Graviteam

SA will soon be "rereleased". (https://www.facebook.com/Graviteam/posts/862701097122499)

Great news !!!!

Looking forward to the re-release. And really looking forward to future World War II DLCs   ;D

 :) :) :)

Txema

(http://i.imgur.com/sBleC7e.jpg)

What improvements or changes will it incorporate?

https://www.facebook.com/Graviteam/posts/862701097122499 (https://www.facebook.com/Graviteam/posts/862701097122499)

Using rangefinder

(http://i.imgur.com/NLcHErFl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/NLcHErF.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/TdjSJtNl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/TdjSJtN.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/22kjZAEl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/22kjZAE.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/won6Tgkl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/won6Tgk.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/BTS1sDHl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/BTS1sDH.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/MZ3thQ3l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/MZ3thQ3.jpg)

Anything new in the shots?

Find 10 differences. :D

(http://i.imgur.com/hqLqzaYl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/hqLqzaY.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/41X7Opnl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/41X7Opn.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/W7JSFcbl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/W7JSFcb.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/ABiVWr9l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/ABiVWr9.jpg)

Damn andrey do you think you've got the foV turned up high enough?   ;D

OMG so excited. is the remastered version out ? Do i simply re-download it from gamers gate ?

It's the same as before, press Tab to lower it.

Not yet. Yes, on GamersGate the install will be updated. Wait for the announce.

Some interactivity in cockpits
(http://i.imgur.com/XbFiWm3l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/XbFiWm3.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/JjGI8KGl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/JjGI8KG.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/NNUlw4gl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/NNUlw4g.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/tVA024ml.jpg) (http://imgur.com/tVA024m.jpg)

And M60s night visor
(http://i.imgur.com/CybL4bfl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/CybL4bf.jpg)

Replace forward periscope and rotation ability
(http://i.imgur.com/VsGn9gpl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/VsGn9gp.jpg)

These last two features are refinements or corrections to the model that weren't done in the first edition?

very nice new lighting? also, please add more grass to grass areas like european maps, they have many foliage. in these games, not so much, but it matters more here because we're playing at ground level.

So damn excited!  ;D

I was originally a bit worried that the news of it returning to the devs might not mean much other than the patches being 'official' so to hear that we'll be getting the patches and more has made my day.

Thanks for your hard work guys and hopefully we can now spread the word without having to add the 'oh but the publishers dropped it, because they are idiots' line and maybe more will join our ranks and show that there is need for more of your great tank sim-ing goodness!!

No, nice old ligting from 2011


You see somewhere a lot of grass?

(http://i.imgur.com/GPDUKJ6l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/GPDUKJ6.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/uF5sBT4l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/uF5sBT4.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/3wrTAJJl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/3wrTAJJ.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/Sxo5pakl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/Sxo5pak.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/NITEJgSl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/NITEJgS.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/CQYAndHl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/CQYAndH.jpg)

Good news indeed!


IMO, the biggest flaw with the grass in SABOW is the draw distance - infantry cannot hide in grass because the grass disappears on long range. In GTOS it is not a problem, since it is "RTS" and not "FPS".

In all games, even in Crysis.
No mircales in computer graphics  ;D

Unfortunately. ;D I think this is a major problem in FPS games. Although something like "envelope grass texture" has been suggested as a solution.

How about sparser grass and longer grass draw distance for SABOW? That might help infantry to stay better hidden at long range, on flat ground.

In GTOS/SABOW can be made to draw the grass in the far distance than other games (~800 meters).
But this feature not have any sence if you can setup low end graphics options  ;D

(http://i.imgur.com/LNukpnwl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/LNukpnw.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/RQyv5KJl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/RQyv5KJ.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/F9hVyQAl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/F9hVyQA.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/HQtjmjxl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/HQtjmjx.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/kc90NMBl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/kc90NMB.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/Fvthligl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/Fvthlig.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/2MK7Jf5l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/2MK7Jf5.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/AkgFGuBl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/AkgFGuB.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/SNBG08Pl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/SNBG08P.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/33EnMvGl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/33EnMvG.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/IBZO1eGl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/IBZO1eG.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/CqvtImgl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/CqvtImg.jpg)

Speaking of grass.  Extremely expensive stuff that grass for games.  Only game I have seen try and do something for long range grass is the ARMA series.  Which is pretty much just rendering out an elevated (or sinking in of units) ground mesh.  Its better than nothing but will be some time in games before enough power is there to actually do grass at long ranges. Or voxels I guess.  That works for grass but is butt ugly close up.  Actually kind of ugly everywhere.

Andrey - Just out of curiosity, how excited are you guys to have the rights to this game back where they belong?  ;D
You seem very happy to be showing off these lovely pics and I do remember the early days with the game and the very strong support we received from GT despite the issues. So it felt like it was a game you guys were proud of - Am I right in thinking GT, or you in particular, are very happy to have it back?

I only ask because when we used to (constantly) talk about the future of SABOW once the bulk of the unofficial fixes were released, it seemed like it was sort of given up on. People would talk in a 'that will never happen' type way - Only because there was so little that could be done of course, but I just wonder if that's still the case for GT?
I don't expect anyone to give me a solid answer but I can't help asking: Does SABOW have a future?

Yes

I hope, but we'll see after the re-release

That's good  :D

I would settle for ai that had the same problem spotting me as I had spotting them, no matter the level of plants.

i don't really care about grass that renders all in the distance, though it's possible. i'm talking more generally more abundant foliage. right now, it's kind of empty. even in the desert regions, i feel the grass on the ground texture doesn't match with the actual blades coming out. i don't mean tall grass, but in those grass patches, a more 3d effect.

also, do you feel the shader or normal effect on the ground always has these squares on it? will that be fixed? maybe a different shader or higher resolution normal map layer?

anyway, just some thoughts for graphical improvements. i really feel the core engine is good enough for it, and can go all the way up to the level of war thunder. possibilities are good.

also, the smoke is really resource intensive, do you feel there is a way to streamline it? i know volumetric smoke effect is good, but it's really different in this game, like super thick. can control not just density, but volume and thickness?

Possible or not only confirmed by practice. In the case of the grass practice tells us that full-fledged grass ~3km not possible for performance reasons. As the complexity of rendering it increases with the square of the distance. Please show me a game where the grass is displayed on at least 2 km? Otherwise, our talk vague about some fantastic things.

This is always the case, due to projection of grass texture maps on landscape is obviously not the same as the 3D projection for grass blades. It is generally different things and are designed for different: one is material (totally virtual), the second is object ("3d effect" as you talk).


Please bring a screenshot what you mean, it is not clear.

For WT level must first redraw textures at higher resolution for much more money (we will not to do this), the rest does not matter. Let me remind you that the SABOW is the game released in 2011, not in 2015.


There is the same problem as with the grass, lots-slowly, few-quickly. Significant optimization leads to a strong decrease in quality (examples with edge squares can be seen in clouds in WT if you reduce quality).
Best solution is GPU with good fillrate. May be coming DX12 is have some ways, but they are not for SABOW of course.

In our game there is not volumetric smoke.
Control for volume and thickness not have any sence  ;D.
Thickness does not affect in any way, only yes / no pixel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFBPRXP21oE

And there was rejoicing across the land!

