Graviteam

English-speaking community => Steel Armor: Blaze of War => Topic started by: Chiquito on October 15, 2015, 10:17:35 PM



Title: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Chiquito on October 15, 2015, 10:17:35 PM
Thank you guys. Thank Graviteam


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on October 16, 2015, 03:49:38 AM
definitely, but i don't think it's likely...unless they make steel armor 2 or something with modern theater.

armored warfare's coming out, maybe i'll port their tank over to steel armor if i can.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Flashburn on October 16, 2015, 07:54:38 AM
Sure.  But I think other vehicles as playable makes more sense first.

In the end it will depend on sales.  Such needs enough money to justify the expense.  And this sim is niche unfortunately and dinged up from old UIG release. 

I think t72 does make the most sense as a modern squeal with larger playable area per battle.  But what should be its nemesis?  Merkava Mk. 1 comes to my mind.  I do not think that will ever happen.   :P


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Andres87 on October 16, 2015, 12:47:11 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jmo04Nw5Vdg

 I voted "Yes";)


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Chiquito on October 16, 2015, 03:46:23 PM
Nice real life footage. Thanks


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Tanker on October 16, 2015, 10:16:00 PM
Tank crew had a lucky getaway.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Flashburn on October 17, 2015, 01:02:10 AM
Tank crew had a lucky getaway.


I put it this way.  The RPG gunner that hit the tank is clearly the best shot of the bunch.  Now the range looks to be at least 400 meters.  But is hard to tell.  Could be more could be less.  Lets just make it 300 meters.  Its hard to hit moving things at 300 meters without using your sights.  :P Even adjusting them.  And leading your target to get the metal to impact the meat.  As we can see here, using the force does not work so well. 

I would say that tank crew was lucky that none of them knew how to use a rifle beyond 75 meters.

Just the same, I am quite happy they made it.  And equally happy that those tankers did not put an HE round into those shooters. 

 


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: yl9961027 on October 19, 2015, 02:41:14 PM
T-72 or other Playable vehicle, I will be welcome.
In reality, T-64 may be more likely. Because of that section of T-64 video.
   



Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: chaudard on October 19, 2015, 03:28:17 PM
I prefer an european map like Shilovo 1942 (from GTOS) or a DLC about WWII in SABOW!


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Flashburn on October 19, 2015, 03:39:17 PM
Playable chieftain over t72...

Still the most logical for many many reasons is a T55. 


I really think if they go ww2 tank sim to make stand alone game at this point featuring nothing but ww2 armored combat.  Braking into some rarely modeled playable tanks would be a bonus.  Talking about interiors.  Like a KV-1, panzer 3, maybe a stug, and I have never seen an M4 sherman in a game with an interior. 


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: 33lima on October 19, 2015, 06:52:59 PM
Voted yes - but since the general subject has been raised, what I'd like is not a new playable tank, but a new playable theatre, complete with additional playable tanks...specifically, NATO -vs- WARPAC, c.1975-c.1985. So, that'll be playable T-55, T-72 and T-64 for WARPAC, and playable Chieftain, Leopard 1 and M1A1, thanks very much. It's what these tanks were built to do, where they were built to do it...their natural home.

So that we can see and do this sort of thing...but in a tanksim, not just in a wargame:

(http://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_06_2015/post-66801-0-09525900-1434313967.jpg)

(http://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_06_2015/post-66801-0-93686000-1433967232.jpg)

(http://combatace.com/index.php?app=gallery&module=images&section=img_ctrl&img=30608&file=max)

(http://combatace.com/index.php?app=gallery&module=images&section=img_ctrl&img=30606&file=max)

Well, you DID ask...

Next best would be Middle East - with playable Centurion and T-55.

Third best would be, make the existing T-55 and Chieftain playable, for the Iran-Iraq war.

Playable T-72 would be behind all that for me, very nice though it would be.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Andres87 on November 05, 2015, 04:37:09 PM
In my opinion , the T-72 could see in the game SABoW . Anyway, the game T -72 Balkans on Fire / Iron Warriors . There were fights between the T -72 , T -55 , Leo 2A4 even the SU -100 and T -34/85. There were also small maps, somehow it did not bother.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on November 09, 2015, 04:26:16 AM
someone rescue this from armored warfare. it deserves a better home:

(http://armoredtalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/t72a_5.jpg)


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Chiquito on November 09, 2015, 05:51:13 AM
Armored Warfare is a Arcade level. we are talking about a Simulation level


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Flashburn on November 09, 2015, 06:09:08 AM
The proportions of tank look way off. 


