Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

[RedWardancer]

In the CMANO scenario I played, the Russians dropped an air assault company very close to their target airfields (Batsfjord, Kirkenes, Vadso, Vardo, and Banak), each were guarded by a lone platoon of infantry.  Kirkenes was guarded by a infantry company with a section of man-portable SAMS, while Banak (the main goal) was guarded by a full company of mechanized cavalry with attached SAMs, TOWs, and a battery of arty.  The air assaults easily dealt with all of the garrisons, but Banak was a bloodbath.  About an hour later, a wave of airborne infantry, followed by air drops of BMDs, landed about a mile from Banak; four total assaults.  Each were crushed by the defenders, mostly by the artillery.  

 

The ideal I had in mind was to simulate the airborne drops in an LZ about a mile from the targets with the graphics of them floating down, then marching/engaging on to the objectives.  Surely, being closer to the targets means a hot LZ, but this is beginning to be a common occurrence in war.  Just ask the Rangers when they dropped into Panama under fire.  Now granted, that was against the Panamanians, but for SB, this could be different.  I can make the game more difficult by making the defenders less armed (M113s instead of M2s, etc).

 

Again, if this is not possible, I'll just work with what I have and have the airborne "spawn" up.  Unlike my last project, this next one will be A LOT smaller.

[RedWardancer]

On a different suggestion, I would like to see the ability to add command teams.  

 

Let's say I want to modify a team of infantry from missile to platoon/company PL/CO or PSG because the scenario did not apply them for some reason.  You can change an infantry team to everything else but a command unit.  During my current scenario designing, I have noticed that a platoon of air assault dismounts on a Hind-E does not have a command element; each helo has a sniper and a missile team.  I can change out, but cannot add in a command team.  

 

Or, am I also doing this wrong?

[Gibsonm]

6 hours ago, RedWardancer said:

On a different suggestion, I would like to see the ability to add command teams.  

 

Let's say I want to modify a team of infantry from missile to platoon/company PL/CO or PSG because the scenario did not apply them for some reason.  You can change an infantry team to everything else but a command unit.  During my current scenario designing, I have noticed that a platoon of air assault dismounts on a Hind-E does not have a command element; each helo has a sniper and a missile team.  I can change out, but cannot add in a command team.  

 

Or, am I also doing this wrong?

 

If I understand your question / request correctly, you can just create an additional Infantry Platoon and remove the surplus sections / squads.

 

You can even rename the resulting HQ unit to match the other units.

 

Whether they will actually fit in the Hinds, in addition to what they are already carrying, is something you will need to determine.

 

Edited April 30, 2020 by Gibsonm

[Marko]

23 hours ago, Gibsonm said:

 

Indeed as already mentioned - I know it was a whole page ago.

 

 

I Know,

I was amused by the coincidence i had literally just watched the video when i read the posts.

 

[Iarmor]

On 4/29/2020 at 11:28 PM, Marko said:

Here's a video i watched a few weeks ago about the last combat drop for the UK paratroops.

Would make for a good set of mission. the Egyptians had four Su-100 deployed near the airport.

And fortified themselves in a near by town.

Check out mark felton productions on youtube a great site for military history buffs

Ths SU-100 picture in the video at 11:10 was taken near Suez city during the 1973 war. The vehicle is painted with the 3-tone (sand yellow, brown, black) camouflage scheme, the standard scheme of Egyptian army AFVs in 1973.

The picture at 10:50 looks genuine from 1956, with an all-yellow paint scheme and a crescent marking.

 

 

British army Centurions, French army M47s and AMX-13s followed the paratroopers in Port Said:

 

 

The first and last Israeli combat paratroop drop also took place in the 1956 conflict, at the eastern end of the Mitla Mountain Pass. In later conflicts the planned paratroop drops always got aborted, for being megalomanic or for other reasons. One example is the planned drop of the reserve 55th paratroop brigade at Sharm Ash-Sheikh in 1967, which became unnecessary when 4 AMX-13s and one jeep were landed there from the sea and found that the defenders had already abandoned the place. However, the paratroopers didn't remain frustrated for long, as they were assigned with a much more prestigious mission.  

Edited April 30, 2020 by Iarmor

[Parachuteprone]

The other possibility (and less work) , would be to be able to spawn troops in the air in parachutes over the target area in a random box.

