confirmed feature list for the next SBP upgrade

[Skybird]

You mean scripting with the editor ?

Yes, during mission design.

And will I have to do the same with a chinook ?

For the time being, yes.

You mean it has a 30mm in reality too ? :hmm:

as far as I remember, yes. I just checked on the fly with Wikipedia, they also say: 30 mm.

I mean, how does it looks like when a soldier pops up in a window ? There is no interiour you say and the windows are just textures then ?

Windows are textures, soldiers remain invisible inside houses. All you see is the muzzle flashes from wepaons and a puff of msoke when a missile is fired.

Damn, they need to learn crawling. But at least something. btw I see some trenches, on videos, digged out where tanks take a hull down position and fire from. Can this trenches be digged during a mission somehow or in the terrain editor or something ?

Not during the mission, which for the time scale of usual missions is unrealostic anyway. each vehicle has it's own foxhole, and they can come in two depth levels, too, one of which allows tabnks moving back and forth, revealing their turret when firijng, and complety go on divind station while reloading. they rock back and and fourth within seconds for that reason.
You can see pictures of it here : http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...d=1#post421927
I agree on the crawling part, it is a high priority for me, yes. But for esim, it seems to be a medium priority only. Has something to do with that infantry again is not the original focus of the sim.

What do you mean with HMG's ?

Heavy machine guns. Before they had LMGs and MMGs only.

No no. I mean when I actually dismount the squad and move it from to a forest patch in an ambush position and letting the IFV behind the hill to give them support. Then when the enemy comes over the hill I take them under fire with the IFV while the squad smoke them with bazookas from close range. When some enemy vehicles might have sliped through I would want to move the IFV quickely into another firing position to engage them from behind and guess what the IFV refuses my order and stay there and wait in the open till the squad returned and till then the next enemy tank comes over the hill and smoke my IFV.

Move the IFV to the squad, or giove both a movement path to a meeting point or leave the sqaud in place. Once the squad has received an order for itself , it is detached from the IFV, and the IFV can do as it pleases. At least that is like it is in SGB. Do not remember SB1, though.

About what seperate orders are you talking about ? As far as I can see you cannot really seperate the squad from the IFV, the squad can move freely very far but when I want to move the IFV then he stay there and wait till the squad is back.

See above. if you talk about SB1, I do not remember, if you talk about SBP, you do something wrong. When you unload the squad, it still is attached to the vehicle, and will follow it, and the vehicle will never stray beyond a certainn distance to the squad, or even wait until the squad has mounted again. If you click on the infantry alone and give it some order like "hold/defend", or "move", it is detached, and the tank will not wait for them to return before it moves (SBP)

How much bigger are the maps now ?

as big as the mission designer makes them. there is a limit, but I never met it so far. for example, 20x15km and more is no problem.

I somehow get claustrophobia in SB at times. I would like to make some scenarios where you have to cross long distances with missons that goon for hours, where you don't have to expect enemies behind every hill. But SB terrain is a little bit small for my taste.

Keep in my mind that platoons and companies in reality would have preordered movement corridors and phaselines for formation cohesion, else a unit would stray into anothe runits firing zoine and Blue on Blue would occure.

I played some missions going for up to 6 hours. But that is not really fun, I promise you. Somebody created the Thunderrun of amerian tanks along the highways in Baghdad, due to the micromanaging I did, I played a sneaking battle. My losses were low, but it took, as I said, over 6 hours. The road is 25 or more km long.

And btw, any improvements to the helo AI ? Can they hide now behind the terrain and tree lines or are they still behave like on a turkey shot ?

Helos are low priority and originally were meant as flying targets for gunnery practice only, so little improvement there (the Aussie military wanted them first, I believe). I doubt there will ever be a flight model of the fidelity you want. that simply is not within the scope of this simulation, and to spend time on it would thus not be justified as long as there are higher priorities - and these are there in high numbers. However, helicopters can be quite lethal. But I tend to leave them out, they are not clever in the way you described, and thus are easy targets. I use them for pop-up-and-hide recce exclusively, if ever, or to chase down an already retreating or shattered enemy (like you often use cavalry in Total War)

[Deamon]

You mean it has a 30mm in reality too ? :hmm:

as far as I remember, yes. I just checked on the fly with Wikipedia, they also say: 30 mm.

This must be new then. The last time I check it it was still 20mm. 30mm is quite large for such a small copter. But i don't mind, the bigger the better

I mean, how does it looks like when a soldier pops up in a window ? There is no interiour you say and the windows are just textures then ?

