What tank would you pick to be playable

[Deputy276]

If Mr Murphy is in your tank you have issues bigger than the enemy:wink2:

And shit does happen, just outside after proper crew drills.

Mr.Murphy is everywhere and seems to make a special effort at following me around. :biggrin:

[Homer]

...SB is missing out on some real cash income not having all that stuff.:luxhello:

I think they have a good idea of where to find the real cash because they make their money through government contracts not from the entertainment market. Any profit they make from us is offset by the time spent on tech support. I think our real value is the "free" marketing and QA we provide for them. They aren't really interested in squeezing a dollar out of us like WOT does.

However, I do know they have mousepads. They will probably trade one for a pizza.

[Deputy276]

I think they have a good idea of where to find the real cash because they make their money through government contracts not from the entertainment market. Any profit they make from us is offset by the time spent on tech support. I think our real value is the "free" marketing and QA we provide for them. They aren't really interested in squeezing a dollar out of us like WOT does.

However, I do know they have mousepads. They will probably trade one for a pizza.

It's a deal!!! :bigsmile:

I suppose you are correct. Just seems like a possible source of revenue that is neglected. Oh well. Guess I will just have to design them myself.

[Homer]

Setting up a donation button is a horrible idea. SB already gets enough flak for its full price. How do you think asking for donations in addition would be received? How would it be perceived by their professional clients if they saw it? If you want to show your support for them, buy 8 licenses.

[Marko]

I saw some M48s when I was in Nam. They mainly stayed on road police duty. Go into the rice paddies and they were dead meat. RPGs really tore the heck out of our armor.

I have read there were some clashes with NVA armour.

In T-54 and Pt-76's one particular battle over a river crossing the M-48's decimated an attacking T-54 company. The more I read about the M-48 the more I think it really would make for a great addiction to the sim it wasn't a superior tank compared to the T-54/55 but it held its own, it had an incredible amount of upgrades in many of the nations in which it served.

[Deputy276]

Setting up a donation button is a horrible idea. SB already gets enough flak for its full price. How do you think asking for donations in addition would be received? How would it be perceived by their professional clients if they saw it? If you want to show your support for them, buy 8 licenses.

The "flak" SB gets for it's price are not from users. It is from people who don't want to spend the money or are content with arcade games. Do we really care about them? I don't. They will never buy SB anyway. Nobody would be "asking" for donations. There would simply be a PayPal button and you could contribute if you want to. If you don't, no problemo. That's how "donations" work:wink2: I doubt very much their professional clients care two squirts about what is going on with the public release. As long as they get the quality of simulation they are used to, that is all they care about. And what would I do with 8 licenses? Hang dongles from the Christmas tree as ornaments? Don't think the wife would appreciate that decoration. :bigsmile:

[Deputy276]

I have read there were some clashes with NVA armour.

In T-54 and Pt-76's one particular battle over a river crossing the M-48's decimated an attacking T-54 company. The more I read about the M-48 the more I think it really would make for a great addiction to the sim it wasn't a superior tank compared to the T-54/55 but it held its own, it had an incredible amount of upgrades in many of the nations in which it served.

If you want a really detailed study of armor in Nam, this website has a book converted for online reading:

http://www.history.army.mil/books/vietnam/mounted/index.htm

[GSprocket]

T54/T55 and one of the Soviet IFV seem to be the most obvious 'gaps' in coverage.

So BMP1 or BMP2 and the T55.

[AlphaOneSix]

And what would I do with 8 licenses?

Give them as gifts to people who don't want to pay the steep price but you think would really enjoy Steel Beasts!

Everyone* wins!

(*except your wife)

[Deputy276]

Give them as gifts to people who don't want to pay the steep price but you think would really enjoy Steel Beasts!

Everyone* wins!

(*except your wife)

LOL....unfortunately, I live in the boonies, am an old fart, and don't know many people (actually only ONE) who might be interested in the sim. Besides, paying the steep price is kind of an "initiation" into the sim. "If you want to dance to the music, you have to pay the piper".