They could then complete their landing normally.

This would eliminate to need to model the aircraft and their flight paths and escorts with A-A engagements. Be nice if we had offboard ASM strikes though.

I would rather have the aircraft but there are so many other important vehicles missing right now.

 

[Gibsonm]

9 hours ago, Parachuteprone said:

The other possibility (and less work) , would be to be able to spawn troops in the air in parachutes over the target area in a random box.

They could then complete their landing normally.

This would eliminate to need to model the aircraft and their flight paths and escorts with A-A engagements. Be nice if we had offboard ASM strikes though.

I would rather have the aircraft but there are so many other important vehicles missing right now.

 

 

Well "less work" but you still need to:

 

• Spawn them under silk,
• Allow the AI to engage them if they aren't on the ground,
• Replicate the effect of the weather (windy scenario lots of drift, calm weather less drift),
• Replicate the non battle casualties risk,
• Replicate them getting rid of their 'chutes,
• Replicate the confusion on the DZ as units link up and reform,
• ....

 

There's still a bunch of work there, even if it is "less".

 

Edited May 1, 2020 by Gibsonm

[Marko]

A possible alternative to paratroops is using heliborne troops.

I know the Soviets back in the day had a massive transport capacity for heliborne troops and equipment

The Mi 26 is capable of carrying a BMD-1/2 not sure about the 3, There is a way of scripting a mission so when your unarmed Mi_24 as a stand in for Mi-26

Lands in a designated zone a BMD  will spawn to replicated a successful Mi -26 transport deployment.

I have done so in the past successfully. 

It was a fun mission having a company of BMD mounted troop behind your opfor lines.

 

[Ssnake]

User HIPs and CH-47s.

[stormrider_sp]

Playable Leclerc!

[Hedgehog]

Would it be possible to have on map Artillery fire at scripted Target Areas?

 

Maybe having them use their own separate target list, so they don't get tied up with "normal" fire missions.

[Ssnake]

You can create scripted artillery fire missions and activate them with appropriate conditions...?

[Gibsonm]

34 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

You can create scripted artillery fire missions and activate them with appropriate conditions...?

I think he's referring to scripted missions for the on map units.

 

I'm not sure why the differentiation, unless he perhaps wants the audio of the guns firing or something for immersion?

[Hedgehog]

On 5/13/2020 at 9:28 PM, Gibsonm said:

I think he's referring to scripted missions for the on map units.

 

I'm not sure why the differentiation, unless he perhaps wants the audio of the guns firing or something for immersion?

Yes.

 

But also as a way to have multiple on map batteries hitting a TOT for example.

 

And it would be a way to have the "AI" use on map Mortars and Rocket Launchers.

 

At the moment on map batteries only shoot default 200 x 200 squares.

This suggestion would expand on that.

 

Setting a control logic condition to enable script use, AI use, or both would be a way round the AI being able to tie up all the batteries on auto generated fire missions.

Edited May 15, 2020 by Hedgehog

[Gibsonm]

47 minutes ago, Hedgehog said:

 

At the moment on map batteries only shoot default 200 x 200 squares.

 

 

Are you sure about that? I'm pretty sure I've called in on map fires for a linear smoke mission, etc.?

 

And of course for scripted missions, you just adjust the size of the impact area (box) to reflect what you want fired.

 

[Bond_Villian]

2 hours ago, Gibsonm said:

3 hours ago, Hedgehog said:

 

At the moment on map batteries only shoot default 200 x 200 squares.

 

 

Are you sure about that? I'm pretty sure I've called in on map fires for a linear smoke mission, etc.?

He may be referring to fire missions called by AI

[Hedgehog]

5 hours ago, Bond_Villian said:

He may be referring to fire missions called by AI

Correct.

 

When the AI requests a fire mission it is always a 200 x 200 box.

(Which is a programming limitation, as writing code to adjust azimuth adjust width length airburst etc would be substantial)

 

Ah yes, the other thing to add to this request, setting fuzing type for scripted fire missions.

Maybe even the delayed fuzing could make mini craters like the IED?

[munckmb]

I would like to see more high caliber turrets like the PROTECTOR MCT-30, SAMSON 30mm, Rheinmetall LANCE 30mm etc. So I can do more turret lego: Matching 8x8's with different turrets!