Windows are textures, soldiers remain invisible inside houses. All you see is the muzzle flashes from wepaons and a puff of msoke when a missile is fired.

Uhh. Does that mean you cannot gun them down then, when they fire from the window ?

I agree on the crawling part, it is a high priority for me, yes. But for esim, it seems to be a medium priority only. Has something to do with that infantry again is not the original focus of the sim.

Sooner or later they will surely fix it.

What do you mean with HMG's ?

Heavy machine guns. Before they had LMGs and MMGs only.

Heavy you mean something like MG3 ?

Move the IFV to the squad, or giove both a movement path to a meeting point or leave the sqaud in place.

No I want to leave the squad where it is and move the IFV but when the IFV is a certain distance away from the squad, it holds on and the squad is running back to the IFV without me ordering it.

Once the squad has received an order for itself , it is detached from the IFV, and the IFV can do as it pleases.

I just made a test run again and figured out that when the squad is a closer distance away and I want to move the IFV then the squad returns while the IFV waits. When the squad is much further away then you can go with the IFV where you like, while the squad stay where it is. However when the IFV pass the squad later too close it stops again and take them on board. Can you maybe ask the devs to add a Kriegsgerichts feature so that I can trial them for disobedience ?

See above. if you talk about SB1, I do not remember, if you talk about SBP, you do something wrong.

I am still talking about SB1

How much bigger are the maps now ?

as big as the mission designer makes them. there is a limit, but I never met it so far. for example, 20x15km and more is no problem.

This is good actually. Is that true that in SB2 the maps will be smaller again ?

I somehow get claustrophobia in SB at times. I would like to make some scenarios where you have to cross long distances with missons that goon for hours, where you don't have to expect enemies behind every hill. But SB terrain is a little bit small for my taste.

Keep in my mind that platoons and companies in reality would have preordered movement corridors and phaselines for formation cohesion, else a unit would stray into anothe runits firing zoine and Blue on Blue would occure.

I know but i want to simulate some marches as well and also an territorial in-depth war where the front line is maybe dissolved already and scattered units are all around. Some gunships would be good then to stop some enemy units that break through.

I played some missions going for up to 6 hours. But that is not really fun, I promise you. Somebody created the Thunderrun of amerian tanks along the highways in Baghdad, due to the micromanaging I did, I played a sneaking battle. My losses were low, but it took, as I said, over 6 hours. The road is 25 or more km long.

That reminds me on something. As far as I can see rearm and repair can be done now in the field too right ?

I doubt there will ever be a flight model of the fidelity you want. that simply is not within the scope of this simulation,

That would be a shame after all for such a fine sim. But sooner or later some of their customers will demand this. It's just a question of time, imho.

and to spend time on it would thus not be justified as long as there are higher priorities - and these are there in high numbers.

One day they will have worked all of them off and then they can finally implement some fine gunship AI. And teach the infantry crawling

or to chase down an already retreating or shattered enemy (like you often use cavalry in Total War)

That's what I would use them for. Some beaten formations that managed to sneak through and no tanks can catch up with them again fast enough, that's where a gang of gunships would come in handy and that is what I would want to have a really big map. Paratroops or air cavalery could be fun too to intercept breaked through formations. :hmm:

But I still have one hell of a fun with SB1. My skills much improved. This came me very handy even In OFP tank operations too.

[Skybird]

Uhh. Does that mean you cannot gun them down then, when they fire from the window ?

You can. Sniper them. Grenade them. Missile them. MG them. Cannon them. Artillerize them. Roll into that house and crush it to flatten pieces. Whatever you pleases. You just need to know they are there without loosing tanks first.

Heavy you mean something like MG3 ?

If that is rated as heavy, yes. Or like the M60.

No I want to leave the squad where it is and move the IFV but when the IFV is a certain distance away from the squad, it holds on and the squad is running back to the IFV without me ordering it.

Maybe it was with SB1 like that, do not remember. It is no more like that in SBP.

Is that true that in SB2 the maps will be smaller again ?

No details on SB2 yet. There were some hot debates in recent days about the price model and delivery model for future upgrades that will no onger differ between patches (=repairing old stuff) and addons (=adding new content). eSim made it clear in words that if they cannot sell that ddon to the community and the latter rjecting to accept the model, they must conclude they will no longer have a civilian market. While I am pretty much sure that SBP-PE will con tinue to be worked on for the next couple of years, I am no longer 100% certain there will ever be an SB2. But this is my personal conclusions, and in no way is backed by eSim. But SB2 is several years away, of this I'm sure. Their developement ressources are very stretched already.