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: 33lima on November 09, 2015, 08:25:28 PM
Looks like a pretty good representation of a 'T-72BV'/T-72A to me, albeit the IR searchlight is gone and the turret ERA bricks seem to be more like the T-80BV. Maybe it's just the respective:

(http://armoredtalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/t72a1.jpg)

Anyway, even a Monkey Model T-72 would be good to have in SABOW...along with a playable Chieftain, Centurion/Olifant and T-55. The Fulda Gap map can come later :)


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on November 11, 2015, 03:42:28 AM
Armored Warfare is a Arcade level. we are talking about a Simulation level

the model is accurate and cna be used for simulation level. hint hint.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Wiedzmin on November 11, 2015, 09:41:26 PM
T-72 frow AW look like made by retarded person, nothing similar to real tank :D


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: 33lima on November 13, 2015, 09:07:23 PM
Well, it's a lot better than the T-72 in SABOW :)


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: andrey12345 on November 13, 2015, 09:18:51 PM
Well, it's a lot better than the T-72 in SABOW :)
But this model is so very incorrect.
It is good that it is not in SABOW.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on November 14, 2015, 07:57:14 PM
what part is incorrect? for t-72a, that is very accurate. lack of searchlight is bug. i saw other screenshots where it exists

i think most accurate t-72 ever made in a game. just a shame it's arcade, not sim.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: andrey12345 on November 15, 2015, 01:36:04 PM
what part is incorrect? for t-72a, that is very accurate.
At first look:
Turret (most of equipment wrong placed and shifted to front), sights, lights, MGs, some reactive armor blocks, smoke dischargers


i think most accurate t-72 ever made in a game. just a shame it's arcade, not sim.
Games in general are extremely rare have correctly modelled tanks, this is not exception.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on November 18, 2015, 04:57:27 AM
i guess that is right. why more technical people like graviteam must make it ;)


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Flashburn on November 18, 2015, 07:14:09 PM
Its more like that the folks modeling the thing are not tank people.  Given a short time frame to model with a subject that does not interest them.  Usually that sort of thing is fine.  Like no one cares if a house model is slightly off or trees.  But other things like human form has to be right.  Car people expect a certain model of car to look and be right in a racing game.  Same thing with tanks, planes and guns on the militaristic side.  Like how many FPS attempt to model this or that firearm but someone who knows it well (or carried one), go OH HELL NO, that's all wrong.  While everyone else thinks its fine.  Sometimes good enough IS.  Sometimes, no it is not. 


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on November 20, 2015, 03:22:13 AM
when graviteam made iron warriors t-72, you have to remember it was cutting edge back then. i think it would be amazing if they got brand new engine and made a sequel. unreal engine 4 is the free engine right now that is quite powerful, i don't know if it's suited to huge terrain and vehicle mechanistic, physics, and ballistics though.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: andrey12345 on November 21, 2015, 12:07:50 AM
i think it would be amazing if they got brand new engine and made a sequel.
But why?

unreal engine 4 is the free engine right now that is quite powerful, i don't know if it's suited to huge terrain and vehicle mechanistic, physics, and ballistics though.
It is not free for commercial game dev. And not needed for this.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Chiquito on November 21, 2015, 12:58:49 AM
The current graphic engine is enough. They only have to do optimization to increase the battle area for modern tanks


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on December 01, 2015, 06:46:55 AM
but their t-80 is very correct. newer model than t-72

http://armoredtalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/t-80_6.jpg


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: andrey12345 on December 01, 2015, 11:35:00 AM
but their t-80 is very correct. newer model than t-72

http://armoredtalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/t-80_6.jpg

Not much better. Someone stole the MG and IR caps again, crooked fuel tanks and commander's cupola and painted the infrared lights in white color ;D.
From typical mistakes, it is clear that they do people who do not interest tanks and they do not even try to understand how and where it works.

