Jester_159th

No, not at all...Sorry it came across that way. I have every sympathy for the honest gamer that's had problems related to copy protection systems. I hope that at some stage a CP system can be developed that's secure and unobtrusive. Not being a programmer or security expert, I don't know if it's possible to do that. I do, however feel that at this time, with simulations in general being a very minor (and often not very profitable) area of the PC gaming industry that we need to support the developers in this field. I'm sure that, as businessmen, they know that alienating a portion of your potential customers is not good. So if they're using Starforce there must be a good reason for it. To use an unpopular CP system without sound financial reasons just wouldn't make sense. My personal viewpoint is that I would rather put up with an unpopular CP system than see simulations disappear off the market completely. As I said before though, I sincerely hope that at some stage a CP system can be developed that will satisfy all parties. Once again, my apologies if my initial post came across as somewhat dismissive (and re-reading it I can see what you mean).

Yea, well some people get hit by a train while trying to cross the tracks at the boarding platform and I understand they're stupid. Usually dead too. </font>

Thanks for the info, Moon. Glad to hear they've found the problem.

Well I can understand someone that's had personal bad experience being against it (whatever the actual reason for that bad experience was). Personally I've got two titles with starforce and had no problems with either. Unfortunately the English forums on Eagle Dynamics website (the LOMAC/ Flaming Cliffs developer) is a prime example of the type of paranoia that can develop. I've seen more than one example of guys having problems with Flaming Cliffs and instead of actually looking for the problem, turning round and saying that they think it could be Starforce related. The end result is always the same...another round of the same old rumours being rehashed....and some one sits with a problem for far longer than they need to.

I hope you're right, Cameroon. As it stands at the moment anyone who has only seen the English demo without having seen the Russian beta first would probably be quite put off. It would be a great pity if this isn't remedied.

Yet again: Quote from ESims website: The professional version of Steel Beasts is offered in two variations: Steel Beasts Professional, and SB Pro Personal Edition. Steel Beasts Professional is designed for use in a simulation lab under the direction of a dedicated operator / controller, whereas SB Pro Personal Edition is meant to be deployed on individual soldiers' notebooks or home PCs for exercises that can be worked on independently. And again, a link to the developer's web page[commercial URL deleted] BOTH proffessional versions are for defence agencies only. I have done my homework on this product by checking the company's website directly. I sincerely hope that you're right and I'm wrong, but from what I've seen (not counting forum scuttlebutt that can't be trusted anyway) I stand by what I've posted. If they prove me wrong I'll be more than happy to purchase the product and apologise. BTW...I NEVER said they were going to turn it into an arcade game. [ July 18, 2005, 12:50 AM: Message edited by: Moon ]

Has anyone that's still got the Russian beta demo tried to import any of the missions into the English version? I just went and checked the link to the beta demo that was posted on here a while back...But it now links to the English version.

Quote from ESim's website (Steel Beast developer): Steel Beasts Professional Is now available. Interested customers should contact us. (Defense agencies only, please.) Don't believe me? Go look for yourself: [commercial URL deleted] They are developing the pro and pro personal versions for the military first, then removing code to make the public version. This is far more difficult to do without creating unforseen problems, than starting with a basic module then adding extra sections to it....Hence the "ripping the guts out of it" comment. Possibly an exageration but not that far from the facts. From what they've stated on their website this does indeed appear to be how they plan on developing the product. If not then they need to clarify the facts. As I also said though: I hope they manage it and it's a success. From past personal experience though, I will need far more convincing to part with money for a product build in the way they have decided on. [ July 18, 2005, 12:47 AM: Message edited by: Moon ]

Interesting question. To be quite honest I have no idea! My family has always had connections to the airforce. My grandfather was a pilot in the RFC during World War 1, and my father and uncle were both in the RAF (I always intended to follow them, but life had other ideas in store for me). So my interest in military aviation is self explanitory. I think it must just be the raw power that a tank projects.

Don't hold your breath. Go check the Steel Beasts website and you'll find they now state very clearly that the professional versions are for defence agencies only. SB2 (the public version) is going to be the same program with most of its guts ripped out (and we all know the type of problems that can cause). As much as I would like the extra immersion the tank interiors would undoubtably give (like the virtual cockpit in a flight sim does), I would be very careful about buying a stripped down product as soon as it's released. Don't get me wrong, I hope that Steel Beasts is a success. Afterall the whole simulation genre has been marginalised for some time now. We need as many products as possible to be successful and reach good sales figures. That way the bigger publishers will see the advantage of investing in the development of newer and better simulations.

I was wondering about this as well.

Sound hardware accelaration isn't it I'm afraid. I've been having thiese freezes with the demo as well. I just tried turning it off and have just had it freeze up on me again. System specs: P4 2.4gig CPU ATI 9800Pro 128MB graphics card (Omega version of the Cat 5.6's) 1024MB PC2700 RAM AC97 on board sound card.

I would LOVE to get my hands on one of those. We've got a gang of teenagers round here that like to cause trouble. I would really like to see the looks ont their faces if they found themselves face-to-face with one of these beauties!! :eek:

Nothing to apologise for, Brian. I just found the problem, and as usual I had completely overlooked the obvious. The tilde key on my keyboard isn't working. I remapped the command and it's working perfectly.

Hi Magnum. I was going through the two tutorial missions, both have preset waypoints. I tried setting a waypoint myself in the map view as well (selecting the movement option ,positioning the yellow flag on the map etc). Nothing worked. If it's working for Brian though, it must be something I'm doing wrong. Can someone give me a breakdown of how they give orders to the AI driver step by step?

Very nice indeed. Got any other mods planned? BTW..How did you get that blacked out area around the driver's view? Is it standard in the full version or another mod you've done?

1) look in the program group in your start menu. You'll find the configuration tool there. 2) Can't help you. I haven't tried it 3) F9 toggles between external camera and the other views. There's a link to a downloadable keycard. I'd suggest you get that and print it out. I'd be lost without it.

On the subject of the keychart. Both it and the instructions in the demo say that the tilde (`) key gives the AI driver the instruction to drive to the next waypoint. It doesn't seem to work. Is this key disabled for some reason or am I doing something wrong?

This thread Has the info you want. scroll down a bit and you'll find it.

Great read!! If you're not a writer (and comedian) by proffession you have definately missed your calling!!

Thanks for the info, Moon. I'd been so impressed with the Russian beta demo that I've already ordered the full version...And now I can actually understand what I'm supposed to be doing I'm certain that it's money well spent. Looking forward to receiving my copy. Meanwhile...back to playing tyhe demo!!

Excellent!....Downloading as I type. One question though. How on earth have they managed to reduce the file size compared to the Russian beta demo by such a huge ammount (192MB compared to about 500MB)?

Surely it wouldn't just be the weapon handler carrying the ammo, but at least some of the infantry squad members as well? If so that could explain the seemingly high number of RPG rounds available.

Very interesting reading while waiting for the demo.

Very interesting video there. Everything I see about this sim impresses me more and more. In fact I'm getting close to the stage of ordering without downloading the demo (once it's released) first! Just one (potentially silly) question though. Is the inside of the tanks modelled in the same way as they modle virtual cockpits in flight sims? If not, what's the immersion factor like ( on a scale from " You can watch the football and play at the same time" to "you'll forget you've got a wife/ children/ life etc"...??