I know but i want to simulate some marches as well and also an territorial in-depth war where the front line is maybe dissolved already and scattered units are all around. Some gunships would be good then to stop some enemy units that break through.

This is no war simulator, and although you could set up scenarios on batallion and even brigade size, best scope remained is on platoon and company level. Having to micromanage a battle on brigade level is no fun. Also, it is pretty soon over, and would need a madness of mission designing. However, you could do as I did. I set up a series of three missions on the same, slightly shifted map, taking over wrecks from likely casualty psoitons into the next one, and create a static mini-campaign. I had one recce patrol in the beginning, then a larger fight for recconnaissance with highly randomoized enemy positions, and finally a big enemy counter-attack (which still is not finished). There are quite some campaigns like this available. But again, this is no war simulator. You have false expecations here and thus must necessarily become dissappointed, probably.

Also, take into account there is no save game function. Having people to play 6 or 8 hours in a row is not funny.

That reminds me on something. As far as I can see rearm and repair can be done now in the field too right ?

Yes. As long as the damage is not too substantial, and needed components can be expected to be available in the field, not just at bases. certain light components also cannot be repaired for the latter reason, and/or if the real repairing time would exceed several hours. In the new upgrade, you can even tow wrecked vehicles. But that needs being done manually, and cannot done by the AI ony command.

That would be a shame after all for such a fine sim. But sooner or later some of their customers will demand this. It's just a question of time, imho.

Their custimers, which is the military (the civilian version did not really sell as well as expected, I have the impression), wnated helicopters as flying targets for the gunners to train aiming at fast moving targets, and now, since the australians do use SBP on small and medium level wargaming, they also wanted an airborn observation platform. It is there, therefore, but the crew positions are absolutely rudimentary, Esim said. This will never turn into a tank AND flightsim, it will always remain a mechanized warfare sim on vehicle, platoon and company level, being best in tank stuff, with some infantry stuff, and even less helicopter stuff. expect much more, and you're likely to become dissapointed. also, if you add fideltity flight components, there is a rat's tail of additonal demands that need to be implemnted, like SAM units, radar (a whole new abyss of must-be-dones), and thehn think about the complexity of bubbles in Falcon 4. It is too much. They are not as well-staffed like a big game studio.

One day they will have worked all of them off and then they can finally implement some fine gunship AI. And teach the infantry crawling

Currently they have 600 confirmed bugs in there, though most users do not even recognize any of them - the obvious and showstopping ones are already gone. we talk of wrong ammunition layouts, or wrong numbers of rounds and such things. After that, military demands, military demands, and more military demands. Go figure. They plan to have a military-free developement year in 2009, focussing on the civilian market excluisvely, and finish things that are since long in the making (or the hoping). what will come of that remains to be seen. One can hope a lot and think that as reasonable, but I personally will not be angry with them if they deliver some items NOT. A mannable T72 is in high demand, for example (artwork is finished, but zero functionality currently), also: animated suspension. So far, no military has ordered it.

That's what I would use them for. Some beaten formations that managed to sneak through and no tanks can catch up with them again fast enough, that's where a gang of gunships would come in handy and that is what I would want to have a really big map. Paratroops or air cavalery could be fun too to intercept breaked through formations. :hmm:

All that dropping stuff can be arranged in the editor.

But I still have one hell of a fun with SB1.

Why not giving SBP a try then. If someone already likes SB1, there is no chance that SBP will be considered as wasted money.

My skills much improved. This came me very handy even In OFP tank operations too.

I am absolutely unforgiving about comparing SBP with the jumping rubber tanks in OFP!

[Deamon]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Uhh. Does that mean you cannot gun them down then, when they fire from the window ?

You can. Sniper them. Grenade them. Missile them. MG them. Cannon them. Artillerize them. Roll into that house and crush it to flatten pieces. Whatever you pleases. You just need to know they are there without loosing tanks first.

But they stay invisible in the window, just the muzzle flash. So do they hide behind the walls actually or do I simple have to shoot at windows and score a hit every time, when I know there is someone in there ?

Is that true that in SB2 the maps will be smaller again ?