Thanks for the answers andrey. Will be looking forward to the re release and I'll be pushing it on to as many people as I can!

the squares on the ground from light reflection:
(http://i.imgur.com/WpXjrtn.jpg)

also, poppy plants a little too big?
http://media.gamerevolution.com/images/games/pc/steel-armor--blaze-of-war/steel-armor--blaze-of-war_004.jpg (http://media.gamerevolution.com/images/games/pc/steel-armor--blaze-of-war/steel-armor--blaze-of-war_004.jpg)

Can't comment on the ground textures, but the poppy plants seem accurate.
Of course it depends where you look...What regions etc..
A lot of the photos from Soviet-Afghan war seem focused on where the battles took place so I couldn't find any shots of the poppy fields from that era (though I am sure they exist somewhere).
However from recent years here are a few.
(http://[url=http://www.truthinmedia.org/2013/Images/USNATO-poppies2-1024x682.jpg]http://www.truthinmedia.org/2013/Images/USNATO-poppies2-1024x682.jpg[/url])
(http://www.basfeijen.nl/system/pic/afghanistanpoppyfield.jpg)
(http://warincontext.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/opium-soldier.jpg)

Military plants simulator  ;D

P.S switch grass option to ultra and you get smaller and density plants on big distances :)
P.P.S About squares on ground
click on image to explore
(http://i.imgur.com/LOOjNkul.jpg) (http://imgur.com/LOOjNku.jpg)

And now really good news  ;D

(http://i.imgur.com/4i3vffyl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/4i3vffy.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/G7sVRj4l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/G7sVRj4.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/7t69cUfl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/7t69cUf.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/8rgnxEWl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/8rgnxEW.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/OG5O2rkl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/OG5O2rk.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/CEAcKVOl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/CEAcKVO.jpg)

SABOW will support Ultra Wide monitors, I know you want this feature  :D

the light in that picture comes upper left, must tilt camera so facing lightsource then you will see the squares

also, about poppy plant, i'm saying they are too big. they should be smaller and more dense. my grass is on ultra. that picture is not mine. just one example of foliage that can be improved.

What is the largest you've tested it on?

Ahhahahaha for a second i thought you were going to say playable chieften/bmp!
Hows that playable bmp going?

Krabb: Overquote removed.

So not work if you have the opportunity to turn the graphics settings. And it is possible, even without game settings - videodriver options, third-party plug-ins, enchancers, etc. Even monitor hardware options - simple change gamma and you change night to day.

I dont know

Somthing like 61 x 28 cm
Sizes somehow affect the essence of the problem?

Okay, try this
(http://i.imgur.com/uSec940l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/uSec940.jpg)


This aspect will not change to smaller.

Looking good. Hmmm, how about an interactive ability to "zoom in" closer to view ports?? The view ports looks so small on the screen, especially with standard monitors.

[Tab] key as before (you can reassign it in any other key)

I agree.  As driver you are unable to "put your face up to" the view port and thus gain greater field of view.  You are very, very blind as driver, probably more so than an actual driver would be because you can't lean forward and put you eyes very close to the view ports.


The problem is not magnification, it is that field of view is too narrow.

Krabb: Posts merged.

You write strange things. For the driver specifically put multiple periscopes to provide a wide angle of view. The driver does not need to put eyes in the view - it's pointless and uncomfortable to drive.


You write strange things. Can you increase the size of your monitor dynamically? If not, then you will always get shared viewing angles and zoom. if you get closer eyes you get more zoom and as result you get less FOV

Great news! This game really deserves it.

I don't write strange things at all.

Are you saying that a driver in a T-62 tank could not lean closer to the view port and get a wider field of view out side the tank by doing so?

You mention periscopes for the driver.  How do you access them?  Using V does not give more views.  As far as I can tell there are only 2 views for the T62 driver when he is in the tank (not using external camera).   Both views show the 2 view ports directly in front of him.  All using the tab key does is magnify the view.  What is the driver doing, using binoculars to get a telescopic view?  I suppose this is to simulate moving his head closer to the view port?  That is an incorrect simulation of leaning forward in your seat to see a greater FOV out of the view port.

I don't understand your point about having a dynamically changing monitor.  Can't you provide a view selection that simulates having your eye closer to the viewing port and gaining a wider FOV?  

For the driver to lean forward and put his eyes closer to the view port is neither useless or uncomfortable.  It would give a greater FOV and better situational awareness and it would only need to be a quick view.  He would not need to be in that position for hours as he drove.  

(http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p293/invertedombligo/FOV_zps549cd605.png)

Which angle is larger?  Obviously B is.  This gives a greater FOV of world outside of the tank.  Granted the area around the inside of the view port would look zoomed or magnified but the outside world would not look much magnified.  I'm sure that tank drivers are not locked in their seats and are perfectly able to lean forward for a few seconds to get an improved field of view and then resume their normal driving position.

 ;D Seriously? Do you think that a T-62 driver got vision slits in front of him?
BTW periscopes have fixed FOV by design. For example, an M1A1 Abrams driver got 3 observational periscopes, which provide him with an overlaping field of view of 120 degrees.

Looking forward to this, as I have just started again trying to 'get into' SABOW. I have the GamersGate version so can download from there.

Great to see Chieftain in action in that video...one day maybe we will get a playable version. Even one with the M60A1 interior and sights, would be better than none. A Chieftain with 3d interior and working IFCS, now that would be something!

Anyway, good to see that SABOW is getting a re-launch. I'll write a mission report or two over at CombatAce once the new version hits the streets.

2Tanker

Please draw right pictures, not some kind of strange fiction

(http://i.imgur.com/QCss6YE.png)

Human FOV not changed from any point you would look

I just see the great new! Seems like christmas with delay :)
I just downloaded GTOS update (december 2014) but the update of SABOW is still the 2012 one: http://graviteam.com/games/SABOW.html?action=downloads (http://graviteam.com/games/SABOW.html?action=downloads)
I don't find the link :(

Of course not open slits.  It certainly looks like vision blocks in the game.  They really don't look like I would think a periscope would look.  But if they are scopes I can now understand how the FOV is constant.

I did not realize that those two view of the outside represented periscopes.   I was expecting eye pieces to be shown, like the commander and the gunner have for their scopes, and then have to use the V key to bring my ey to the scope.  Now that I realize they are periscopes, I can understand why the FOV would not change.  Thank you for the diagram.

Is that really all that can be seen by the driver when he is buttoned up?  I can understand why the commander risks popping his head out of the hatch to see what's going on.

andrey, i meant opposite direction. camera point toward light, but look on the ground. there will be squares/lines.

also, "all things be ready if our minds be so"  small detailed foliage cover ground in short radius around tank like so:
(http://files.facepunch.com/andre/Screen%20Shot%202015-02-06%20at%2020.11.24.png)

Point
(http://i.imgur.com/MZfLkYal.jpg) (http://imgur.com/MZfLkYa.jpg)

look on the ground

(http://i.imgur.com/yo6bCVbl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/yo6bCVb.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/cwSvV56l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/cwSvV56.jpg)

This is exciting. I'm already prepping my IDF sources  ;D

I saw the video that was posted on facebook. It looks like the APSFD rounds actually serve a purpose now. Very much looking forward to this

What do you mean?

