Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

[Gibsonm]

9 hours ago, stormrider_sp said:

There is already the option to add just a text box so you can place text whenever you want. It makes it easier to declutter whenever you dont want any text.

Yes I know that. I'm not asking for that option.

 

The current arrangement doesn't make it easier to move a graphic and label at the same time.

 

You need to click on the graphic and move it, then go into a clicking frenzy to "find" the free floating text box.

 

Often the map has too much information to click and drag to form a area around bother without also including other items.

 

The same applies if you want to edit said "free floating" text box.

 

By all means you can continue to use just the free text, but I suspect several would like the additional feature of "tethered text", especially as it has already been partially implemented for some graphics, but not all.

 

Edited December 29, 2019 by Gibsonm

[Gibsonm]

8 hours ago, Ssnake said:

SB Pro 5.0 will do that.

Dare I ask, which of the preceding entries does that quote apply to?

[Ssnake]

The intermediary text sizes, and a number of other GUI related things too. At this point it's impossible to make an accurate prediction about specific features implementations; the point of 5.0 is to implements a new software architecture that allows us to adapt development processes, rather than the implementation of a specific catalog of new features. But, it's safe to say that reworking the user interface is going to be a major component of the task, and that will bring, among other things, the end of rasterized fixed size fonts, so it will work with Windows font scaling (and thus, implicitly, with 4K and higher screen resolutions; once that we can do Windows based font scaling we can also have near-seamless in-application font scaling for map graphics).

[Gibsonm]

9 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

The intermediary text sizes, and a number of other GUI related things too. At this point it's impossible to make an accurate prediction about specific features implementations; the point of 5.0 is to implements a new software architecture that allows us to adapt development processes, rather than the implementation of a specific catalog of new features. But, it's safe to say that reworking the user interface is going to be a major component of the task, and that will bring, among other things, the end of rasterized fixed size fonts, so it will work with Windows font scaling (and thus, implicitly, with 4K and higher screen resolutions; once that we can do Windows based font scaling we can also have near-seamless in-application font scaling for map graphics).

Ah OK so that maybe links into Kingtiger's request re various font sizes.

 

Although the part about "reworking the user interface" gives me some hope too.

 

[Ssnake]

It absolutely should. Even if we may not be able to address each and every issue right away, it should at least simplify things enough that we can adapt the GUI to customer requests with much less effort than has been the case since about, well, "always". Redesigning the GUI framework is another major development effort - somewhat comparable to a new terrain engine - less sophisticated maybe, but the UI by definition has ties to about every component in Steel Beasts.

[ChrisWerb]

Hopefully this one should be quite easy to implement. SA-13 Gopher/8K35 Strela 10 (take the launcher from the SA-9 and mount it on the MTLB),

[Iarmor]

M60A3 TTS with ERA

 

 

Other than the ERA, commander's cupola, smoke grenade dischargers, 60 mm mortar and machine guns, the IDF M60A3 was identical to the one already modeled in SB.

[Grenny]

zis maschine gun:

 

 

[Kingtiger]

Function "Set Damage if" - "Show to enemy" and a related "Repair if"

 

That way we can simulate artillery radar, during fire mission the artillery piece get the damage "show to enemy" function taken from penalty zon) and when the fire stops you set a "Repair" on show to enemy.

[R Lee]

I'd be happy with a mouse sensitivity slider.  My TC jukes around like a drunk chicken.

Edited January 15, 2020 by R Lee

[Ssnake]

Does your mouse have a dpi selector switch?

That would be a very quick solution to your problem.

[ChrisWerb]

1. At the moment, in game, AI gunners seem to be able to determine instantly if a vehicle is killed. When I'm playing a gunner first person, it's often difficult to tell, particularly at longer ranges with early TI etc. For AI gunners, could you please consider an option of "keep shooting until target burns or changes shape" or "put one round into each target then move on until they all burn or change shape", or something along those lines?

 

2. Could we have the option that some (it can be a small minority) enemy vehicles and infantry "play dead" if they receive minor damage or if their unit is being massacred, then are resurrected with nefarious intent? 

 

By the way, the combination of bumpy terrain and more aggressive (vs armour) infantry in the latest version is a vast improvement. I just wish we had the option to decide scale of issue of LAWs within infantry sections/teams so you don't just have the one RPG guy when you can see other's in the team carrying disposable LAWs that are only set-dressing at the moment.

