Armor Warfare

[Binary 0]

j/k, I know steelbeasts is NOT a game, it is an expensive armor simulator.

But I wish we had at least a laser and thermals for armor in Arma II.

Ahh come on - It's just as much an expensive game...

Its only 120$ - I love my SB copy, but i certainly play it as a game...

[PhilippRauch 0]

In VBS2 you can interlink Steelbeast(2? or Pro?) with VBS already via HLA/DIS... damn i think i need to save for a copy of both the new steelbeasts and VBS2... *ching*ching*

[nodunit 397]

Wrong topic.

Edited April 17, 2009 by NodUnit

[Baff1 0]

Wouldn't the AT-11 need something to guide it that far? like the Isreali LAHAT can be guided by a UAV, while the tank can just fire it, Or Hunter-Killer system, where one tank tracks the tank while the other tank shoots it. (irrc T-84 has that, i think?)

I think they have the usual Russian style guidence system. They ride down a laser beam targeted by the launching vehicle. I think to some extent this laser beam is kept on target using the fire control systems. I'm not sure exactly how manual/automated this process is

[Young Eagle 0]

In VBS2 you can interlink Steelbeast(2? or Pro?) with VBS already via HLA/DIS... damn i think i need to save for a copy of both the new steelbeasts and VBS2... *ching*ching*

Source or info link please?

[Extremeus Decimus 0]

Here you are Young Eagle

http://virtualbattlespace.vbs2.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=95&Itemid=88

[walker 0]

Hi all

The problem with HLA or DIS and linking a tank sim to say VBS is that both have to share the same terrain model and placement fidelity.

If they don't it causes the hull down in tank sim but on the crest of the hill in the infantry sim problem; leading to the tank being shot with a direct fire weapon in the infantry sim when the Tank crew believe they are not in a position where they are able to be hit.

It is not so much of an issue with constructive sims or aircraft sims where HLA and DIS works very well.

That is why I think Steel Beasts will be replaced by subsequent versions of VBS.

As the fidelity of the Real Virtuality engine continues to improve it will be able to fulfill more of the Steel Beasts capabilities for doing Part Task simulations of actions within a tank. I think VBS3 may be able to simulate all the functionality that Steel Beasts can at the moment.

As such it has already acted as spur to improve the fidelity of Armored combat simulation from BIS's OFP1/VBS1 to ArmA/VBS2. We can after all now have multiple guns on vehicles. We already know that tanks in ArmA will have correct crew numbers and improved interiors that will hopefully allow us to place overlay dialogue buttons on the tank internal view to facilitate part tasks in the vehicles.

Kind Regards walker

Edited April 20, 2009 by walker
Spelling and expanding on points made to improve debate

[LJF 0]

OK, what about this:

Use the same round deflection as used on the ground for tank rounds, an angled shot will be more likely to bounce off than a direct one.

Or, Use the same round deflection as used on the ground for tank rounds but take into account the amount of hitpoints of the vehicle/vehicle part - so a round will deflect off a tank but not a jeep :)

Or, Use the same round deflection as used on the ground for tank rounds but take into account the amount of hitpoints of the vehicle/vehicle part as well as the distance travelled - so at longer ranges it will be more difficult to penetrate armour.

Are any of these systems possible? Even the first one would be a massive improvement. If this were possible it would actually be pretty fun instead of being like a 1990's RTS.

[leehy 0]

what to expect $59 software? It is also one half of the $59 campaign

If you want a real vehicle system, purchase the vbs2

BIS salve the Community addons with free