[BlackDeath]

T54/T55 and one of the Soviet IFV seem to be the most obvious 'gaps' in coverage.

So BMP1 or BMP2 and the T55.

Hell yeah, more soviets junk for more fun

And dreaming : the tiger and t34-85

[Marko]

Hell yeah, more soviets junk for more fun

And dreaming : the tiger and t34-85

+1 for a world war two SB add on down the road a few years hopefully.

As much as I admire the tiger a panther /T-34 match would be more interesting IMO

All the tiger would have to do is keep its frontal armour facing the T-34 and let the 88 do its Thing. LoL

[Maj.Hans]

I'd gladly pay another $50+ for a quality WW2 module for Pro PE.

Playable Tiger I, Panther, Panzer IV, and then of course some soviet made s**t to smash with it. :1:

I'll reiterate something I said earlier about more vehicles for Pro PE. I'm perfectly happy to have them without a 3D interior. If you gave me the choice between having a playable M60A1 next year with only optics and vision block views or an playable M60A1 never because no military customer will pay for it...Well I'd just get over not having 3D views and I'd do it awful damn fast.

If E-Sim felt like being super-nice, they could get a nice photograph of the interior for the gunner and do a 2D "photo-realistic" panel they way they did for the Leo2A4 and M1A1/HA in the original Steel Beasts. But how often did we use those? I honestly never did. They don't really matter. The gunner belongs on his sights and the TC belongs head out.

In the event that a vehicle has no usable vision blocks, for example the M113G4-DK, and buttoning up will leave the TC with only a black screen to stare at, offer him instead the view through the driver's three vision blocks so that he can continue to act as the driver without leaving the TC's position.

[Marko]

I'd gladly pay another $50+ for a quality WW2 module for Pro PE.

Playable Tiger I, Panther, Panzer IV, and then of course some soviet made s**t to smash with it. :1:

+1 I would have no issues paying that either for a WW2 DLC

if Esim ever do add WW2 AFV's and that's a big if,

They could Start by just adding say two or three models like the panzer 111 Sherman and T-34/76.

If the DLC was a success, they could then work there way up to the heavy's tiger JS3 etc

[Vikingo]

I go for BMP1 or/and 2 :gun:

[IrishHussar]

I would like Cheiftan/Challenger 1 modelled as they both played quite a large part in the Cold War, also the fire control systems and main armament are very similar so perhaps there could be some economy in their build??

[Crusty]

M48A3 or A5

Reasons:

Crusty will pick Chieftain.

And most Yanqui's will probabaly pick the M60.

and the T-55

Of course I will, I'm predictable if nothing else

[Crusty]

I would like Cheiftan/Challenger 1 modelled as they both played quite a large part in the Cold War, also the fire control systems and main armament are very similar so perhaps there could be some economy in their build??

I'm with you on this one Irish, these two tanks added to SB would open up a lot of fantastic cold war scenarios

[krause]

There are two things sorely missing from SB at this time:

1. An early cold war NATO tank (equivalent to the t-62) like the m-60

2. A good russian/soviet tank like the t-80u or t-90.

I would love to see either/or.

[Grenny]

There are two things sorely missing from SB at this time:

1. An early cold war NATO tank (equivalent to the t-62) like the m-60

2. A good russian/soviet tank like the t-80u or t-90.

I would love to see either/or.

There is the Leopard 1, remove the TIS and you have a good T62 oponent.

[Parachuteprone]

Although I would love to see some WW2 equipment I doubt the devs have the time to spend on it. I think its best to fill out the more modern equipment. Maybe something like an M-51 to split the difference ?

Only way I can see WW2 happening would be if they allowed a 3rd party produce them. (Similar to what is happening with DCS). At least in any numbers to be useful.

I'm not sure 3 or 4 tanks from US/GB/Germany/Russia would be more than a curiosity.

A full WW2 module with Anti-tank guns etc, would be the thing.

I imagine WW2 equipment would be much simpler & easier to produce ?

