Steel Beasts 4.2 Thread

[Rinix]

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14550-how-to-play-single-player-scenarios/?tab=comments#comment-210310

The installers were broken into smaller parts so they fit DVDs that you might want to burn, and the Legacy Map installer is highly optional. That being said, we'll offer a unified installer in addition to the individual installers with version 4.2

[Asid]

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14550-how-to-play-single-player-scenarios/?tab=comments#comment-210310

The installers were broken into smaller parts so they fit DVDs that you might want to burn, and the Legacy Map installer is highly optional. That being said, we'll offer a unified installer in addition to the individual installers with version 4.2

I have had a few pm's about the confusing nature of the install process.

[Rinix]

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14423-2021-new-steelbeasts-version-features/page/7/?tab=comments#comment-210402

Sadly, someone has been naughty, so no version 4.2 for you ... well, not until mid January, that is.
Too many bug fixes are still awaiting their verification, and we don't rush out something just because it's Christmas in two weeks. At the same time, the beta testers need to wind down a little as well, so we feel better to take the extra time over the holidays to polish a few more parts a little more.

Sorry, but sometimes that's just the way it goes.

[Asid]

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14423-2021-new-steelbeasts-version-features/page/7/?tab=comments#comment-210402

Sadly, someone has been naughty, so no version 4.2 for you ... well, not until mid January, that is.
Too many bug fixes are still awaiting their verification, and we don't rush out something just because it's Christmas in two weeks. At the same time, the beta testers need to wind down a little as well, so we feel better to take the extra time over the holidays to polish a few more parts a little more.

Sorry, but sometimes that's just the way it goes.

Did you think it would be released on time?

[Rinix]

Did you think it would be released on time?

I withheld judgement, since Ssnake had stated that they were waiting until today to make the decision. I did have some hope that it would be released immediately.

[Rinix]

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14558-bigger-map-selection-like-in-old-pro-versions/?tab=comments#comment-210464
The Pro version of Steel Beasts is already at 4.2? It makes sense, given that we know that the Pro version gets continuous updates.

I'll have to check but pretty sure that's not right.

But in any case there is another issue that may delay things.

Now that the update from 4.167 to 4.2x is delayed I have to wait anyway due to the "version number issue" (i.e. scenarios being edited in 4.167 need to be created in a version number 4.167 or earlier).

My Pro versions go from 3.535 (can't work with new map formats) to 4.2x (nothing in the 4.0 to 4.166 range) so I need to use one of the 4.2x versions to access the map, but then he'll need 4.2x in order to build the scenario.

Basically I can convert it now, but it will need to sit on a shelf until SB Pro PE 4.2x actually comes out.

Also I'm assuming that this "new" map has already had "bumpiness" and everything else adjusted???

[Rinix]

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14558-bigger-map-selection-like-in-old-pro-versions/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-210489

First of all, the higher resolution is needed for the procedural road leveling, flattening under buildings, and ramp building. Okay, Ramp building still has bugs in 4.167 so that's certainly a hold-up for map development and the practical visibility of higer resolutions. Then, the high-res terrain is required for the IED crater formation. Eventually that will be expanded to all artillery and other explosions close to the ground, but like we wrote earlier, the new terrain ENGINE is the plumbing that needs to be in place before the actual application cases can rise to prominence. The new terrain engine also gives you a visualization of the bumpiness settings in your terrain theme. It allows us to render smoothed surfaces in dep snow scenarios. The coming (free!) update 4.2 will bring you anti-tank ditches. Versions after that will introduce trenches for infantry. All these things require a much higher resolution than the old 12.5m grid.

For our military customers, the ability to import LIDAR scan terrain data is certainly a big bonus. They have the advantage of free access to all national LIDAR terrain databases. We don't.
This is about to change at least in the European Union and probably also in the US which will certainly allow us in the future to introduce high-res map data, possibly as separate map installers. Keep in mind though that the disk space requirements of true high-res maps are hideous. I believe however that the "Paderborn" map in version 4.1 is based on LIDAR scan data. Might be worth checking out.