No details on SB2 yet. There were some hot debates in recent days about the price model and delivery model for future upgrades that will no onger differ between patches (=repairing old stuff) and addons (=adding new content). eSim made it clear in words that if they cannot sell that ddon to the community and the latter rjecting to accept the model, they must conclude they will no longer have a civilian market. While I am pretty much sure that SBP-PE will con tinue to be worked on for the next couple of years, I am no longer 100% certain there will ever be an SB2. But this is my personal conclusions, and in no way is backed by eSim. But SB2 is several years away, of this I'm sure. Their developement ressources are very stretched already.

That's how it goes.

You have false expecations here and thus must necessarily become dissappointed, probably.

No, all I want are MUCH bigger maps, leave the rest to me.

Also, take into account there is no save game function. Having people to play 6 or 8 hours in a row is not funny.

You can leave this to me too

Their custimers, which is the military (the civilian version did not really sell as well as expected, I have the impression), wnated helicopters as flying targets for the gunners to train aiming at fast moving targets, and now, since the australians do use SBP on small and medium level wargaming, they also wanted an airborn observation platform. It is there, therefore, but the crew positions are absolutely rudimentary, Esim said. This will never turn into a tank AND flightsim, it will always remain a mechanized warfare sim on vehicle, platoon and company level, being best in tank stuff, with some infantry stuff, and even less helicopter stuff. expect much more, and you're likely to become dissapointed. also, if you add fideltity flight components, there is a rat's tail of additonal demands that need to be implemnted, like SAM units, radar (a whole new abyss of must-be-dones), and thehn think about the complexity of bubbles in Falcon 4. It is too much. They are not as well-staffed like a big game studio.

Not necessarily. Some AA units would do it too. There is always some inballance somewhere and it is up to the mission designer then how many of them he wants to take in to get the ballance he wants to have.

After that, military demands, military demands, and more military demands. Go figure.

Ok I figure they will build in whatever some military want to have in there. So when some of the military would suddenly want to have a copter sim so that their tankers can train together with their gun ship pilots then they would implement a copter sim too ? :hmm:

I wouldn't mind. But yes, it is certainly better to not expect anything.

That's what I would use them for. Some beaten formations that managed to sneak through and no tanks can catch up with them again fast enough, that's where a gang of gunships would come in handy and that is what I would want to have a really big map. Paratroops or air cavalery could be fun too to intercept breaked through formations. :hmm:

All that dropping stuff can be arranged in the editor.

1. Too combersome
2. To inflexible. I want that chenook to pick up squad X at point A and drop them at point B. But let me guess: I have to high expectations

I always have to high expectations. I always was like this. This is what drives my own development.

But I still have one hell of a fun with SB1.

Why not giving SBP a try then. If someone already likes SB1, there is no chance that SBP will be considered as wasted money.

1. Lack money a big time.
2. I still would by it but...
3. I don't want to be tempted to play instead of spend my time with my own development, so i don't get it intentionally.:p At least not now and probably not in the near future. But that I will get it someday is a sure thing.

My skills much improved. This came me very handy even In OFP tank operations too.

I am absolutely unforgiving about comparing SBP with the jumping rubber tanks in OFP!

No, I mean this compaison tactically. I got owned so often in flashpoint but after playing SB for a while, I mobed the floor with my enemies. In flashpoint I was used to focus on the near environment, like the next bushes and tree lines but Steal Beasts thought me to think big. That did the trick

[Skybird]

But they stay invisible in the window, just the muzzle flash. So do they hide behind the walls actually or do I simple have to shoot at windows and score a hit every time, when I know there is someone in there ?

If your callibre is big enough, and your type of round is dedicated enough - does it matter...? But you can gun them down with small arms fire, too, just aiming at the muzzle flashes becomes more crucial.


Not necessarily. Some AA units would do it too.

You are wrong there. even if you throw in just a single Gepard, a whole new bunch of concepts, LOS calculations, models for new sensors, damage models, AI routines would be needed, not to mention models for the Gepard, damage modelling to itself, AI logic, and so much more. They once commented on it. It means opening Pandora's box. It also means to have appropriate flight models capable of doing pop-up-and-hide tactics for the choppers if they should have a chance to survive. It's actually a very, very big tsk you are asking for. In the far away future - well, maybe, who knows - but in the forseeable future: no.


Ok I figure they will build in whatever some military want to have in there. So when some of the military would suddenly want to have a copter sim so that their tankers can train together with their gun ship pilots then they would implement a copter sim too ?

