Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

[Apocalypse 31]

1. Better Infantry control - movement (shoot from standing and kneel) and sights for rifles and Light AT. Not asking for ArmA level of detail. 

 

2. Helicopter Controls. Fake sites, sure. Just something to let players aim and shoot. Not asking for DCS, here...

 

3. Vehicle Masking feature from the PRO version into PE. I wouldn't ask for another playable OPFOR vehicle, I guess. 

 

4. Wish we had embedded scenario Delta maps back. Not a fan of new system. Have stopped making custom terrain maps because distribution is a pain in the ass.

 

4A. Copy/Paste in Map Editor and maybe some  "blocks" of structures.

 

5. Deployable Command Posts. Would be nice to setup the M577 and see animations in game. 

 

5a. More types of command posts (red)

[ChrisWerb]

On 1/17/2020 at 8:08 PM, Gibsonm said:

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.

 

Yes, in retrospect I admit it's a bit pointless. I didn't realise it was the one mounted on the sensor mast, so you don't get to have both. Also it doesn't include a GSR as far as I can tell.

[ChrisWerb]

If I could have only five six things next time around(other than bug fixes)

 

1. Better infantry control.

2. More defineable" weapon loadouts for infantry

3. An IR MANPADS with selectable quality.

4. BONUS/SMArt

5. Anti materiel rifle with first person control and no restriction to HVTs.

6. Infantry fighting positions - no overhead cover, overhead "retreat" cover and full overhead cover and supporting AI logic

[ssidiver]

If we're listing our wanted lists, here is mine:

 

All current Israeli armoured vehicles, no need to make them 'playable'.

[hoggydog]

A contact report button would be useful (when working without enemy map updates) once pressed it would give you a co-ordinate report on all current enemy contacts.

[ghostdog688]

hello all! It’s been a while since I visited Steel Beasts forums. I plan on picking up the recent upgrade in the next month or so and want to congratulate you on keeping this sim alive and available to us enthusiasts.

I would still want something like the T-64, or other Tanks that can shoot ATGMs featured. It would change the threat picture for certain scenarios quite a bit. 
 

things like scout vehicles (BRDM-2AT, Scorpion) being crewed would be nice as well). I appreciate the difficulty in modelling these things without the customer demand at the Pro end. But perhaps the old “If you build it, they will come” can be done in a low-key speculative manner. Either way, it would very much allow many of us to really appreciate the REDFOR side if we could have a more realistic TO&E that doesn’t rely on the much slower AI engagement process.

 

completing interiors for Shot’Kal (and giving us a British Centurion seeing as they are similarly modelled) and Challengers would be nifty too.

 

dare I ask, is VR something that the PRO market are expressing an interest in? Seems to me something that could really change the game here in a tank sim as well. The recent IL-2 content has very much peaked my interest certainly. But I want more modern equipment than ww2

[Ssnake]

WRT VR supportm I commented in the following two threads:

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/11869-virtual-reality-support
https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/12680-using-steel-beasts-with-vorpx-vr

[dejawolf]

crew morale depends on if you're driving around in top modern western tank, or outdated soviet monkey model tincan. 

 

 

Edited January 21, 2020 by dejawolf

[Koen]

13 hours ago, dejawolf said:

crew morale depends on if you're driving around in top modern western tank, or outdated soviet monkey model tincan. 

 

 

Were these guys lost ?

What were they doing there so close to the Iranian lines ?

[dejawolf]

20 hours ago, Ssnake said:

I'm not going to dissect all the details in public. We chose different priorities for better or for worse, and we'll have to live with those decisions. Had we prioritized infantry behavior beyond the numerous improvements in the pathfinding field since 2014 - just one year after I assumed responsibility for software development - we'd still be stuck with the old lighting and low resolution terrain, and some would then complain about those issues instead.

I'd rather have improved infantry over an accurate star map of the sky complete with adjustable star brighhtness. 

Edited January 24, 2020 by dejawolf

[thewood]

Another wishlist item is in AFVs with large windows, being able to craze the window and reduce visibility.

[Apocalypse 31]

Wish

We had this for Steel Beasts:

 

Dynamic Combat Ops is a randomized, re-playable scenario that focuses on combined arms operations. Select your AO location, the factions you want to use and your platoon makeup or leave them all randomized and see what mission you are sent on. 

 

Features

• Auto generates tasks based on player input; number of tasks and types
• Allows players to select friendly, enemy, and neutral factions
• Environment; pick the time of day and weather
• 1-2 hour estimated duration

 

 

Edited January 26, 2020 by Apocalypse 31

[Hedgehog]

@Ssnake

Ready rack speed variations.