That before the M60a1 was relegated to HEAT rounds to deal with T-62's and T-55's

How can you tell what was being fired?  Flat trajectory and speed of the tracer?

yea, the HEAT rounds have a different flow to them

Did they replace the old M392 APDS-T or changed something else?

can't wait ! awesome work =)

I'd say they just fixed the Penetration values so it's not retarded now

New readable texts in cockpit

(http://i.imgur.com/nuYSCJal.jpg) (http://imgur.com/nuYSCJa.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/uqEjzAyl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/uqEjzAy.jpg)

"Accedental firing if the balt has not engaged the bear"


Something sounds wrong here  :P

You have a good observation :)

Driver's night visor in close look.
(http://i.imgur.com/gO3DQskl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/gO3DQsk.jpg)

What?  Balt?  What is a Balt? 

Should read '..bolt has not engaged the sear', I suspect, if the label relates to the co-ax.

I know  ;D
Test for mindfulness :)

Balt? How about bear and accedental ?  ;D

I am pleased that everyone likes to read labels even on screenshots. In M60s cockpit will be 50+ readable tables, I think there is something to do in the game  ;D.

I prefer trying to read the labels on enemy APCs through my gunsight:

http://combatace.com/index.php?app=gallery&module=images&section=img_ctrl&img=29877&file=max (http://combatace.com/index.php?app=gallery&module=images&section=img_ctrl&img=29877&file=max)

...or in the case of that screenshot - which I can link to, but can't seem to post here - the laundry labels on the uniforms of enemy dismounts.

Balt? How about bear and accedental ?  ;D

[/quote]

I don't know about 'accedental' - maybe some sort of rather tricky dentistry procedure involving that bear - but I'd guess the bear is what you release, if the enemy attacks you with a pomegranate:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piWCBOsJr-w# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piWCBOsJr-w#)

Well I am getting rather curious about the reworked Iran map.  Is it the same area just redone?  Is it expanded at all?  Will it get a new campaign or more I should say reworked one? 

;D ;D ;D
Iran map will be reworked.
Not new map, not expanded map, not reworked operations or campaign. Onlyl map as it is.  ;D

Well actually as you guessed it already reworked, not will not  ;D.

Sooo when can we expect a Playable Centurion DLC?  ;D

No, we will be releasing DLCs unexpectedly  ;D

nice. is that the cuito cuanavale map? the grass will be in? i like it a lot

also, put it some places in afghanistan and iran hehe

Yes, Cuito  swamp areas

For Iran it is not realistic at all. But in some places of Afghanistan map it always been.

also, andrey, light has to come from steeper angle. try dusk or dawn setting and you will see the squares.

Try dusk
(http://i.imgur.com/0Hn4Xr9l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/0Hn4Xr9.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/mge1K8Rl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/mge1K8R.jpg)

Try dawn
(http://i.imgur.com/BrVTzCFl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/BrVTzCF.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/eszQYm9l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/eszQYm9.jpg)

Back and front to light

Try steeper angle dusk and dawn

(http://i.imgur.com/TuDW6lFl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/TuDW6lF.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/bhY652dl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/bhY652d.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/y6WWoZ6l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/y6WWoZ6.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/UOpbugCl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/UOpbugC.jpg)

Whats next?

sorry, not full dusk or full dawn. but actually the middsay setting for sun coming down from an angle, try like what i do here:

red arrow show sun coming in on middsay setting. map is margda. battle takes place on the upper left corner with the mountains:
(http://i.imgur.com/R99x7yD.jpg)

but in your 3rd to last picture, you can see some of the squares on the right side of the screenshot

also, why not have updated grass like in this video form spin tires:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzm-wr8nWDQ#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzm-wr8nWDQ#ws)

all grass texture on the ground have grass models over it as well.

Please circle on my screenshot.

Absolutely the same as in SABOW, but with more limited radius.

Updated manual
http://graviteam.com/AP-STAR/TOOLS/tank_manual_(eng).pdf (http://graviteam.com/AP-STAR/TOOLS/tank_manual_(eng).pdf)

Great, thank you! At the first glance it seams much better than the original.

Nice pictures :)

Excellent update Andrey.  Very helpful and much better than the first one.

Happy to see that the game is still supported, after all the problems with the first release and the publisher. I bought it when it was totally broken.  :D

The first one, it is not our manual, and some hybrid which made by publisher.

It was unavoidable when the budget and timeline were reduced by 30%, while the number of jobs increased  ;D.

P.S. We start testing version for replacement (on GamersGate).

Thing is, even with it being broken initially you guys didn't abandon it like some companies might have done. It would have been easy for you to say 'well the publishers screwed us over, sorry' and written off the game entirely, but you didn't.
Really a great thing to see the continued support...even if they had to be unofficial patch/mods that were quite awkward for newcomers to attempt to patch! :p Well worth it in the end and I'm glad I too didn't abandon it.
I've got very limited gaming time these days, but even so I've bought every GT products since just to support the company.

Looking forward to jumping back in when SABoW Returns!


EDIT - I'm not sure it's been mentioned but what will happen with the Steam version? I thought it was eventually put on there (still out of your control though) and now it is missing?
Will it be available, and supported eventually?
I only ask as it'd be easier to convince certain people to play it if they can get it on steam. Creatures of habit and all that...

I hope that this time will turn out better  ;D

No comments yet, we are working on this issue.

in this screenshot from you, you can see here some squares. will be easier to tell in midday lighting setting:
(http://i.imgur.com/wQ4T5UI.jpg)

i think it's a pixel issue. maybe the normal map is too stretched? maybe have normal map be tiled? or maybe it's the texture underneath the normal map layer?

the system is not optimal. why not use one texture normal, one spec, one alpha, one diffuse. combine into one texture, strange artifacts bound to happen.

I see bumps, not squares :)
They are not ideal due to texture compression, but nothing special.

I do not really understand what you mean.
SABOW use one spec, one normal, one diffuse and one roughness texture, not combine into one (it not have any sence). All this used as shader input. Alpha not used at all.

And... it's now here! Hurray!!!
http://www.gamersgate.com/DD-SABW/steel-armor-blaze-of-war (http://www.gamersgate.com/DD-SABW/steel-armor-blaze-of-war)

From Gravi's facebook (https://www.facebook.com/Graviteam):
- updated to the recent version of GTOS engine
- international version (Eng/Rus in one package; determined from the OS language)
- slightly modified interface and adjusted game mechanics
- revised Iran battlefield and training battlefields
- M60 and T-62 interactive cockpit
- M60 and T-62 driver night vision devices added

If you bought the game earlier, simply redownload it in your library.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  ;D

Brilliant time too, just finished another game I had on my 'to play' list. Now to spread the word and get others to join in.


Thanks Graviteam!

EDIT - Out of curiosity, why does it install into the GTOS directory? I changed it, gave it its own folder, will this have a negative impact?...

Oops, I forgot to add few more changes. :D

Don't worry about that, some of the changes will just be a nice surprise for us. ;)

I didn't use Gamersgate to buy it  :'( . Can you update the link to the new patch on the main download page? http://graviteam.com/games/SABOW.html?action=downloads (http://graviteam.com/games/SABOW.html?action=downloads)

Downloading!  ;D

Thank you!

Patch for non-GamersGate versions is still being considered.

Ok, I will wait for it :)

Excellent. I re-downloaded it again, does it require the unofficial patch and the core update ?

No.

Downloaded and installed, once that process was complete I launched the game and everything worked perfectly, had a quick look, started a campaign then closed the game.

Just finished real life stuff and was ready to get stuck in but when I try to launch SABOW I get the following message in a small dialogue box...

''critical error

003: Unable to create the rendering device''

edit - uninstalled and reinstalled, still getting the same message, could it be something to do with DX9?