[Ssnake]

I'll call Rheinmetall on Monday, if they want us as a competitor for all simulators involving vehicles with their Lance turret. I have a good feeling about this.

😃

[Hedgehog]

On 4/21/2020 at 4:38 PM, Mirzayev said:

 

No, this wasn't the original wish. The original wish is to have a different camouflage pattern by unit. 

 

So, you can, for example, have different platoons, ALL ON THE BLUE SIDE, have a different camo pattern. IE, a Platoon of German Marders with German camo-patterns for the Soldiers as part of a US Tank Company. 

 

Sorry if we were talking past each other. 

I second this.

It also allows for streamlining scenarios.

Both designing and playing.

 

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the ability to have multiple parties and switching alliances.

 

But at the moment the multiple uniforms per side would be appreciated more.

 

"Porting over" the callsign selection menu would be my suggestion

[Gibsonm]

1 hour ago, Hedgehog said:

"Porting over" the callsign selection menu would be my suggestion

 

Sorry you lost me. How does this (and you can already change call signs via the template - 1-4 Platoons use US callsigns, 5 - 10 use UK, etc.) impact the camouflage pattern used?

 

Edited May 16, 2020 by Gibsonm

[munckmb]

10 hours ago, Ssnake said:

I'll call Rheinmetall on Monday, if they want us as a competitor for all simulators involving vehicles with their Lance turret. I have a good feeling about this.

😃

😂Cool!

[Liudas32]

As i understand it, for obvious reasons, the game will have more and more new modern equipment. Especially lightly armored vehicles 
And for the armaments of the Cold War of the Arab-Israeli Iran-Iraq wars will be less attention In those days, of course, operations were planned and carried out using large tank units There were many battles tanks against tanks
But if the goal is to create the realities of modern combat, then it is simply necessary to improve the infantry AI, because all these lightly armored are not at all assigned to battle with heavy tanks. Their main opponent is infantry and not in an open field but in shelters, in trenches in buildings.
So I think the main thing is to improve realism in this aspect It would be nice if the infantry ceased to be a group of suicides, knew how to use trench and shelters, and buildings
About the same can be said about helicopters. Their AI also has a tendency to suicide.
Also, the interaction of high-explosive fragmentation shells with soil or with elements of fortification and others buildings

[Grenny]

8 hours ago, Liudas32 said:

As i understand it, for obvious reasons, the game will have more and more new modern equipment. Especially lightly armored vehicles 
And for the armaments of the Cold War of the Arab-Israeli Iran-Iraq wars will be less attention In those days, of course, operations were planned and carried out using large tank units There were many battles tanks against tanks
But if the goal is to create the realities of modern combat, then it is simply necessary to improve the infantry AI, because all these lightly armored are not at all assigned to battle with heavy tanks. Their main opponent is infantry and not in an open field but in shelters, in trenches in buildings.
So I think the main thing is to improve realism in this aspect It would be nice if the infantry ceased to be a group of suicides, knew how to use trench and shelters, and buildings
About the same can be said about helicopters. Their AI also has a tendency to suicide.
Also, the interaction of high-explosive fragmentation shells with soil or with elements of fortification and others buildings

Infantry?

They do use bunkers and buildings? If the scenario designer puts the infantry in a wrong position, its not the fault of the "AI"...

 

Helicopters?

SB has no real flight model and ECM suits for the Helicopters. That makes them more vulnerable then they would be IRL.

They should be better at picking battle/firing positions. But "suicidal" they are not...only if given stupid commands by players/sce designers.

Edited May 16, 2020 by Grenny

[Hedgehog]

22 hours ago, Gibsonm said:

 

Sorry you lost me. How does this (and you can already change call signs via the template - 1-4 Platoons use US callsigns, 5 - 10 use UK, etc.) impact the camouflage pattern used?

 

Directly?

It doesn't.

 

Indirectly?

I'm saying why not use the same process used for picking call sign templates, as for selecting "limited issue" camo patterns (the new feature being suggested)

 

The idea being the Call sign and "limited issue camo" share the same dialog box, when defining who uses what call sign template / camo pattern.

 

Hey everyone, go back to the beginning of the thread is a good way of seeing how far SB has progressed 🙂

Edited May 16, 2020 by Hedgehog