Sorry, but tank models in AW much worse than the latest models from WOT or WT.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Wiedzmin on December 01, 2015, 11:50:03 AM
but their t-80 is very correct. newer model than t-72

http://armoredtalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/t-80_6.jpg

it's very retarted, same as T-72 nothing nothing similar with real tank

models frow AW made by retards and mostly for retards(no offence) :)


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Chiquito on December 01, 2015, 12:01:03 PM

it's very retarted, same as T-72 nothing nothing similar with real tank

models frow AW made by retards and mostly for retards(no offence) :)

Lol...!


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Andres87 on December 02, 2015, 11:34:14 AM
Sorry, but the creators of AW, didn't want to consult with a decent monographie or technical instruction, they preferred to create a fantasy tanks, same like WOT. Even western tanks look tragically.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on December 03, 2015, 03:57:33 AM
i think they make the best tanks for now simply because no other company goes modern tanks in high fidelity. i cannot find any other developer who makes t-80 in modern engine. that level of accuracy is tolerable for the moment.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Wiedzmin on December 03, 2015, 07:08:35 AM
because no other company goes modern tanks in high fidelity
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DkHGG-HkFs8/Ur90vWGQM2I/AAAAAAAALG8/HjR1MEAuZAQ/s1600/LineUp.jpg)
(http://www.esimgames.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/2013-05-29_05.jpg)
realy ?


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: andrey12345 on December 03, 2015, 12:52:48 PM
i think they make the best tanks for now simply because no other company goes modern tanks in high fidelity. i cannot find any other developer who makes t-80 in modern engine. that level of accuracy is tolerable for the moment.
In Steel Beasts, latests models more accurate.
Yes it does not look "shiny and glowing" and not in "modern engine" but much better than AW


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Fritz on December 03, 2015, 01:19:34 PM
In CombatMission SF and BS also 3d models is good ;)
(http://s01.riotpixels.net/data/47/dc/47dc2637-7c51-48db-a9ae-9b5845daa4fb.jpg/screenshot.combat-mission-black-sea.1700x824.2014-11-06.11.jpg)


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: andrey12345 on December 03, 2015, 01:47:36 PM
In CombatMission SF and BS also 3d models is good ;)
(http://s01.riotpixels.net/data/47/dc/47dc2637-7c51-48db-a9ae-9b5845daa4fb.jpg/screenshot.combat-mission-black-sea.1700x824.2014-11-06.11.jpg)

If this game was released 10 years ago, yes  ;D. But CM so much lacking polygons and textures. Even in the SB remembered that already 21 century and add polygons and texture resolution :)


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Chiquito on December 03, 2015, 07:40:17 PM
I think Steal Beast is not that good in tank models. Also they only make playable the NATO tanks so this company is playing with politics goals. They are professionals losers!


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Tanker on December 03, 2015, 10:34:04 PM
I think Steal Beast is not that good in tank models. Also they only make playable the NATO tanks so this company is playing with politics goals. They are professionals losers!

They marketed their program to the US military as a training aid.  They then adapted it for the game market.  Their emphasis would be on NATO equipment.  I doubt there is any political motivation involved.  As far as being losers, I think the company is quite successful.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Chiquito on December 03, 2015, 11:34:07 PM
I think Steal Beast is not that good in tank models. Also they only make playable the NATO tanks so this company is playing with politics goals. They are professionals losers!
They marketed their program to the US military as a training aid.  They then adapted it for the game market.  Their emphasis would be on NATO equipment.  I doubt there is any political motivation involved.  As far as being losers, I think the company is quite successful.

Who care about what they really do for the military market. We are not in game to be manipulated, we are free. Honestly success for Steal Beast is not real


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Asid on December 04, 2015, 12:41:27 AM
They marketed their program to the US military as a training aid.  They then adapted it for the game market.  Their emphasis would be on NATO equipment.  I doubt there is any political motivation involved.  As far as being losers, I think the company is quite successful.

Steel Beasts was firstly a game which evolved into a military product which is also available to civilians. The US military did not adopt Steel Beasts as a training product.