There's also a video of Steel Beasts 4.2 with antitank ditches, but that has been made private: https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14423-2021-new-steelbeasts-version-features/page/6/?tab=comments#comment-210378

[Rinix]

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14600-%E2%80%9Cdted-is-dead%E2%80%9D-map/?tab=comments#comment-210931

Oh, yeah.
The good news is that the European Union finally seems to send directives to member states to open their land survey databases to the general public (for free, or at least for marginal fees covering the costs of filling out a web form, data retrieval, and transmission), including LIDAR scans. Over time we will see high-res data percolating into future Steel Beasts releases, probably as additional map package installers.

[Asid]

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14600-%E2%80%9Cdted-is-dead%E2%80%9D-map/?tab=comments#comment-210931

Oh, yeah.
The good news is that the European Union finally seems to send directives to member states to open their land survey databases to the general public (for free, or at least for marginal fees covering the costs of filling out a web form, data retrieval, and transmission), including LIDAR scans. Over time we will see high-res data percolating into future Steel Beasts releases, probably as additional map package installers.

Apart from classroom use, where actual terrain features are important or critical. How is this feature going to improve playability for the standard end-user? Higher fidelity terrain resolution would be useful to enable you to use the land for manoeuvre or concealment.

Regards

[Rinix]

That depends on your definition of "playability". If "playability" means changing the terrain to make the task of gunnery more realistic, then that will improve playability.

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14601-multiplayer-desync-with-bridging-assets/?tab=comments#comment-210973
Apocalypse 31 remarked at Mirzayev "Thanks for delaying 4.2" because Mirzayev had reported a bug. That triggered the responses below. Apocalypse 31 now insists that he was joking, but I'm not sure that he was joking.

Surely you're jesting.

well, we all holding our fingers crossed for mid Jan....

[Asid]

That depends on your definition of "playability". If "playability" means changing the terrain to make the task of gunnery more realistic, then that will improve playability.

I was talking about having specific real world data. Does it make a difference if it is real world or close if it is at same resolutions?

Regards

[Rinix]

I was talking about having specific real world data. Does it make a difference if it is real world or close if it is at same resolutions?

Regards

Probably not.

[Rinix]

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14549-iran-iraq-war/?tab=comments#comment-211194

We'll have version 4.2 ready next week. It's probably easier to wait for it, since it'll come with a unified web installer, so you have to run just that single installer program and the rest will be done automatically.

[Asid]

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14549-iran-iraq-war/?tab=comments#comment-211194

We'll have version 4.2 ready next week. It's probably easier to wait for it, since it'll come with a unified web installer, so you have to run just that single installer program and the rest will be done automatically.

Hope it is easier to install for everyone. The current setup can be confusing 

[Rinix]

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14619-practice-training-with-artillery/?tab=comments#comment-211243

Could be a matter of minimum engagement distance (like, 10km+ for some ammo types). Version 4.2 will bring a few improvements to make it easier to figure out what's wrong.

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14622-what-is-steel-beasts/?tab=comments#comment-211241

Currently we're held back by code parts that were written 20 years ago when we didn't know better. This is being addressed, but since those code parts are reaching deep there will be significant parts that need to be rewritten from ground up (and that takes time). Either that, or development would eventually come to a complete standstill, so it's not even a "decision point".