Try to disable option 6.11 Hide desktop.

I can't get into the game at all, even after reinstalling, going to retry 3rd download/install

Hi,


Why is the new file size much smaller than the old version?

Downloading 1.75 Gb .. !

Previous downloaded install files = ~ 3.5 Gb

SA_Setup-0.bin .................. 191 KB 
SA_Setup-1.bin ......... 2,049,876 KB
SA_Setup-2.bin ......... 1,526,763 KB


What's missing in new download?


Thanks

Cheers
Tom

Before reinstalling, check if the game folder was completely deleted after you uninstalled the game. If not, delete it manualy. It may be a good idea not to install it in Program files.

Did you update DX9 during the installation?

Yeah, I just did a manual delete and re-install and it's working,  :) thanks.

Great!  :)

Wow, what a nice surpise. Downloading.  Thank you Devs!

hey any thoughts on adding displacement mapping channel? could be nice for the ground :)

We have quite enough details, from the point of geometry. Displacement maps not dynamic and is essentially a hack, not better than a bump map.

Oh I noticed this too now, hard to see on this picture.

I think it is caused by the specular light on the ground.
Ground isn't "flat" in graviteam engine, made of little tiles joined together at different angles to make noise, bumps, holes, hills, craters whatever.  So when sun it shining low across ground that has very small bumps all over it all the little squares pointing at the sun are light and the ones on the other side pointing away are dark so you get little checker pattern on the ground

In the next patch:
1) Automatic selection of nearby vehicle for hit vectors in statistics.
2) Improved M60 cockpit: roundness, drivers panel, lights.
3) Restyled combat interface.
4) Maneuver algorithm changed.
5) Binocular cap slightly changed.
6) Some improvements in target selection (in automatic fire mode).

Speaking of vectors, I understand the meaning of the incoming vector, but what is the meaning of the head of the vector?  Is that the direction that the round would ricochet?  This vector always seems to be present even when the round penetrates the armor.

Each vector = incoming shell + armor normal at hit point (arrow)

Just so I understand, B is the incoming shell vector, but what is A?

What does 79/821.6m mean in the damage line for that hit?

(http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p293/invertedombligo/Shot.vectors_zpsbhxeaowt.jpg)

A:
The shell hit the armor with an angle of 79°. The gun was from a distance of 821.6m.

B:
The yellow vector with a arrow is the normal of the armor (Andrey just explained it).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_(geometry) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_(geometry))

"armor normal at hit point"

79 slope angle at hit point
821.6 shot distance

Thanks Graviteam, good luck with the new version!

Hey, the IR searchlights on all Tanks in night battles doesn’t seem to work in the “rerelease”. They are all gone dark in my night battles ;D.

Welcome to the forum! Thanks for reporting the bug.

If you set buttoned state for your tanks (through map, placement mode or combat interface), crews disable all unmasking factors including IR lights.
May be this case?

The illumination through IR is gone. I think also through enemy tanks.
I tested it unbuttoned and buttoned. I see the backlights of my tanks, tracers ...  but no IR-illumination.
In my old DVD-Version with August 2012 patch it worked right from start of the battle.

I agree.  I tested it with the old and the remastered versions under the same conditions and the IR search light does not seem to be working in the remastered one.  I have just tested the M-60.

Thanks for explaining it more clearly.  I was not familiar with the geometry term "Normal".  In fact I didn't even recognize it as a geometry term. Now if you had just said a vector that is perpendicular to the surface at the point of impact I would have grasped it immediately.  Not everyone knows what a "normal" is.  The wiki article explained it well.

Really?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_(geometry) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_(geometry))

Really.  Hard to believe I'm sure.  That's why I told Chaudard that the wiki explained it well.

(http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p293/invertedombligo/M60%20Driver.left.periscope_zpszrlrimkv.jpg)
(http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p293/invertedombligo/M60%20Driver.V.key.pressed_zps8quec9gn.jpg)

Two screen shots from driver's seat in M-60.
Top one shows one of the platoon's tanks through the left periscope (tab key used).

Bottom shows the view when V is pressed.  The view is locked to the left periscope (you can see the same tank).  I can't use , or . or the arrow keys to rotate between the other 2 periscope views.  Also note that you can see the track through the mud guard.

Glad to know that my reply was helpful, especially the link to Wikipedia  :)

And, I want to say that I didn't know what was this yellow arrow before this current discussion. I didn't asked about it, thanks to have asked this question!

Присоединяюсь.


Да, есть такое.
ИК подсветка включается с командой "Открыть люки" и не выключается командой "Прекратить огонь".
версия 2407 - 546119

Yes, there is.
IR illumination is activated with the command "Open hatches" and does not turn off with the "Cease fire".
version 2407 - 546119
http://youtu.be/m2D4X6PxRHc (http://youtu.be/m2D4X6PxRHc)

yes, its a known bug, try to fix it soon

That is not working as intended correct?

Previously, IR illumination quenched by the order "Cease fire".
More convenient, of course, would be to have a separate button or submenu in the interface.
To sit dark piece in night battle, but ready to fire - the most it until the enemy is lit like a Christmas tree.  :)

Раньше ИК подсветка гасилась приказом "Прекратить огонь".
Удобнее, конечно, было бы иметь отдельную кнопку или пункт подменю в интерфейсе.
Для ночного боя сидеть тёмным, но готовым вести огонь - самое оно, пока противник светится как новогодняя ёлка.   :)

But isn't it desirable to have IR illumination with the hatches both open and closed?  Your post seems to indicate that it only comes on when the hatches are opened.

What will happen next in near time?
1) changes in the interface: arcade remnants will be removed (such as markers), some changes in commands
2) will be polished cockpits
3) will be updated manual
4) after stable version is achieved we try to do upgrade patch for lost versions RUS/ENG

P.S. Still need 5 tankers, which will record voiceovers for commands/briefs in English and Russian

Вначале маневры отладим и кокпиты настроим, потом всякая шпионская деятельность :)

We will debug maneuvers and configure cockpits first, and then whatever spying activities :)

This doesn't work for me. No matter if the hatchets are opened or closed, IR searchlight is always off. How do I turn it on?

Wait for update. Currently there is a bug, searchlights and lights are always off.

Leave options for markers.  Then players can choose arcade or hardcore.  Choice is good.

Yes, choice is better.

I have another idea. Add a free camera. It would be nice to help us to create videos like on GTOS.

Setup updated on GamersGate. Problem is gone.

Markers on map.

Choice is bad. Makes it necessary to verify and support multiple versions of the game. In this case it is unnecessary and markers will gone.

It's the difference of the point of view between players and developpers  ;D Players love to have a lot of options, developpers not. Personally, I think we already have a lot of options. We have the options 8.0x in game settings. We can change these options.

What are the markers you want to remove?

Markers in 3D. They are already removed. :)

Normally developers develop games for players, not for themselves.

No, its pragmatic way.
But there are players who are not very pragmatic and believe in miracles  ;D.


I do not think you really want in 8x times more bugs and glitches  :D.

I underlined keywords.
Even you say - develop games, not options.

Can you tell us what bugs are associated with having the 3D markers in the game version prior to the remastered one?

This is hard to understand.  Why can't there be one version of the game?  What does having 3D markers have to do with having multiple versions?

This extra element (ie naturally cheat) in 3D that interferes with the game. Not need at all.