First there was SB Gold and then SB Pro

Regards


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on December 04, 2015, 02:43:47 AM
i am talking about high fidelity art assets, both steel beast and combat mission have very outdated models. if you see the armored warfare models, they have far more details. 3d handles, little bumps, levers, even screws modeled.

the only issue they have is dimension, and sometimes they are lazy with details. but steel beast models cannot be compared. they are too low, too low detail.

it is a strange correlation. the higher fidelity, the more fantasy. i notice in games like arma 3, they have better models now, but all fantasy and sci fi.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Wiedzmin on December 04, 2015, 07:33:35 AM
I think Steal Beast is not that good in tank models. Also they only make playable the NATO tanks so this company is playing with politics goals. They are professionals losers!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZ6RKQLoEQo

i am talking about high fidelity art assets, both steel beast and combat mission have very outdated models. if you see the armored warfare models, they have far more details. 3d handles, little bumps, levers, even screws modeled.

the only issue they have is dimension, and sometimes they are lazy with details. but steel beast models cannot be compared. they are too low, too low detail.

it is a strange correlation. the higher fidelity, the more fantasy. i notice in games like arma 3, they have better models now, but all fantasy and sci fi.
(http://armoredtalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/t72a_1.jpg)
(http://armoredtalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/t72a_2.jpg)
"high fidelity art assets" they f-cked up whole model buy yaaaay they have screws(but they painted commander cupola vision blocks with green paint)  ;D
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yOBpN-trX5U/UsYvUzW1uFI/AAAAAAAALLM/VwrjbONdDUA/s1600/Banner.jpg)
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-K9Hv0E3NJ28/Uu8A-AfeLCI/AAAAAAAALTg/2S7emM6T740/s1600/e.jpg)
and more or less normal T-72(oh wow they have tow cable and AW doesn't have it  ;D)

if you don't understand how real T-72 look like, and how propper 3D model look like, than what is your point ?


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Chiquito on December 04, 2015, 11:57:27 AM
The video of the T-72. This version of the T-72 is the only playable Russian hardware that worth in Steal Beast. For your information, the T-72M1 is the Warsaw Pact T-72, not the Soviet version, wide different in performance. As all the Warsaw Pact countries are now in NATO side, they only made this T-72M1 export version, because this.

I don't like the Russian tanks models by SB, maybe because the very old graphic engine.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Wiedzmin on December 04, 2015, 12:12:33 PM
I don't like the Russian tanks models by SB, maybe because the very old graphic engine.
you may like or don't like models from SB, but they are more or less accurate, unlike of AW crappy models.
the T-72M1 is the Warsaw Pact T-72, not the Soviet version, wide different in performance.

for your information zero differences(especially in game terms) .


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: andrey12345 on December 04, 2015, 12:15:45 PM
i am talking about high fidelity art assets, both steel beast and combat mission have very outdated models. if you see the armored warfare models, they have far more details. 3d handles, little bumps, levers, even screws modeled.
But they incorrectly modeled :)
What a sence in levers and screws if it misplaced?

May be better to do game with high fidelity fantasy tanks, even better with orcs and elves  with screws and bumps ;D


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: chaudard on December 04, 2015, 01:07:46 PM
May be better to do game with high fidelity fantasy tanks, even better with orcs and elves  with screws and bumps ;D
Wargaming wanted to create an orcs and elves game, they finaly choose to make a game with tanks. Less competition and good market in Russia. I think we see that Graviteam was passionnate about tanks and made a far better game in term of quality. And they choose a very difficult market: simulators are less popular.

I would like more games like yours: warships, submarines, planes simulator... These games are abandoned by their developpers.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Tanker on December 04, 2015, 11:55:21 PM
I think Steal Beast is not that good in tank models. Also they only make playable the NATO tanks so this company is playing with politics goals. They are professionals losers!
They marketed their program to the US military as a training aid.  They then adapted it for the game market.  Their emphasis would be on NATO equipment.  I doubt there is any political motivation involved.  As far as being losers, I think the company is quite successful.

Who care about what they really do for the military market. We are not in game to be manipulated, we are free. Honestly success for Steal Beast is not real

How are you being manipulated by SB?


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Tanker on December 04, 2015, 11:56:17 PM
They marketed their program to the US military as a training aid.  They then adapted it for the game market.  Their emphasis would be on NATO equipment.  I doubt there is any political motivation involved.  As far as being losers, I think the company is quite successful.

Steel Beasts was firstly a game which evolved into a military product which is also available to civilians. The US military did not adopt Steel Beasts as a training product.