Such training obviously has not been demanded by anyone so far. Like the military does not want a jeep that can drive under the ocean, they do not expect SBP to be more than it is - a tank-centred simulation that touches some side aspects as well - not more. Tank crews do not care about getting introduced to the basics of gunship flying.


To inflexible. I want that chenook to pick up squad X at point A and drop them at point B.

I want that too, and much else as well. What a small team can actually manage to deliver, is somethign different. For the time being, you can work around it via the editor.

[Deamon]

Not necessarily. Some AA units would do it too.

You are wrong there. even if you throw in just a single Gepard, a whole new bunch of concepts, LOS calculations, models for new sensors, damage models, AI routines would be needed, not to mention models for the Gepard, damage modelling to itself, AI logic, and so much more. They once commented on it. It means opening Pandora's box. It also means to have appropriate flight models capable of doing pop-up-and-hide tactics for the choppers if they should have a chance to survive. It's actually a very, very big tsk you are asking for. In the far away future - well, maybe, who knows - but in the forseeable future: no.

Can the AI vehicles shoot them down ?

Tank crews do not care about getting introduced to the basics of gunship flying.

I was erffering to pilots actually but never mind.

To inflexible. I want that chenook to pick up squad X at point A and drop them at point B.

I want that too, and much else as well. What a small team can actually manage to deliver, is somethign different. For the time being, you can work around it via the editor.

The possibility to carry troops in a vehicle is in the game already. It just need to be applied on the choppers, with some modifications maybe. Don't see a big problem here.

btw, did the M1A2 made it into SBPE finally ?

And any news whether the Leo2A6, with its killer gun will float up in the near future ? I could need a bigger punch against that pesky T-80 in a frontal confrontation.

Hey do I see here that the new german IFV is in the game already ? What was its name again, Panther ?

[Skybird]

Can the AI vehicles shoot them down ?

Too easily, yes. That'S becasue helicopters in all regards are dramatically simplified. They are not the focus of this sim. I find it strange that they are included at all.


I was erffering to pilots actually but never mind.

It is no flight simulator and lacks all characteristics to be that, so nobody cares for SBP being a tool to train pilots.


The possibility to carry troops in a vehicle is in the game already. It just need to be applied on the choppers, with some modifications maybe. Don't see a big problem here.

Tell them. Big problem is: time. Lots of stuff they have on the ready, but lack the time to implement it, becasue it also would mean to throughly test it in a multitude of different situation contexts.


btw, did the M1A2 made it into SBPE finally ?

No military customer asked for it so far, which makes me wondering, but they may have other demands for that sim than we civilian players do have. I would like to see a better Abrams myself, too - preferred to a T72. SA in the Abrams is no competitor for the SA you have in any the Leopards, both one and two.


And any news whether the Leo2A6, with its killer gun will float up in the near future ? I could need a bigger punch against that pesky T-80 in a frontal confrontation.

You mean the longer gun used in the experimental Leo2A6, and higher? Not even a whisper on that. The current 120mm already is devastating enough, btw, especially with the latest DM55 round. It is almost unfair a round. the difference between american uranium and Germn tungsten round in terms of penetration capability by far is not as huge anymore as it once has been. The German roundas are the reference for non-uranium rounds anyway, and at short and medium ranges are as lethal as the american rounds. The American round only has an advantage of maintaining the assured penetration capacity over a slighty greater range, but we talk ranges probably in excess of 2500-3000m here. Both nations could deliver precise fire with their 120mm over 4000m. russian non-missile ammo is listed in the sim as having a maximum range of 3300m. Beyond that, they need to use their cannon-fired mini missiles, with ranges of up to 5000m. - Well, at least that is what the sim lists as technical data being used ingame. The difference between latest uranium and latest Tungsten ammunition it lists to be just 10 mm additional penetration capacity (being in the range beyond 800mm anyway). As i said, the uranium ammo is capable to remain penetrative over a slighty greater distance only.


Hey do I see here that the new german IFV is in the game already ? What was its name again, Panther ?

No German IFV. An armoured Australian truck called Bushmaster is ready, it compares to the German dingo. Also, the Spanish Pizarro is done. both vehicles so far have not passed the analysis cycle of their military customers and thus still wait to be included in an addon release. the last addon saw the Swedish CV9040 family of IFVs, and nthe Strv-122, which is a swedish improvement of the Leo-2A5 (better roof armour and mine protection, different design of aiming crosshairs, magnification switch for daylight optics as well).