Edited January 15, 2020 by ChrisWerb

[Lumituisku]

3 hours ago, ChrisWerb said:

By the way, the combination of bumpy terrain and more aggressive (vs armour) infantry in the latest version is a vast improvement. I just wish we had the option to decide scale of issue of LAWs within infantry sections/teams so you don't just have the one RPG guy when you can see other's in the team carrying disposable LAWs that are only set-dressing at the moment.

Btw..  there is kind of work around for this too that "May" work on some situations if you want to tinker and test how it would be..   (With vehicle carried dismounts it messes symbol menu (next to compass) for troops and even vehicles of that unit!!!)

 

Spawn new infantry squad   and you can divide it to two.   Both half's can be set to carry RPG.    So  in the end squad has 2  men's able to fire RPG 

 

Other solution is to simply use "attach to"   with that you can add infantry units to even vehicles if there is space for troops to be attached.   as many squads or individuals as you want or more precisely, fits inside the vehicle. 

Edited January 15, 2020 by Lumituisku

[ChrisWerb]

Excellent! Thank you!

[Ssnake]

You're giving up the squad's MG however, if you create two RPG teams.

[Lumituisku]

32 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

You're giving up the squad's MG however, if you create two RPG teams.

Well...  it is possible to delete existing vehicle dismounts..  and to have..  say..  1x riffle team  (4 members)  divided two..   to have double AT weapons...   and to add  MG  as another team  to vehicle.  Downside however is..  That vehicle squads no longer work as intended..  also naming of units gets really funny.   It kind of works..  but I would not recommend it.  

[Ssnake]

Yes.

[ssidiver]

I've been able to make mixed sections/squads by taking a standard unit, change the size to what I require, separate into 'sub units'. Then change some/all of those teams into what I require, then reattaching them back together.

 

You can then save the recombined unit as a template.

 

Took some time to work through this, till I tumbled that they need the same unit 'number'. I use the same idea to create mixed AFV platoons.

[Kev2go]

an M1A2 SEP variant mounted with Crows

[Gibsonm]

5 hours ago, ssidiver said:

I've been able to make mixed sections/squads by taking a standard unit, change the size to what I require, separate into 'sub units'. Then change some/all of those teams into what I require, then reattaching them back together.

 

You can then save the recombined unit as a template.

 

Took some time to work through this, till I tumbled that they need the same unit 'number'. I use the same idea to create mixed AFV platoons.

 

Yes like this:

 

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/13672-17-heterogeneous-group-3023/

 

[ChrisWerb]

Gilding the lily a bit, but I'd like to see have the Tripod mounted remote sensor head for Fennek, which I believe can be deployed something like 50 metres from the vehicle. 

[Gibsonm]

Perhaps before we get too excited about deployable sensor heads, telescopic masts, etc. perhaps we can look at the "sensor suite" the head provides?

 

There is little point doing all the coding to replicate selecting the location (do we just click on the map somewhere within a circle - similar to say barbed wire), the deployment and setup such a sensor head if say the Ground Surveillance Radar isn't actually modelled.

 

Otherwise you just have a small item that, by itself (without say a GSR capability), brings little value to the sim.

 

Edited January 17, 2020 by Gibsonm

[Grenny]

I'll stick with my old priority list:

 

1. MILAN/MELLS mounted on Marder 1A3

2. Player controlled AT weapons for the inf squads

3. Adjustable sights on PKM, M60, M240

4. maybe some basic controls of Helicopters (even fake-sights and triggers would be fine)

5. more playable tank-hunters (BRDM-2AT, Jaguar...)

6. Player controlled personal weapons (rifle) for the inf squads

 

[Wax Savage]

Currently, to extend the variety of structures we must assemble multiple units to make one larger one.

How about the ability to permanently glue these creations together and add them to the available inventory of structures?

 

Cut and paste capability in maps would also be helpful.

[Maj.Hans]

On 1/17/2020 at 4:41 PM, Grenny said:

1. MILAN/MELLS mounted on Marder 1A3

2. Player controlled AT weapons for the inf squads

3. Adjustable sights on PKM, M60, M240

4. maybe some basic controls of Helicopters (even fake-sights and triggers would be fine)

5. more playable tank-hunters (BRDM-2AT, Jaguar...)

6. Player controlled personal weapons (rifle) for the inf squads

Me too.

 

Also MILAN on M113G, and if possible, Dragon on M113A