First there was SB Gold and then SB Pro

Regards


Thank you for that. 


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on December 05, 2015, 03:18:19 AM
it's crazy. you'd think sb team would hire a graphics programmer or something.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: 33lima on December 05, 2015, 11:09:40 AM
IMHO Steel Beasts is an excellent illustration of the point that having adequate graphics rather than relatively minor 'eye candy' features can be very much more than compensated for by extreme fidelity to crew drills and the tactical handling of tanks and troops in combat, providing a sense of 'being there' that - in my experience - has seldom been equalled and never been exceeded, in any sim (despite US accents for all sides). And tho with no or basic interiors, several Soviet AFVs are playable. It's still arguably the Gold Standard for tanksims. As a tank sim, and very good though PE and SF are, only SABOW is really in the same league, with better graphics, better SP content and some other superior features.

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



Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: whukid on December 05, 2015, 07:39:55 PM
Personally I find the level of chaos that comes with SABOW combat to be rather accurate.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on December 11, 2015, 07:10:14 AM
IMHO Steel Beasts is an excellent illustration of the point that having adequate graphics rather than relatively minor 'eye candy' features can be very much more than compensated for by extreme fidelity to crew drills and the tactical handling of tanks and troops in combat, providing a sense of 'being there' that - in my experience - has seldom been equalled and never been exceeded, in any sim (despite US accents for all sides). And tho with no or basic interiors, several Soviet AFVs are playable. It's still arguably the Gold Standard for tanksims. As a tank sim, and very good though PE and SF are, only SABOW is really in the same league, with better graphics, better SP content and some other superior features.

that's just sour grapes coping for that game having outdated graphics.

better graphics would benefit that game, period. nothing contributes more to the sense of being there, than having things that should be there represented visually.

Krabb: Overquote removed.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Ghostrider on December 14, 2015, 02:46:09 PM

that's just sour grapes coping for that game having outdated graphics.

better graphics would benefit that game, period. nothing contributes more to the sense of being there, than having things that should be there represented visually.

Graphics is being improved somewhat,  but  will never match, lets say, a SABOW level. There are certain constraints for this- requirements of .mil customers(who, for example, can not  gut containerized  training systems  every  year by swapping computers inside),  map size(which is  approximately 100x100km), quantity of units in mission scenario(up to couple Bn-sized TFs per side) and so on...


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: 33lima on December 15, 2015, 12:52:05 AM
IMHO Steel Beasts is an excellent illustration of the point that having adequate graphics rather than relatively minor 'eye candy' features can be very much more than compensated for by extreme fidelity to crew drills and the tactical handling of tanks and troops in combat, providing a sense of 'being there' that - in my experience - has seldom been equalled and never been exceeded, in any sim (despite US accents for all sides). And tho with no or basic interiors, several Soviet AFVs are playable. It's still arguably the Gold Standard for tanksims. As a tank sim, and very good though PE and SF are, only SABOW is really in the same league, with better graphics, better SP content and some other superior features.


that's just sour grapes coping for that game having outdated graphics.

better graphics would benefit that game, period. nothing contributes more to the sense of being there, than having things that should be there represented visually.

Now, now. Don't presume you understand another's motivation, you have clearly no idea of mine. Ever heard the expression, de gustibus, nil est disputandum?  I also disagree with your assertion that 'nothing contributes more to the sense of being there, than having things that should be there represented visually', inasmuch as this are merely one of several important contributors. I find SB's current graphics quite acceptable, and the accuracy of their 3d models preferable to the 'beter graphics' but less accurate 3d models of AW. So do others.

Krabb: Overquote removed.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Rich8 on April 03, 2016, 09:33:46 AM
T-72 or other Playable vehicle, I will be welcome.
In reality, T-64 may be more likely. Because of that section of T-64 video.
   



I absolutely agree, T-64 and maybe either M60A1 with AOS or M60A3, I'd love to see the A3 vs the T-64 on a European map with some good hills and forests...would be amazing.
We need hypothetical scenarios imo, just look at how few battle options there are in SABOW. The replay-ability is just so low. I'm two months into this sim, I really love it, but fighting only for sand in the M60 is really boring and the Battle Editor feels kinda dull.

