Steel Beasts: Content Wish List

[MAJ_Fubar]

Truck (car) suicide bomber (going to hell).

Rump is correct, you can cause civilian vehicles to explode using the 'Explode combatant if..." command, and I must say it is quite an impressive blast.

[Invader ZIM]

Since the introduction of Remote Weapons systems in SB Pro, would it be possible to expand the option to more vehicles in a future release?

I'd like to see a Lemur RWS option for the CV90 series, as well as other vehicles that might be able to use the system.

Here's a quick video of the CV9040 with the Lemur:

And a link to the CROWS II which has a lot of customers and countries represented.

http://www.kongsberg.com/~/media/KPS/Datasheets/Dataark_crows_sep%202010-A4.ashx

Also, RWS systems for other countries vehicles, like the Crows II for the M1A2, etc.

It's interesting to see the force multiplier potential when you can save your main gun ammo for something more threatening, but use an RWS with 40mm grenade launcher or .50cal to take out thin skinned or personel targets quickly with RWS equipped forces.

[Hedgehog]

Rump is correct, you can cause civilian vehicles to explode using the 'Explode combatant if..." command, and I must say it is quite an impressive blast.

Indeed I'm tempted to apply this to supply vehicles with a "If this is no longer unit X = BANG!"

[Panzer_Leader]

Since the introduction of Remote Weapons systems in SB Pro, would it be possible to expand the option to more vehicles in a future release?

I'd like to see a Lemur RWS option for the CV90 series, as well as other vehicles that might be able to use the system.

Here's a quick video of the CV9040 with the Lemur:

And a link to the CROWS II which has a lot of customers and countries represented.

http://www.kongsberg.com/~/media/KPS/Datasheets/Dataark_crows_sep%202010-A4.ashx

Also, RWS systems for other countries vehicles, like the Crows II for the M1A2, etc.

It's interesting to see the force multiplier potential when you can save your main gun ammo for something more threatening, but use an RWS with 40mm grenade launcher or .50cal to take out thin skinned or personel targets quickly with RWS equipped forces.

On that note, I'd really like to see a fully modelled Kongsberg M151 Protector if possible.

[Invader ZIM]

Yea, any extra options are always good. Here's the M151 brochure: http://www.kongsberg.com/~/media/KPS/Datasheets/Dataark_M151_september%202010%20A4.ashx

I did find this:

http://www.kongsberg.com/en/kps/products/remoteweaponstation/protector%20dual%20rws/

Wow, dual weapons, plus extra smoke grenades for the vehicle, already chosen by the Canadians for the Tactical Armored Vehicle Program last year.

[FLEXCopMNPD]

Check this out

Would love to see this on the Brad

[Invader ZIM]

LOL, yea, in the video section I posted that video, as well as a Bradley using at least part of the system in Iraq.

Nothing makes me drool more than having 2 Tow missiles, a 25mm autocannon, a RWS with Javelin launcher and a 40mm grenade launcher, together with a complete combat team. That's an amazing amount of firepower for a single Bradley.

[Tacbat]

I guess equipping a platoon with different weapon options would give the platoon a lot of versatility.

[outontheop]

Well, everyone has his own idea of "fun".

Going trough firing tables and calculating a FM is not my idea of "fun".

Don't know about the Paladin(did it even exist in "cold war times" ?)...but the US-M109 models I know, don't have any scope or aiming system for direct fire other then looking down the barrel. Not very accurate. :-P

Besides using a howitzer for direct is a "last resort" thing.

It is an utter waste of an artillery system to be used in that way and no (sane) commander would do it willingly.

That's correct, no Paladins (M109A6) in the Cold War. What I meant was it would be fun to use the Paladin (M109A6) in the direct-fire MOUT role as was practiced with the Paladin('s predecessors, M109-M109A5).

Also, yes, the M109 DOES have a direct fire sight: you simply use the panoramic sight, normally used for acquiring aiming stakes (and still present on the Paladin as a backup to the automated GPS/INS), set it to 0 mils deflection, and superelevate off of a permanently installed direct fire range chart conveniently located just to the front right of the gunner's station.

Yes, they did practice direct fire, and still do. It is far from useless; it is critical in battery defense, and in a MOUT situation, often more useful than indirect: it allows you to hit specific buildings or rooms, and just as important, it allows you to effectively strike lower-story targets in built-up areas. If you doubt the efficacy of direct-fire artillery, I recommend reading up on the battle of Aachen, the assault on the Siegfried line, WW2 urban fighting in Russia, and the use of "killer" and "killer junior" missions in Vietnam.