 

1st 2-3 rounds very fast loading. (On par with or just slightly slower than "Lap Loading") "The Sweet Spot"

Next 3-4 rounds is a slower reload, "The Sweet Spot Emptied"

Last few rounds take forever and a day, "Digging around in the corner of the ready rack for that spot that's bastard awkward to get to"

 

Reload Action Modification:

Loader Restows Ammo into the Sweet Spot first (In the M1 with a faster progress rate)

Then starts to fill up empty ready rack slots. (in the M1 standard progress rate)

 

Intended training outcome: "Restow ready rack often."

Is an incentive to Top up / restow as often as possible. And adding fidelity.

As at the moment there's no real disadvantage to running the ready rack dry (Other than exhausting ammo)

 

 

 

[ghostdog688]

I actually like this, as it would simulate loader fatigue as well - something that would level the “auto/manual loader debate” a little bit. 

[Hedgehog]

Vegetation based camoflague (And attendant masking of thermal signatures.)

Might need editing / adding to the 3D models though.

 

[Maj.Hans]

My wish list as of right now is a bunch of Cold-War era themed things:

 

Leopard AS1:

       Optional Weapon --> Passive IR Night Sight / NVG View through GPS

Image intensification night sights for the Leopard AS1 for when it's used as a Leopard 1A4 / 1A3A1 / 1A3A3 stand in for cold war scenarios.

EVEN IF the AS1 technically didn't have them and EVEN IF it's somehow different in a detail from the 1A4, I'd rather have a 'quick and dirty' stand in than wait forever for the ProPE team to eventually or perhaps never accurately model a West German Leopard 1...I understand time constraints and so on, so I would be very very happy with an 'Ersatz Leo' in this regard.

 

M60A3 Passive:

I'm aware these weren't made in large numbers and were mostly or entirely upgraded to the TTS version, however an M60A3 with the older Passive night sights might make a great stand in for several generations of earlier M60/M48 tank.

 

Marder 1A3:

       Optional Weapon --> Milan Launcher
Milan launcher mounted on the Marder 1A3,

EVEN IF it cannot be dismounted during the scenarios,

OR EVEN IF it requires an entirely new separate vehicle "Marder 1A3 Milan".

It would also be great to have a Marder 1 in a pre-thermal sight configuration...

 

With the current vehicles in ProPE I have noticed that night time scenarios tend to be difficult to make well balanced in certain time frames.  Warsaw Pact forces are at an unfair advantage as the various T-Tanks we have *DO* have passive IR night sights fitted to them, and as crappy as they may be, with no illumination flares for NATO, and no simulation of NATO vehicle's night fighting capability pre-thermals, they get cut up pretty fast...

 

Alternatively, NATO gets to have thermal night sights in 1975, and now they just cut Red to pieces...

 

M113G:

       Optional Weapon --> Milan Launcher

M113A:

       Optional Weapon --> Dragon Launcher

 

The 113 was seen in West German service with a Milan launcher bolted to the roof, and in US Army service in recon roles with a Dragon launcher bolted to the hatch.  Again for cold war, would like to see these some day.

 

BMP-1M and/or BMP-1P:

Even with an incorrect or incomplete 3D model.  BMP-1M is nothing more than the existing BMP-1 with a group six 81 mm 902V "Tucha" smoke grenade launchers along the back of the turret.  The BMP-1P furthermore replaces the AT-3 Sagger missile launcher with the AT-5 Spandrel launcher.  May be an AI Only vehicle but I understand that BMP-1 and BMP-2 tended to be often times used in mixed formations, such that a platoon may have some of each vehicle, so either or both of these would be a good compliment to the existing BMP-2.  Currently when a platoon is ordered to retreat, the BMP-2's pop smoke and the BMP-1's are left with everyone shooting at them.
Since we already have the BMP-1 simply adding optional smoke launchers to it would satisfy this request.

 

T-64BV:

Similar to the existing T-64B, but fitted with Kontakt-1 ERA.  AI only would be fine.

 

T-72AV / T-72M1V:

We already have the T-72A and T-72M1 modeled in the game combined into a single vehicle slot.  On my list of "would be nice" would be the Kontakt-5 equipped version of these vehicles.  Good simulation of various upgraded export/foreign production T-72M variants.

 

T-72B  m.1989 and T-72B1 m1989:

Fitted with Kontakt-5 ERA, but otherwise identical to the existing m.1985 vehicles, useful mostly for simulating a more modern OPFOT MBT.

 

One more thing:

The option to select between "Standard" and "Multi-spectral" smoke for *ALL* vehicles and on-map artillery!

Currently certain vehicles like the BTR-80 and certain T-72's don't have multi-spectral smoke as an option, while others ONLY have multi-spectral.  For me, personally, the former is more of an issue than the latter.  When creating night-time scenarios during eras where NATO would not have had thermal imagers mounted on all of it's vehicles or ATGM launchers, I always try to put multi-spectral smoke on literally everything that has smoke launchers.  It may not be "correct", but since the thermal sights aren't supposed to be there ANYWAY, I think of this as a way to hamper their effect as much as I possibly can.