So it's really a philosophical objection and not one based on bugs.  In your view, the game should be more hardcore and the player should not even have the option to make it less hardcore.

Why not eliminate external camera view then?  Isn't that a "cheat" also?  Also, how can you magically transport yourself from tank to tank in the platoon during the battle?  Seems like that could be seen as a "cheat" also.  Now don't get me wrong.  I'm not advocating eliminating these features.  I'm saying they make the simulation more enjoyable.  They are not any more realistic than 3D markers. 

I'm not aware of the external camera view or the ability of transferring between tanks or 3D markers causing any bugs or design problems and your only objection to the 3D markers seems to be a realism one.  If they don't cause bugs why not leave them as an option and let me decide how realistic I want the sim to play?

Use the compass, Luke! :D

Games are made up of all sorts of elements, options being one of them.  If options are added or deleted the game changes.  It is not logical to say the two are unrelated.

No. Options, this is the place where the game designer does not know how best to proceed, and provides a solve to the player. Sometimes this is justified, for example settings are dependent on the player's hardware. Sometimes not, as in the case with markers.

In any case, if the problem can be solved without player - need to decide without him.

Luke, I am your father. ;D

Cute, but it really does not answer the question that if 3D markers are not any more unrealistic than flying between tanks and flying around your tank in external view and there are no bugs (that anyone has detailed) associated with them, why eliminate them?  Many may disagree with this but to me eliminating a feature like that subtracts from the value of the game for me, unnecessarily so.

In real life I would have more options than the compass and map.  I could radio the infantry units to send up a flare or other signal to verify their location.  I could ask allied tanks or even my own platoon tanks to turn their lights on to verify identity before shooting at unknown contacts.  None of this is available in the game, so 3D markers is a good substitute.

If we're talking about realism, we have access to a constantly updated, moving map with all visible units depicted in the 1970s and 1980s.    Realism can't be an argument for eliminating 3D markers.

I'm really trying to understand your point of view.  You've told me that markers are not justified.  I believe your reason for saying that is they are unrealistic, correct?

This is army son...   ;D

Of course not realisitc, do you see flying red/green markers around in the world?  ;D
But most of the parts in games is unrealistic (and in our too), this is not a problem.
Problem is a redundant element which spoils the game.

Typical example, someone like Tanker, writes:
"Night map, M-60, exterior is visible through the turret side in cockpit view." and post screenshot with markers
http://graviteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=11818.0 (http://graviteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=11818.0)

Now, that's exactly what I'm talking about, and you, though resisted, but subconsciously understand that it is all unnecessary in the game.  
Because it looks like a bug! ;D

What 3D markers are we talking about ?

Although, .. it would seem like Graviteam are trying to make the game inaccessible to newcomers.

.. perhaps not the wisest idea, .. given that many already consider the game extremely difficult, .. especially given the UI.

I believe that realism options should be selectable or de-selectable, .. and let the player advance at his own pace.

Is this option 4.15 you are talking about?, .. as I notice that it no longer works.


Cheers
Tom

I understand your point of view now.  But I don't reach the same conclusion.  If you explain that feature in a comprehensive manual you solve the problem of them appearing as a bug.  I mentioned it because I was unaware of how markers work in relation to the tank interior.  Now that I understand how they work I accept the fact that if I have them on I will see them through the turret.  Now I can decide if I wish to turn them off and be more realistic or leave them on and use the benefit.  But that's the key.  I get to decide.  It's a win/win situation.  I don't understand how GT loses by leaving this feature in.  Are you worried that people will see it and think the game is buggy?  As I said, an updated manual will take care of that.

Tom, they are the markers showing your vehicles and soldiers that are visible even when you are inside the tank, through the armor.  See the link that Andrey posted just above yours.  They are selectable to be on or off at present.

No, they are not. You lag behind the updates. :D

Have you announced a new patch available at Gamers' Gate?  If not, I'm not the one that may be lagging. ;)

I don't see it on gamersgate. But there seems to be a new patch on steam:

Slight changes in lighting
3D camera available in deployment and initial orders modes (yes!  ;D)
Fixed the movement orders bugs
Slightly more animations in the T-62 cockpit

Doesn't mention markers though...

3D camera available in deployment and initial orders modes (yes!  ;D)

That's a nice improvement.

Just yesterday updated version on the GamersGate. The whole day GG was ahead the STEAM. Now turn STEAM be ahead for updates.
Than change it again.

Do we have re-download the entire game from Gamersgate, .. every time there is an update?

.. if so, .. I guess I won't be updating SABOW that often.

Can't we get Steam keys or something?


Cheers
Tom

No, previous update have a critical bug with updater utility and our installer script. This is sad, but I hope fixed.
And next updates will be small and installed by standard way.

Не успели порадоваться новым значкам из GTOS.   :)
Do not have time to enjoy the new icons of GTOS.   :)

(http://s6.uploads.ru/t/DgrjW.jpg) (http://s6.uploads.ru/DgrjW.jpg)

So we must download the whole game to get latest version from GGate, is that correct?

Hi Tanker,


Apparently there was some issue with the installer, .. so, that's why you need the complete install vs. .. just an update patch/file.

I downloaded the 1st time on the 2nd of March, .. vers. 2398

I downloaded again last night .. now I have vers 2410.

However, .. I didn't notice anything different with the new installer vs. the older one ..  ???

.. then again, .. I never install to the default path e.g. C:\Program Files (x86) ..., .. rather to one of my RAID partitions, .. and I always leave out the 'Program Files' part of it.


I was bitching yesterday about having to re-download the entire game again, .. as I had, .. earlier in the day, .. been bitching at another developer, .. who screwed up an update on Steam,  which made the game unplayable. Apparently, .. the only way to solve the problem, .. was to delete all the local content, .. and download the entire thing again.  >:(

.. my solution?, ... I deleted the game from my account ..  :-\


So, my apologies to Andrey & Co. for being a bitch yesterday  :-[ , ... it happens, .. fortunately, .. it's only once a month ..  ;)


Cheers
Tom

Tom,

Giving the version number is very helpful.  It would be even more helpful if Gamers' gate could list the version number offered on their site or it could be reliably posted somewhere when the versions change and what the latest one is  (looking at you here Krabb) ;).

Hi Tanker,


I definitely agree with that, .. I never know what I'm downloading from Gamergate ..  ???


Why don't Graviteam just have Gamersgate issue Steam keys for the game (for new buyers), .. like they do for other games. I've purchased a few games from GG, that just issued me a Steam key.

For those of us that already have the game, .. Graviteam should just issue us with Steam keys, .. and we can install from there.

That way, .. we wouldn't have this version mismatch, .. that seems to be prevalent at the moment. Steam apparently has a version after 2410.

Graviteam would then only have to update in one place, .. i.e. Steam, .. and we'd all be happy.  ;D


Cheers
Tom

a lot of people don't want to have this game associated with steam. i believe they went steam because it gives them a wider consumer base. there's no inherent benefit to steam other than as a delivery platform.

One great benefit of Steam is automatic updates.  There is no need to mooch around trying to discover what the latest patch is.  Auto updates can be disabled if desired.

No thanks for Steam :P

I agree with Tanker about markers, adding an option for newbies is better. External view and crew transferring are not realistic, but they help the gameplay. Like 3D markers.

I realy think that you should merge GTOS and SABOW in one big game... And progressively add the control of anothers tanks like PzIV, Tiger, KV1S, T34, T-55, BMP, BTR, M113 and new maps through DLC.

