team inside the vic (effectively doubling your milans), but it is a surprisingly ok solution.