I would also contend that artillery raids would make an interesting mission type: if you are interested in scouting missions, where the goal is to approach enemy lines undetected in a thinly armored, lightly armed scout vehicle, then it should be equally interesting to conduct a mission where you have to infiltrate THROUGH enemy lines in a thinly armored SP howitzer, with the additional challenge of calculating and firing a mission at a high-value deep target out of range from the friendly side of the lines. Yes, it's a real mission, yes, it is practiced.

[borisz]

Arty is getting more complicated in SB v3. I thing it is fun to make a crewable and operable artillery unit, with more realism. Think multiplayer! You dont just point and click on the map, and arty will fall. You have to call and pinpoint the target coordinates verbaly. Then the arty unit crew has to compute the necessary data and type in the "ballistic computer"... etc.

There could be scenarios where the focus is not on the tanks, but artillery batteries and arty observers. Just think of it.

If M1A2 SEP an other present vehicles is in the SB, why not to put more "not cold war" warmachines in it?

Another vehicle to my list:

A modern, crewable ABV (Assault Breacher Vehicle)

For me, it is great fun to do a minefield breach in combat enviroment.

[[]_--__[]KITT]

There's probably no way to have this in SB Pro PE.

But I would like to see Merkava tank in SB Pro PE, preferably the latest Mk. IV.

AND

I'd like to see active protection added to a few tanks where appropriate.

[delta6]

M1A2 SEP with TUSK 2 Kit...

[Grenny]

I would also contend that artillery raids would make an interesting mission type:...

In my book, "artillery raid" has a meaning that differs a little ;-)

There it means: many tubes at one target, small number of rounds as quick a possible( MRSI would be great for that purpose)

The idea of moving through enemy lines (for other reason then getting back to your own lines after some shit happend) in an loud, big box stuffed to the hilt with explosives...well, seems quiete bold to me.

[outontheop]

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your books are all in German, and that "artillery raid" does not translate correctly from them, then. In six years as an artillery officer, every reference I've ever seen for it (as well as the first page of google hits for the term) come up with exactly what I described. They were used in Gulf War 1 (primarily in the counter-battery role), they've been conducted at the section level in Afghanistan (possibly Iraq as well, but I'm not aware of it; most targets were off-limits to indirect fires anyhow).

Granted, it's often conceived as an air assault operation with light guns deployed by helicopter insertion, but the concept of an artillery raid is not "massing fires from multiple firing batteries". That is generally known as a time-on-target mission.

[TankHunter]

A better way to go through all of the mounted infantry in the event/condition box for routes when you want to select which one you want to move down a route. Make it conditional (only this platoon is connected to this route, so it should only be these 6-8 squads) or make it so you can if you so desire type in which unit you want exactly. As it is it is a nightmare if you have any non-zero number of PCs/trucks/IFVs.

[Marko]

One of these please.

[mpow66m]

MTLB?

[NoCarrier]

Looks like an SA-13 to me, which is a SHORAD system mounted on an MTLB, yes. Speaking for myself, I'm not convinced about its usefulness in Steel Beasts. Seems to me a system like this would be skirting the edges of this simulation's scope.

[dejawolf]

Looks like an SA-13 to me, which is a SHORAD system mounted on an MTLB, yes. Speaking for myself, I'm not convinced about its usefulness in Steel Beasts. Seems to me a system like this would be skirting the edges of this simulation's scope.

dunno about that. the tunguska is already serving as a pretty deadly adversary keeping attack helicopters from going on a rampage.

[Tacbat]

Happy to see something on my personal wish list coming to SB in the next year or so.

[Invader ZIM]

*Searching frantically for Tacbat's wishlist*

[hoggydog]

*Searching frantically for Tacbat's wishlist*

probably tacmoths

[mpdugas]

DX11...

[Tjay]

probably tacmoths

Very good. :bigsmile:

For me, it would be just one BMP1 commander who can see and engage targets directly to his front with the missile at a range of more than 1km.

[Guggy]

Hey all, first post here

My best-case wishes would be a T-64B or T-80BV. Neither is really marketable though sadly. It'd be nice to have them though as a unit a cut above the T-72M1. Failing that, the T-72B would be another exceptional addition.

Would also love to see support for earlier types of ammo for ATGM platforms, like the AT-3 Sagger etc.

EDIT: Also, the M47 Dragon for US infantry. Preferably usable, with the missile poppin' through the air as it did