And adding a warning to know the latest build number is a nice idea. Personally, my build number is 1983 and it works fine.

If you disable target markers, you cannot see squad markers on the map. At least this needs fixing. Dot icons on the map are not good for commanding and feel unrealistic.

IMO, target markers are annoying, clutter the screen, and makes playing the game too easy/arcadey. I always disable them.

Jumping from tank to tank is gamey, but it allows player to jump into action and continue playing if one tank gets destroyed. Good thing is it doesn't really break the battlefield realism or give player any advantage - keeping in mind that the player has an acces to full situation map anyway.

As for external view, I think it should be allowed only when unbuttoned. Otherwise it is very unrealistic. The only acceptable situation for external camera are screenshots or the moments when the tank gets stuck - the player as a crewmember is unable to dismount to see what happened, and thus the external camera can substitute for this behaviour. But yes, although unrealistic, it's sometimes nice to look the battle through the external camera.

BTW, I downloaded the newest version from Gamersgate, but I still don't have 3D deployment. That is in the next patch??

External view is worst, but suitable due to does not change the gameplay. Relocation between crew members is the same thing. But markers really pain, see post from Tanker http://graviteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=11818.0 (http://graviteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=11818.0)
it looks like 100% bug.  ;D

No, they will diverge as possible.

Now the main goal is to make the tank, tank crew+cockpit and tank platoon as a first class citizens, and then the tactical elements.
Practice shows that spend a lot of time on the map, it is not good.


;D

We don't disable markers on the map.

Yes but now, we disable it at all. No need to disable it manually. Use direction indicator instead, it performs the same role but not the cheat and not in center of the screen.

It can be disabled or you can simply dont touch F3 button  ;D

Will be in the first patch for GG, until it available on STEAM in the form of beta, as it will be finished, we will make a patch.

 Jumping from tank to tank isn't unrealistic, tho the speed at which it is done probably is. If you're a troop/platoon leader and your tank is disabled, you take over another tank in your troop/platoon so you can continue to lead. Assuming you survive!

As for an external view, unrealistic yes but so is not having any peripheral vision, especially when playing TC unbuttoned. So I think it's an acceptable siutational awareness compromise.

I suppose you could say the same for onscreen markers and 'HUD' displays being compesnsation for the limits of 'MonitorVision' but I hate them with a passion and always turn them off. We might as well have gunsight markers in the external view and play WoT style. I have no difficulty with them being an option for those who think differently but they look truly awful in the 3d world and are not for me.

In all the sims I used to play before (mostly aircraft and subs), the first thing I would do was turn the markers off. For some reason, I left them on in SABOW. Probably because I got used to them playing GTOS and APK43. Now that they are gone, I won't miss them much.  ;D

As for the external view, I love it - for taking screenshots and just watching my tanks move  ;D. I don't see any use for it during the actual combat, except maybe if I play as driver. Which I almost never do.

Changing seats and tanks is unrealistic, but I see nothing wrong about it. If you don't want to, don't. I once had a great fun when all the tanks of my platoon where destroyed, and all the crew of my tank was dead except me. I then turned on the "change seats" option (or whatever it is called - the one that adds a few seconds delay when changing position, as if you're moving inside a tank), and operated the tank by myself - driving, stopping to reload and shoot back, driving again. Basicaly I tried to bring my tank back home in relatively one piece. Didn't make it in the end but it was intense.  ;D

LOL Andrey, you are using the same logic I used to argue for keeping 3D markers.  If you don't like them, you can simply not enable them.  I guess it seems more logical when you say it.

What I'm reading here is that people have differing opinions about using or not using 3D markers and their effect on the "purity" of the game, but most seem to think having the choice available is fine.  That's what I'm advocating, choice.  GT seems against it on esthetic grounds.  Why should my personal enjoyment and play style be dictated by the esthetic views of others?  To paraphrase Andrey, simply don't use it if it bothers you.

Gasp!  You've admitted to having the banned 3D markers available.  Men In Black will be dispatched momentarily. :D

;D

I'm still waiting for a compatible patch. But I have to confess that I don't update my game (or softwares or materials in general) before a realy usefull patch or DLC come out.
Or at least, create a WWII DLC to add these vehicles in SABOW  ;) I would like to play in SABOW in a WWII tanks (or take the control of existing tanks in GTOS).
There is a "cold war" DLC for GTOS but not a WWII DLC for SABOW :(

No, you're wrong.
You could not turn on the markers on the map (and without them there is obviously hard to play) and simultaneously turned off in 3D.

So my logic works, but your logic is not entirely a logic, but unreasonable assumptions.

What?  In version 1962 I can have squad and unit markers visible on the map and simultaneously turn them off in 3D via the flag icon at the bottom of the screen.  I can thus switch to the map and have markers and I can switch back to 3D and have no markers.  I can provide screen shots.  

What's wrong with that?  Doesn't that accomplish your objectives?  

So I'm not wrong.  My logic is the same as yours.  If you don't care for markers or the external view you don't have to use either one.  Explain how that is unreasonable please.

Especially with multiple artillery observers the situation is difficult to micromanage. Some kind of automatic off-map indirect fire system would be nice.

Also, I think indirect control of units (except for player's platoon) might be useful: player assigns objectives (attack/defend/recon cell) for AI battle groups and AI carries out the mission. Another option is that AI creates the objectives and player is assigned to carry out the mission, i.e. getting orders from the higher AI commander and managing his platoon accordingly.

Just some quick thoughts...

We already have these commands. Attack/March/Take defense. The units open fire when an ennemy appears.

Tanker asked what the current versions are:
GamersGate: 5.81 (2410)
Steam: 5.81 (2413)

And other publishers: 1983  ;D

Tank manual has been updated
http://graviteam.com/HELP.html (http://graviteam.com/HELP.html)

(http://i1291.photobucket.com/albums/b546/TheIndividualAndHisRights/shot_2015_03_16_02_22_49_0007_zpskikfjaf6.jpg) (http://s1291.photobucket.com/user/TheIndividualAndHisRights/media/shot_2015_03_16_02_22_49_0007_zpskikfjaf6.jpg.html)

Is this what you're talking about?

I have these problems too.

That is a good picture of it :)

Can Graviteam engine do Phong shading on the terrain? would probably fix it.

We never use Phong lighting for anything, it is extremely unrealistic and totally unnecessary.

As I wrote a few times - this is texture compression artifacts for roughness data. Please, do not make sense to write proposals in those areas in which you do not understand.

The public can be such a pain sometimes. ;)

but how do other games fix that? can it be possible port fix over?

I don't get that effect to much.  Sometimes ya sure.  And usually when lighting is at low angles.  But vary rarely do i notice.

Just like SABOW/GTOS: not compressed textures or compressed somewhat differently, using DX10+ or special formats from ATI/AMD (and forgot about Nvidia). Or never mind, because this is an extremely rare bug, especially in those places where you show.