TL;DR In my opinion next DLC should be T-64 vs M60A1(AOS) and/or M60A3 in Eastern Europe circa 1970s hypothetical scenario campaign :3
Would make good use of that snow weather :D


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Pulstar on July 28, 2016, 06:39:51 PM
I will defo be back to SB after they (eventually) upgrade the terrain engine. The models themselves are pretty good.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on September 17, 2016, 05:36:02 AM
amored warfare models now available. maybe some people can help edit the turret dimension to be more correct so we can help put this in the game:

http://p3dm.ru/files/7754_obt_t-72a-.html
http://p3dm.ru/files/7752_obt_t-72-ural-.html
http://p3dm.ru/files/7751_obt_t-64a-.html

it is possible and done before just see below pic, just need to make models accurate and authentic first.

(http://i.imgur.com/s9en2XV.jpg)


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Anddy on September 17, 2016, 12:30:38 PM
it is possible and done before just see below pic
Nice job! This tank is under AI control only or user may control it too?


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on September 18, 2016, 03:33:47 AM
player controllable, however many features missing due to lack of technical and modding knowledge. it was never released and is now lost. but i am confident, with our better understanding of modding, more demand for those types of vehicles, there is better chance to implement vehicle properly working


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: 33lima on September 18, 2016, 09:59:18 PM
Making the AI AFVs that are in SABOW now user-playable, would be a good start. Even if they can only be played from the tank commander's sights or unbuttoned positions, until somebody can implement the fire control system. 'Cockpit' 3d interiors are nice to have but not essential. A Chieftain playeble from the TC's sights and hatch view would be a lot better than no playable Chieftain at all, likewise a BMP, Centurion, Ratel etc. And these models are already in the game!

(http://combatace.com/index.php?app=gallery&module=images&section=img_ctrl&img=30534&file=max)


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: whukid on November 18, 2016, 03:11:01 AM
A couple years back they actually had the BMP working and Flashburn had a half decent M113 package going. Someone also got the bright idea of throwing a T-34/85 into the mix as well as a playable vehicle.


Honestly, I think the only shortcoming with any of the Graviteam games is the complex system necessary to mod the game. Granted, when I tried to overcome it I was 18, stupid, and burdened with the attention span of a small child, however it still completely lacks anything resembling user friendliness.

Simply put, if the process of importing a vehicle was easier or at least less frustrating, there would be a wider field of modders to pick up where Graviteam left off. A great example of this is Kerbal Space Program; the base game blows, however it's integrated reliance on 3rd party mods have forced it into a genre of its own among space exploration games. This concept also goes for maps, skins, audio, ect. I think the reason Steel Fury's modding community took off the way it did was because of how easy it is to edit the files and get your stuff into the game (A game focused on Operation Fridericus now manages to fit everything from Manstein's march on Kerch to the invasion of Normandy?!).


So in short, I think every sane person here understands that making vehicles to Graviteam's level of proficiency limits the company's output, however if some of the effort dedicated to DLC were instead aimed at making simple importer tools and integrated editing (map making, scenario building, army building, ect.) the general populace could come up with their own solutions.


The reason I bring this up is I truly am completely turned off by the Iran-Iraq war and would rather spend my time driving an M60 over the dunes of the Sinai or a T-62 through the narrow mountain passes of Norway.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: 33lima on November 19, 2016, 12:37:19 AM
...or said M60, or indeed a Leo 1, Chieftain or T-64/T-72 across the North German Plain?

Something approaching this can be achieved in GT:OS by mixing and matching DLC, if you can ignore the out-of-place markings and buildings...

(http://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_11_2016/post-66801-0-77946400-1479087244.jpg)

...not to mention troops shivering in lightweight uniforms while risking life and limb without steel helmets...

(http://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_11_2016/post-66801-0-82294000-1479160458.jpg)

...though even getting the Chieftain to move at other than the current halting crawl looks to be a significant modding headache. And of course a SABOW-style tanksim element is absent.

The time taken to build big maps and replicate modern FCS's seems likely to doom such hopes, short of a serious change of development tack by GT or your aforementioned facilitation of modding. We can but live in hope, while making the best of what we've got.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Pandacat on November 29, 2016, 10:57:37 PM
It'll be nice to have M60A3 to face T72. ;D


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: 33lima on November 30, 2016, 09:15:34 PM
It'll be nice to have M60A3 to face T72. ;D

Well, while we are hoping and waiting for 'Fulda Gap/North German Plain' DLC, we can always take a T-72...