 

Edited February 12, 2020 by Maj.Hans

[stormrider_sp]

21 hours ago, Maj.Hans said:

My wish list as of right now is a bunch of Cold-War era themed things:

 

Leopard AS1:

       Optional Weapon --> Passive IR Night Sight / NVG View through GPS

Image intensification night sights for the Leopard AS1 for when it's used as a Leopard 1A4 / 1A3A1 / 1A3A3 stand in for cold war scenarios.

EVEN IF the AS1 technically didn't have them and EVEN IF it's somehow different in a detail from the 1A4, I'd rather have a 'quick and dirty' stand in than wait forever for the ProPE team to eventually or perhaps never accurately model a West German Leopard 1...I understand time constraints and so on, so I would be very very happy with an 'Ersatz Leo' in this regard.

 

M60A3 Passive:

I'm aware these weren't made in large numbers and were mostly or entirely upgraded to the TTS version, however an M60A3 with the older Passive night sights might make a great stand in for several generations of earlier M60/M48 tank.

 

Marder 1A3:

       Optional Weapon --> Milan Launcher
Milan launcher mounted on the Marder 1A3,

EVEN IF it cannot be dismounted during the scenarios,

OR EVEN IF it requires an entirely new separate vehicle "Marder 1A3 Milan".

It would also be great to have a Marder 1 in a pre-thermal sight configuration...

 

With the current vehicles in ProPE I have noticed that night time scenarios tend to be difficult to make well balanced in certain time frames.  Warsaw Pact forces are at an unfair advantage as the various T-Tanks we have *DO* have passive IR night sights fitted to them, and as crappy as they may be, with no illumination flares for NATO, and no simulation of NATO vehicle's night fighting capability pre-thermals, they get cut up pretty fast...

 

Alternatively, NATO gets to have thermal night sights in 1975, and now they just cut Red to pieces...

 

M113G:

       Optional Weapon --> Milan Launcher

M113A:

       Optional Weapon --> Dragon Launcher

 

The 113 was seen in West German service with a Milan launcher bolted to the roof, and in US Army service in recon roles with a Dragon launcher bolted to the hatch.  Again for cold war, would like to see these some day.

 

BMP-1M and/or BMP-1P:

Even with an incorrect or incomplete 3D model.  BMP-1M is nothing more than the existing BMP-1 with a group six 81 mm 902V "Tucha" smoke grenade launchers along the back of the turret.  The BMP-1P furthermore replaces the AT-3 Sagger missile launcher with the AT-5 Spandrel launcher.  May be an AI Only vehicle but I understand that BMP-1 and BMP-2 tended to be often times used in mixed formations, such that a platoon may have some of each vehicle, so either or both of these would be a good compliment to the existing BMP-2.  Currently when a platoon is ordered to retreat, the BMP-2's pop smoke and the BMP-1's are left with everyone shooting at them.
Since we already have the BMP-1 simply adding optional smoke launchers to it would satisfy this request.

 

T-64BV:

Similar to the existing T-64B, but fitted with Kontakt-1 ERA.  AI only would be fine.

 

T-72AV / T-72M1V:

We already have the T-72A and T-72M1 modeled in the game combined into a single vehicle slot.  On my list of "would be nice" would be the Kontakt-5 equipped version of these vehicles.  Good simulation of various upgraded export/foreign production T-72M variants.

 

T-72B  m.1989 and T-72B1 m1989:

Fitted with Kontakt-5 ERA, but otherwise identical to the existing m.1985 vehicles, useful mostly for simulating a more modern OPFOT MBT.

 

One more thing:

The option to select between "Standard" and "Multi-spectral" smoke for *ALL* vehicles and on-map artillery!

Currently certain vehicles like the BTR-80 and certain T-72's don't have multi-spectral smoke as an option, while others ONLY have multi-spectral.  For me, personally, the former is more of an issue than the latter.  When creating night-time scenarios during eras where NATO would not have had thermal imagers mounted on all of it's vehicles or ATGM launchers, I always try to put multi-spectral smoke on literally everything that has smoke launchers.  It may not be "correct", but since the thermal sights aren't supposed to be there ANYWAY, I think of this as a way to hamper their effect as much as I possibly can.

 

100% agreed

[Maj.Hans]

My wish list as of right now is a bunch of mostly Cold-War era themed things:

 

Most interesting to me:

1. Leopard AS1 with optional PZB-200 passive IR night sights to better replicate the later era Leopard 1A4 with night vision.  We need some pre-thermal night vision for NATO.  Even if it's "wrong".  Even if the 3D model is "wrong".