Our military customers are mostly - but not exclusively - interested in "more of the same". That's no knock on them either; they have their training requirements, they know what SB Pro can do for them, so they are looking at application cases that aren't too far away from what's proven to work. At the same time we're looking at ways how we can add new elements to the tactics aspect of the game that add a new dimension while we're rewriting parts of the code. So, for a while those new elements will be small-ish in development effort simply because so much capacity is tied up with essential tasks, and contractual obligations. But I'm trying to always keep a reserve force that I can put on tasks that aren't directly related to customer requirements. Sometimes these additions take a while to gestate. FEX, the addition of sensor fuzed munitions with the coming 4.2 release is actually just a preparatory step towards the completely new features that are scheduled for development. It's cool and mature enough to add the stuff right now, so we're throwing it in to add a fresh element for you, and neither those artillery munitions were requested by any of our military customers nor what we're planning as the next steps.
Much of the changes that we did with the minefields on the other hand were a direct consequence of some seemingly innocuous military customer demand, that mineplows would be lowered immediately on a breach route, irrespective of the presence of minefields (because, they're a mine detector that way). We embellished that by features that we can bring to the game now that the development on the new terrain engine has been (largely) completed - scrape marks by mineplows, specifically; the decoy minefields were a fringe benefit of the work that had to be added to make AI vehicles respond in an appropriate manner to breach lanes created by (possibly human operated) plows. Simple idea, but surprisingly complex in execution.

I would certainly like to put more emphasis on Steel Beasts as a wargame, and I think that others in the team feel the same way. But we need to establish a code framework first that is easier to expand than the legacy code with which we're dealing right now. Which was good for about 20 years, and a good approach for an acceptable time to market - we are, after all, a commercial business - but with 20 years under our belt it seems likely that a tool like SB Pro is likely to be in use by our customers for another ten to twenty years, so we need to lay the groundwork for that. I'm planning to run this business myself for another fifteen years or so; this is sorta-kinda my "life project". I want to hand over a clean house in fifteen years (which isn't that far ahead if you think about it), and now is the time to fix the known deficits in the plumbing so that there will still be a viable product.

Like Mirzayev wrote, Steel Beasts definitely is a wargame, but probably one that works best with human players at every tactical level rather than everything in single player mode, simply because we apply only few abstractions. Which means, the workload to get it running must be distributed over more shoulders if you are interested in those tactical levels where tactics are rapidly turning into a deep process - company to battalion task force level. Yeah, that requires you to, yeagh, work with people, people who won't read your mind and sometimes simply create friction with their behavior. But the reality is, running a battalion requires people skills in real life too.

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14622-what-is-steel-beasts/?tab=comments#comment-211249

I requested these features before in the content thread:

1) Better message window that is sortable and searchable
2) Configurable message filtering
3) Hotspot message window (click on the message and go to unit/event)
4) More detailed unit status...ammo, damage, casualties, etc.
5) More granular and configurable time slices on the world AAR to see and learn beyond what a hit did.  I want to see what the misses were.
6) Option for active pause where I can pause the game and still give out orders and look around the battlefield
7) Automatic and configurable transport to events.
😎 Automatic pause on configurable events
9) Not so much a wargame feature but quality of life...a hot key to switch sides in scenario test mode.

Not out to profusely excuse and explain away things, but here's a breakdown of where these requests are prevented from implementation,

#1, needs new UI code first
#2, needs new UI code first
#3, needs new UI code first
#4, much easier to do with new UI code; there is however the very real danger of too much information
#5, substantial increase in RAM and disk space consumption, also was single-htreaded for a long time with the associated performance penalties (so, we made it multi-threaded, as a first step)
#6, here we simply have different ideas. Originally, I was even against a pause function. You don't get to pause in real life to consider your options. You have to decide under time pressure, and not deciding in time is a decision too. Also, sometimes you won't even know that you were under time pressure until after it's too late.
#7, much easier to do with new UI code
#8, much like #6
#9, fair enough but probably not the most pressing issue either

https://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/14622-what-is-steel-beasts/?tab=comments#comment-211250

substantial increase in RAM and disk space consumption, also was single-htreaded for a long time with the associated performance penalties (so, we made it multi-threaded, as a first step)

And I as I have stated in the content thread.  Make it configurable.  Even put in hard limits based on RAM and storage.  I have to assume the current system was put in place when RAM was typically 2-4Gb and HD storage was still measured in 100s of Mb.