I'm not understand, the same thing right in the face in the cockpit at all times and no one cares, no one will post screenshots. But at lights and lighting at a sharp angle, which is extremely rare (relative to cockpit), all the time in posts, in what sense?  ;D

i think that has been solved in last update. i don't see it anymore. maybe renderer is different and do not draw that harsh light to see the grain. i commend graviteam on tackling this long issue.

however with the new lighting, i see some issue with tank iron shell. is it not the case with most tanks they are painted to dull the glint? don't get me wrong, the new lighting produces some amazingly realistic effects when you're facing away from the sun, see the glow on the turret can define the shape, and also some 3d roughness effect of the paint blotching and imperfect iron rippling:
(http://i.imgur.com/RDCnh4o.jpg)

but here some screenshots show the lighting is maybe too concentrated when glaring off the sun. from even top angle looks this way:
(http://i.imgur.com/PAvzE80.jpg)

gives it a wet look. maybe can use this for raining, but normal, should be more diffuse lighting.

Andrey has been rolling out about a zillion different shaders the past weak. It is certainly looking better.   

(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTYrk16Qq7nLT96iWzg8kZLascxzr-SjIvRtAFoW3HzHUvz1Vis)

vs

(http://savok.name/uploads/smbs/22.jpg)

next round  ;D

Why did they paint them glowsy like that?  Seems like a bad idea.

Probably some compound to keep chemical and nuclear crap from sticking.  Or because it looks nice in a parade and as soon as you get out in the dirt the dust takes care of it. 

Loving the re-released SABOW!

(http://www.smithcorp.com.au/images/SABOW/t62.jpg)

Quick note - tank AI pathfinding seems better. Didn't get bogged in a single canal and tanks correctly used the road crossings without difficulty.

Do you photoshoped it? :P

Nope. Only cropped.

It is awesome, I don't have this quality with aug12 version. The gray colour on the T62 is the dirt or the camouflage?

It's camo. Well I am pretty sure it is. Maybe some nature got involved too but you can get a similar look.
Fire up the game, go to the encylopedia (any nation will do) and when a T62 is selected, there's a button you can use to cycle through the camo options.

(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/78627297/T62%20Camo.jpg)
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/78627297/T62%20Camo1.jpg)
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/78627297/T62%20Camo2.jpg)
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/78627297/T62%20Camo3.jpg)


(Not sure if pics are to big?

correct on gloss, but i feel it should be less on tank. one section protrudes, but whole top half of turret glowing? bright spot can be, but smaller imho

Yes I knew, but I never play with camo. The nature seems in better quality than with older version.

Yes, it's the default akin for the Afghanistan campaign. Pretty nice. The binocular view also gives an excellent perspective for screenshots.

A tank on display or painted up for parade on red Square is not a good reference for a tank in operational service in the field. The tanks in SABOW are FAR too shiny.

yeah i think one of the problem is the shine is too smooth. usually tank surface is rough. not mirror finish or coated for parade

On the photo there are no tanks for the parade. Only tanks that had long been outside hangar, one in winter, other in the summer.

I really think that gloss is due to a NBC chemical non-stick coat.  The US woodland NATO scheme also gives off a mild shine when not covered in dust/dirt.  And I know that one does have basically a Teflon no stick NBC coat of something.  But it also weathers off.  It may simply be they stuck an uber coat of something on the Soviet vehicles. Because at least ones made for the USSR all do have that gloss thing it seems. 

Commander
(http://i.imgur.com/iyLIuuBl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/iyLIuuB.jpg)

very good. but all body can be better like so:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-SZimX222Byc/UME7kKu7r_I/AAAAAAAAKZo/9ozBP9QW-PQ/s1600/tank+crew.jpg (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-SZimX222Byc/UME7kKu7r_I/AAAAAAAAKZo/9ozBP9QW-PQ/s1600/tank+crew.jpg)
http://www.defense.gov/dodcmsshare/newsphoto/2005-03/050319-F-9629D-030.jpg (http://www.defense.gov/dodcmsshare/newsphoto/2005-03/050319-F-9629D-030.jpg)

Do not forget that the game is 2011 not 2015. And not have AAA budgets.
How to earn your first million, will make the body more smoothly.

Hi Andrey - very happy with how you and your team are updating this title! Fantastic to see it get such attention.

Thanks

 :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

Thank you very much Andrey and Graviteam !!!

Txema

The new patch looks and plays great, thank you Andrey and the team.

how about whirring smoke from the ejecting shells?

"Weird FPS, smoke drop FPS by 50%" (c) from STEAM
 ;D

Well the dust can impact FPS greatly under certain conditions.  Mainly that guy is expecting his 60fps at all times whatever happens on screen.  And you can turn most of the effects off if that is what you want to do right?


That's actually a neat idea.  Not sure if that is vary realistic.  Theoretically, the power should be getting directed out the bore before the breach unlocks and spits out the case.  Otherwise the crew area would get awfully unpleasant.  Of course there should be a ventilation fan system dealing with what little there is.  However, a shot case getting ejected into a cold environment should have some bit of visible vapor or smoke.  

Smoke from the cartridge is generally minor feature. Mainly needed a fire / sparks and smoke when hit or penetration.

Of course all this and lot of features that you do not already suggested in the long plans  :D.
It all depends on the success of sales of the game.

At day
(http://i.imgur.com/vjr5NYxl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/vjr5NYx.jpg)

At night
(http://i.imgur.com/hvhUooIl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/hvhUooI.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/kD4CBbzl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/kD4CBbz.jpg)

Blackout
(http://i.imgur.com/HThtf2kl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/HThtf2k.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/HSU6ZGal.jpg) (http://imgur.com/HSU6ZGa.jpg)

How are the sales doing? I know you don't want to give actual figures but are you happy with how the re-release has gone so far?

So far, nothing to talk about, it did not bring profit even a penny.

SOOO..... steam does this quarterly?  And Gamersgate the number sold is so small its not even a blip?

Typically, such payments have a greater delay. Always and everywhere.

Yes

The customers don't want to pay a new time. But they will pay for new content, like DLC or another version of game like MIUS.

New content dont appears for free from air.

A pity.  :(

You added hydrostatic transmission modelling, which vehicle has this ?

The target range and targeting tips are an excellent addition.  Great job.

M60A1

Thank you Andrey for the new update, very nice :)

The patch is downloading :)
http://graviteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=10223.msg43846#msg43846 (http://graviteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=10223.msg43846#msg43846)

Thanks Krabb!

(http://i.imgur.com/jTmoLI0l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/jTmoLI0.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/DRLaAX9l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/DRLaAX9.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/35vWLMTl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/35vWLMT.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/5u43J2rl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/5u43J2r.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/q7qvCkBl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/q7qvCkB.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/6798u6wl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/6798u6w.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/2SV5AHNl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/2SV5AHN.jpg)

I have some problems with the new patch April 2015 for non-GamersGate/non-Steam versions.

The crews are silent.
And, the main problem: I have an interrogation point in a lot of places in the game.

I try to install the game a new time with the same results.

The graphics are awesome, but I would like to play without the interrogation points everywhere, especially in the boussole! ;D

(http://i.imgur.com/BURlPTr.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/AzCIMdE.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/ZbiOYnv.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/autf47w.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/2ykFqbN.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/4G9nFUo.jpg)

Is this UIG version?

Yes.

Fixed update is uploading. While you are waiting, you could "manually" fix this by "removing" duplicate loc_eng folder in data\mtc80\dev_updates, i.e. the folder structure right now is data\mtc80\dev_updates\loc_eng\loc_eng, but should be data\mtc80\dev_updates\loc_eng.

Many thanks. The "?" are gone  :)

However, the crews are still silent/muted.

Fixed patch (http://graviteam.com/SABOW/sabow_apr15_dvd_patch_int.gt2extension) uploaded.