 

2. M60A3 Passive - I'm aware these weren't made in large numbers and were mostly or entirely upgraded to the TTS version, however an M60A3 with the older Passive night sights might make a great stand in for several generations of earlier M60/M48 tank.  Even if it's "wrong" in details.

 

3. Marder 1A3:
Milan launcher mounted on the Marder 1A3,

EVEN IF it cannot be dismounted during the scenarios,

OR EVEN IF it requires an entirely new separate vehicle "Marder 1A3 Milan",

 

 4. M113G with Milan on the roof in West German service,

and M113A as seen in US service with Dragon mounted. - Less interesting than the 113G+Milan since Dragon sucked anyway...Skip?

 

5. T-72A with Kontakt-1:

Leverage on existing T-72A/M1 since FCS and internals are unchanged, recycle existing internals and FCS views, fills gap between T-72A/M1 and T-72B/BV.  Useful to replicate Georgian T-72 SIM1, Indian "Ajeya Mk2", Finnish T-72M1 upgrade prototypes, etc.

 

6. BMP-1M and/or BMP-1P:

Make smoke grenade launchers an "Optional Weapon" for the existing BMP-1 for when it's used in late cold-war scenarios where this upgrade was common.  Don't bother with the 1P too much work for what we'd get.

 

Less interesting things:

 

M1A1/SA or any other A1 variant featuring the SCWS for the TC, updated armor package and TIS, based on whatever version is easier for eSim to model, even with incorrect internal/external 3D models, would be an interesting modern era toy.

 

T-72B  m.1989 / T-72B1 m1989:

Fitted with Kontakt-5 ERA, but otherwise identical to the existing m.1985 vehicles, useful mostly for simulating a more modern OPFOT MBT, requires new external 3D and new damage model but could utilize existing interiors and FCS, sadly needs that new external 3D...

 

Any one of the following: Leopard 2A4M CAN, 2A4PL, 2A4SG.

Selection based upon whatever is easier for eSim to model, I think they're all pretty close, but any upgraded legacy 2A4 would be interesting to compare to the 2A5 etc.  If we get one we could probably use it to represent all three.

 

T-64BV:

AI only would be fine but Less interesting due to no internals done...

Not actually that useful for Cold War scenarios due to when it was introduced and numbers built?  Skip?

 

T-62 upgrade with gun launched missiles and BDD Armor

Use existing T-55AM.

 

Things that I can live without but I'll ask for anyway just in case they're easy to do:

 

A way to set an infantry mortar team to use its 60/82mm mortar in "direct fire" mode so they'll shoot at targets that they themselves can see.

Option to select between "Standard" and "Multi-spectral" smoke for *ALL* vehicles and on-map artillery.

Option to disable thermals on ATGM launchers.  Better infantry control in general.

An easy way in the scenario editor to create good spots for vehicles to exit water and to lay down AVLB bridges.

T-55M FIN upgrade?  Add 105mm L7/M68 ammo options to existing T-55 m.1974 so we can call it an Israeli "Tiran 5"?  A playable Merkava 2 or 3 even if its wrong because Israel will never tell us anything about it.

Edited February 16, 2020 by Maj.Hans
Version 3.0

[Gibsonm]

So your wish list as of a day or so ago is now doubled in length.

 

Looking forward to ver 3 in another day or so.

[ChrisWerb]

More wish list additions from Maj. Hans.

[Iarmor]

On 2/15/2020 at 7:15 PM, Maj.Hans said:

Add 105mm L7/M68 ammo options to existing T-55 m.1974 so we can call it an Israeli "Tiran 5"?

Why m.1974? The Tiran was never fielded with a LRF. There was a proposed modernization project in the 80s, with several prototypes built, but it was canceled since the IDF prefered to concentrate on the Merkava development and on Magach and Shot upgrades.

For the Tiran 4 and 5 (T-54 and T-55 respectively), the current T-55A model would have been sufficient with slight changes, such as the GPS introduced into the Tirans for the 105 mm gun:

 

 

Ballistic range columns, from left to right: coaxial mg (Browning 0.3), anti personnel (flechette), HESH, APDS (L-28), HEAT.

[Maj.Hans]

40 minutes ago, Iarmor said:

Why m.1974? The Tiran was never fielded with a LRF. 

Because I had incorrect info!  Better still would, of course, to be to use the already modeled player vehicle.

[Captain_Colossus]

mount/dismount vehicle crew if...

[Maj.Hans]

42 minutes ago, Captain_Colossus said:

mount/dismount vehicle crew if...

 

Speaking of dismounts, I really wish there was a way to get them to:

 

1. Dismount

2. March ahead of the AFV they dismounted from.

3. Maintain formation.

 

So that a scenario creator could easily have a group of PC's show up at a waypoint, get in line abreast formation, deploy troops, and move together as a unit to take a position.

[thewood]

Like this?