I would happily pay for it.

Which leads to a question - How long would it take to make a WW2 tank vs Modern ?

[macieksoft]

There is the Leopard 1, remove the TIS and you have a good T62 oponent.

No need for this. Just take LEO AS1 (its playable but without 3D interior, just like T-62 anyway). It has no TIS by default, but it has LRF and FCS (together with simple lead prediction) so it would be still more powerful than M-60A1 (something between A1 and A3 but a bit closer to A3). Leo 1 have even better FCS (and a TIS by default) so it would be very close to M-60A3.

T-62 had no rangefinder at all and no FCS at all. The best thing it had was a simple stab. M-60A1 had the coincidence rangefinder and very simple mechanical FCS but AFAIK no stab. M-60A2 had a funny short and fat gun (AFAIK over 150mm caliber) and it was capable to launch ATGM! M-60A3 got the serious FCS (with lead prediction and LRF) and AFAIK some of A3 got thermals.

If i had a choice to chose T-62 or LEO1 in MP PVP combat i would chose LEO1, even without thermal. Ranging in T-62 is pain in the ass, and lead is even more. LEO do not have such problems, just first shot hit and take down the T-62.

And in T-62 in SB you cannot observe where the round falls (gunsight goes up as soon as you fire because gun goes in loading position). So you cannot make corrections! Its pain in the ass that soon turns into sabot in ass from any tank with serious FCS.

[TSe419E]

T-62 had no rangefinder at all and no FCS at all. The best thing it had was a simple stab. M-60A1 had the coincidence rangefinder and very simple mechanical FCS but AFAIK no stab. M-60A2 had a funny short and fat gun (AFAIK over 150mm caliber) and it was capable to launch ATGM! M-60A3 got the serious FCS (with lead prediction and LRF) and AFAIK some of A3 got thermals.

I have read that in the late '70s T-62s started to be upgraded with LRFs.

The M60A1 started getting AOS (Add On Stab) in the early to mid '70s as part of new production and as a retrofit. It was not as sophisticated as the stab on the M1s but it really increased the ability of gunners to hit targets while on the move.

The m60A2 had a 152mm gun/missle system.

Only a very few M60A3s, right at first, did not have TTS. The one day I was on one in the fall of '79 it was one of the things that was easy to see was very different compared to the 'A1s I was serving on.

And in T-62 in SB you cannot observe where the round falls (gunsight goes up as soon as you fire because gun goes in loading position). So you cannot make corrections! Its pain in the ass that soon turns into sabot in ass from any tank with serious FCS.

From Steel Beasts' Wiki; Quickly switching to 3x after firing will allow you observe the target and - depending on the target's range - sense the fall of your shot. I found the T-62 much easier to fight with after I found this tidbit. I still would not want to engage targets over 1500m and I will let the AI take credit for (or blame for not) hitting targets.

[MDF]

And in T-62 in SB you cannot observe where the round falls (gunsight goes up as soon as you fire because gun goes in loading position). So you cannot make corrections! Its pain in the ass that soon turns into sabot in ass from any tank with serious FCS.

Two partial solutions:

(1) you can have a human TC and gunner, and the TC can observe the fall of shot. Not always practical in multiplayer, if the friendly force size is large in comparison to the number of players.

(2) A single human in the TC position rather than the gunner position. Use the commander's periscope to lay the AI gunner onto the target. The AI is a decent shot.

[macieksoft]

Yes, i know that M-60 was retrofitted with stab.

And T-62 could probably be retrofitted with laser rangefinder.

I am from Poland and i heard about T-55AM Merida, it was a Polish modyfication of T-55 (i guess they was older than T-62) but they fitted them with a fancy electronics looking 10 times more modern than things T-72M1 had by default. And its FCS was way more advanced than things we see in T-72M1. I guess that it was also calculating lead but i am not sure. It also featured laser warning system!

So there are many possibilities to retrofit tanks with different things that basically turns shit into a really nice thing :gun: