0005251: M1A2 AbramsSep V1 Tusk II

Notes
(0009831) reyhard (administrator) 2019-09-07 13:13	"-The tank is extremely weak, It can only take one shot as opposed to the Bradley being able to withstand multiple shots without taking damage." Bradley can be also destroyed by one shot if you hit the weakpoint (ammo storage) "- The TUSK II does not seem to work, it seems as if the tank has very little protection or armor." - TUSK II has rather small effect on APDSF rounds and protects mainly from HEAT projectiles "- The tank does not come preloaded with HE shells, this is a must." You can change it in attributes - Current loadut depict army tanks in 2014-2016 "- The tank needs a laser designator so the AI gunner can be manipulated from the commander seat similar to the rhino, you tell him to aim at the designator and he tracks the target with you." defienietely not going to happen since it's a fantasy feature "-The commander seat is very difficult, there is no way of knowing the tanks orientation in leu of the camera, or any sort of critical data including distance, heading, and the gunners aim point- this is actually a real world thing, not only can you see where the gunner is aiming from the commander seat, you can also press a button and the camera automatically locks on to where he is aiming without the commander having to orient manually. Also you can not see anything when turned out because of the nature of Arma 3's engine, the turrets get in the way of being able to see behind and would be more practical to include a 360 degree remote operated turret like the non TUSK variant." As for commander seat we try to keep it realistic and stadia reticles and TC override are planned features. SEPv1 variant which have doesn't have remotely operated weapon station. SEPv2 has CROWS but we don't have that tank in mod. You can read about available systems here http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbwiki/index.php?title=M1A2_(SEP)#Tank_Commander.27s_Position_F7 [^]

(0009833) lparker (reporter) 2019-09-08 03:32 edited on: 2019-09-08 03:35	I understand, overall, my experience with the Abrams was not the best - That's that's just it, if my opinion doesn't matter then that's ok, and talking to other people to the server that I was playing on, they said it was clunky and hard to use. "As for commander seat we try to keep it realistic and stadia reticles and TC override are planned features." I am happy that those features are being implemented because they are critical to commanding a tank and you are taking steps to improve it. It still stands though, that the functionality of the commander seat is limited because of the turret in the way, perhaps for practicality and user enjoyment sake you could possibly change it to a later version of the tank. As far as the tanks armor, its not adequate to defend against tanks shells. I find that after testing, the armor just doesn't cut it( I was talking about this more than the TUSK but the TUSK still seams weak to missiles), at least against vanilla tanks, im not sure that is your intention but would be nice to be able to face and win. Also another problem I encountered was that the AI will fire the M2 machine gun at other tanks instead of the cannon usually ending up in it getting destroyed (other Russian tanks). Besides my gripes with it, I still really am looking forward to the improved version coming out.

(0009834) reyhard (administrator) 2019-09-08 10:32	"As far as the tanks armor, its not adequate to defend against tanks shells" That's very vague. There are weakpoints (turret ring & gun mantle) where you can achieve critical hit with single shots and AI is sort of designed to aim those points. Vanilla tanks have ammo with 2035 penetration level, which exist as prototypes in real life now (i.e. M829A4 with i.e. suspected 950mm RHA penetration level) so it's not that unrealistic that M1A2 SepV2 is destroyed by them quite easily. Still, by 2035 tech could even further so when comparing it with vanilla tanks you have to take it into account. Anyway, if you have some concrete examples then I can take a look what is wrong. Otherwise I'm afraid I would have ignore it because I get quite regularly messages like "-US tanks are too strong" "-Why?" "-They feel like that!" and if I would follow such feedback I would be constantly shifting between some weird values. At least when we try to follow real life estimations we can somehow defend our point and ground in something solid ;)

(0009835) lparker (reporter) 2019-09-08 18:39 edited on: 2019-09-08 18:44	Ok cool, I can understand that. I think that my main gripe is narrowed down to this then. I would love if the commander seat would get an upgrade, which it sounds like it is, are you going to include some of the features from the steel beasts? (that would be cool) At the moment, I guess the tank is as good as it can be in game, apart from some issues with the AI, it is really frustrating having it go up against another tank only to use the machine gun against it sounds like a problem with the AI thinking that the M2 .50 can penetrate armor, which it probably can just not as effectively, I will attach a video of this happening- this is the main reason why it gets destroyed by other tanks. Also something else I noticed is that the AI is constantly shutting down the tank, so it takes a long time before the engine starts up before it can get moving again, this also happens mid combat. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmgBajBP18Q&feature=youtu.be [^]

Issue History
Date Modified	Username	Field	Change
2019-09-07 00:02	lparker	New Issue
2019-09-07 00:47	lparker	Description Updated	View Revisions
2019-09-07 04:53	lparker	Description Updated	View Revisions
2019-09-07 13:13	reyhard	Note Added: 0009831
2019-09-07 13:13	reyhard	Assigned To	=> reyhard
2019-09-07 13:13	reyhard	Status	new => feedback
2019-09-08 03:32	lparker	Note Added: 0009833
2019-09-08 03:32	lparker	Status	feedback => new
2019-09-08 03:35	lparker	Note Edited: 0009833	View Revisions
2019-09-08 10:32	reyhard	Note Added: 0009834
2019-09-08 10:32	reyhard	Status	new => feedback
2019-09-08 18:39	lparker	Note Added: 0009835
2019-09-08 18:39	lparker	Status	feedback => new
2019-09-08 18:44	lparker	Note Edited: 0009835	View Revisions
2019-09-08 18:44	lparker	Note Edited: 0009835	View Revisions
2019-09-19 19:29	reyhard	Status	new => closed
2019-09-19 19:29	reyhard	Resolution	open => suspended

Relationships