Hmm, not sure about missing crew voices. It's the English version? Try resetting the game settings to the defaults (10.01 in particular). Also, could you search and tell me the path to various speech_cocpits*.flatdata files, please?

Works! I disabled the setting 10.01

Thanks Krabb, you fixed all the problems :)

The game is very nice with the new release. Maps are better, I have a better FPS, the smoke is beautiful, the GUI is more easy to use. Really a nice work!

The crew is still silent/mute in the new quick battles mode, but he is ok in the old mission editor mode. Does the new quick battles force the 10.01 setting to "enabled"?
I will don't use the new battle mode, so it's not a problem for me, but I report the issue nonetheless to help you  ;)

Commands that you give is not sounded? Or what?

The voices of the crew are missing in the instant action battles. In the mission editor battles, the voices are sounded after disabling the 10.01 setting.

April15 Feat Vid
https://youtu.be/mE43QPHREG8

Awesome! Which version?

In fact, the problem is still present in editor battles. The problem is aleatory. Sometimes, when the battle start, the voices are sounded. Sometimes, the voices are not sounded.
 :'(

In development.

What voices for example? Keep in mind that voices were not made for new texts, therefore they have only silent subtitles.

All voices of the crew are silent. I will make a video if you want. Sometimes, the battle start like before the patch, the crew tells "HEAT", "Loading" for example. Sometimes, the voices are sounded, sometimes I play all the battle without the gunner, the commander's voices and other voices. Sometimes, I click "restart battle" and after one or two try the voices are sounded (but it is annoying because I have to deploy the units a new time for each try).

April15 Knock Outs
https://youtu.be/K493FCAt6VQ

Really nice damage modelling...music, not so good  ;D

Is this with the April 2015a patch? I think yes - in my first mission report I described hearing these BANGS! to my right rear after one of my T-62s had been knocked out and was on fire, and I believe it was the ammo 'cooking off'.

April 2015b. But yes, somthing introduced in Apr15a too as lite version :)

Gamersgate patch soon? :)
What was added in april15a?

You can see the patchlog here in the first post: http://graviteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=10223.0 (http://graviteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=10223.0)

(http://i.imgur.com/dVti60Ol.jpg) (http://imgur.com/dVti60O.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/e22OgyIl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/e22OgyI.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/X2yFEYRl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/X2yFEYR.jpg)

More bits falling off?

And damaged tracks and smokescreen details ;)

(http://i.imgur.com/D4v4IjPl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/D4v4IjP.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/JwDxSP9l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/JwDxSP9.jpg)

I spy a new icon.  5th from the right, a head, speaking.  First time I've seen that.

new secondary explosions are nice. there is dust from shrapnel impact to the ground.

Already present in April15a. Here, I see the ground deformed by the tracks.

Read manual please, it is updated almost in each version, in green and blue are marked monthly changes.

Many thanks for the new features.

BTW, can vehicles get bogged down in the mud in the future? Or is it just a "semi-physical" visual effect?

If you put enough effort, they can do it and now.
In the future it will be more difficult on the one hand, on the other easier because that will little change a modeling.

T-62 in Action
https://youtu.be/rMGgV4k1OLk

(http://s6.uploads.ru/t/KOrA9.jpg) (http://s6.uploads.ru/KOrA9.jpg) (http://sg.uploads.ru/t/YxzE7.jpg) (http://sg.uploads.ru/YxzE7.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/QzWmU7il.jpg) (http://imgur.com/QzWmU7i.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/rf9wCgml.jpg) (http://imgur.com/rf9wCgm.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/xQfZ622l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/xQfZ622.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/JNqM0dUl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/JNqM0dU.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/paqnXzHl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/paqnXzH.jpg)

What is new in this picture?

Maybe interior lighting overhauled ?  you can see the crew in night as they open hatches.

But you can already do that?

Sorry.. i'm wrong... this is an abandoned tank

Last man out should have turned out the lights  ;D

Seriously, though, and talking about tank interior lighting, can you switch to night-vision-saving red light instead of white? I just fought a night battle in a T-62 and not only was the light white inside, but I could see chinks of white light through the periscopes, in the external view, even with the hatches closed.

The chink of white light is visible from the loader's hatch in the screenshot below.

(http://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_05_2015/post-66801-0-04467300-1430779344.jpg)

First May patch is coming soon!

Wet surfaces during rain, extended unit roster in Quick Battle, new single missions. Added tank achievemnts and achievements for some single missions, and many more.

We remind that sale is still going on!

Looking forward to this, and to featuring the new patch in another mission report, or maybe a mini-review of the update. SABOW is a real gem of a tanksim and if it was a rough diamond when first released, it is now an increasingly polished one!

(http://i.imgur.com/NcJ8i5vl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/NcJ8i5v.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/5lN9RIMl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/5lN9RIM.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/qfWRVsrl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/qfWRVsr.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/UJIHKnol.jpg) (http://imgur.com/UJIHKno.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/C6SW5Dbl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/C6SW5Db.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/IWcska3l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/IWcska3.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/Yb6eidyl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/Yb6eidy.jpg)

In the case of the M60 the interior light should really be that light blue/green color if the hatches are open.  Only a total idiot would use white light while turned out.  The light fixtures have a white light and a setting for less visible light which is sort of that strange blue green color.  No idea why they did not go with plane old red light.  Vary hard to see red light in darkness at range. 

And SABOW again
(http://i.imgur.com/8QDoYytl.jpg) (http://imgur.com/8QDoYyt.jpg)

Is that one of those Iranian drones? Very cool! Eagerly awaiting DLC

Yes, it will be a small DLC with unexpected features  ;D

Is it this one? Mohajer armed with RPGs? Lookin forward to the DLC, especially the "unexpected features".  ;D


https://youtu.be/uADrXnAHT1Y

Hi, I'm not new in the game but yes in forum, I love what you are doing, any update in your projects? I really want to see more !
Cheers.

Welcome to the forum! All updates are posted regularly on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/Graviteam) and Twitter (https://twitter.com/graviteam).

(http://i.imgur.com/nQuMVO8l.jpg) (http://imgur.com/nQuMVO8.jpg)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uL0niWcVf0

 :P

In all seriousness though, very nice to see this game continue to get some attention. :) Looking forward to any updates that come our way.

Is the pontoon bridge destroyable?

Looking at the screenshot , it looks like they are destructible. I wonder if Graviteam add any unit of army- engineers. :)

(https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpt1/v/t1.0-9/12003313_981267271932547_8187709480100079978_n.jpg?oh=14f1cfc459d3b0dba8970e082e3e4f07&oe=5666FD10)

So, any info on the upcoming DLC? I assume that's where the recent screenshots come from.  ;D

This MBT is new in the game, or this is a new MBT for some DLC?

BTW. this is a Chieftain from UK.

It is not new, since the beginning of SA:BoW (2011). It was used extensively by Iran during the Iran–Iraq War of 1980–88.

Now a playable Chieftain, that would be DLC worth having...

(http://combatace.com/index.php?app=gallery&module=images&section=img_ctrl&img=30434&file=medium)

I agree

In ambush
(http://i.imgur.com/rYgFlC9.jpg)

Really glad I rediscovered SABOW recently. Thanks for all the quality updates. Hope we can soon buy some additional content so you guys get paid for the awesome work you're doing. :)

Do you think make a T-72 for the Iraq forces?   

this x10000