(http://combatace.com/uploads/monthly_06_2014/post-66801-0-96831600-1402705706.jpg)

...up against various enemies, including Leo 1, in this:

http://combatace.com/topic/83055-iron-warriors-balkans-on-fire/


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Pandacat on December 01, 2016, 06:25:23 PM
Is this gonna be a new game? or simply DLC for current SABOW?


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: andrey12345 on December 01, 2016, 07:28:33 PM
Is this gonna be a new game? or simply DLC for current SABOW?

Of course new game. At first we invent time machine, then move back to 2004 and release this game as "T-72 Iron Warriors"


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: 33lima on December 01, 2016, 07:50:47 PM
Is this gonna be a new game? or simply DLC for current SABOW?

Of course new game. At first we invent time machine, then move back to 2004 and release this game as "T-72 Iron Warriors"

So that's how it all started - time travel. It all makes sense, now.

(http://combatace.com/index.php?app=gallery&module=images&section=img_ctrl&img=33850&file=max)

(http://combatace.com/index.php?app=gallery&module=images&section=img_ctrl&img=33849&file=max)

(http://combatace.com/index.php?app=gallery&module=images&section=img_ctrl&img=33847&file=max)


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on December 05, 2016, 01:51:22 AM
i believe modern tanks t-64 and beyond in a european environment, maybe moldova or chechnya will spur some additional interest from mainstream outlets and more players.

it has been a very long time since t-64, 74 or 80 were handled competently in a game. i am aware of steel beast, quite frankly, not attracted to their 1999 technology.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Anddy on December 08, 2016, 02:06:30 PM
So in short, I think every sane person here understands that making vehicles to Graviteam's level of proficiency limits the company's output, however if some of the effort dedicated to DLC were instead aimed at making simple importer tools and integrated editing (map making, scenario building, army building, ect.) the general populace could come up with their own solutions.
What is the profit for Graviteam to make a simple importer tools and integrated editing map? It's obvious to make another DLC.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: whukid on May 25, 2017, 03:22:33 AM
So in short, I think every sane person here understands that making vehicles to Graviteam's level of proficiency limits the company's output, however if some of the effort dedicated to DLC were instead aimed at making simple importer tools and integrated editing (map making, scenario building, army building, ect.) the general populace could come up with their own solutions.
What is the profit for Graviteam to make a simple importer tools and integrated editing map? It's obvious to make another DLC.

Did you miss my point on Kerbal Space program intentionally or...?

DLC are short term, finite solutions to a lack of content. They cost the company money and time to make, and their success is wholly dependant on the DLC reaching the intended audience.

Creating tools for people to generate user-content pretty much alleviates the burden of providing made-to-order DLC on the company. If you've been following the Graviteam adventures with SABOW and GTOS, you're well aware that this has always been their achilles heel, since the campaigns are so limited in scope compared to their potential. This limited scope, without mods, pretty much guarantees that the people who spend money on the game stop after a few hours and limits the feedback that the developers receive from their audience outside of the forum, which impacts their profits in the next release.

Now if we're going to compare this from a market standpoint with companies that produce games like KSP, the Total War series, Civilization, Eve Online, or Red Orchestra/Rising Storm, the latter is the clear beneficiary in the long run (which would be recurring profits from the next generation of games the developer releases).

You're forgetting that the money from the DLC isn't the goal, the consumer base is. You stay relevant by answering the consumer's demands, which in this case would be playable vehicles.

Whether or not Graviteam does this is up to them, but they've been mentioned by a few different authors for gaming magazines now that had good things to say about the potential of SABOW, but not it's limited scope in content.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: 33lima on May 25, 2017, 09:37:57 PM
Spot on, Whukid.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on May 29, 2017, 11:13:41 PM
i have an accurate 3d model of t-72 made from a guy that can be used for this game if anyone wants. i myself forgot how to mod.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: whukid on June 22, 2017, 09:07:28 PM
Spot on, Whukid.

Thank you.


I must say, I'm very frustrated with the direction Graviteam has been heading. Their high water mark seemed to be just after the release of SABOW and GTOS, which both died off after the constant updates made it impossible to use mods and the cryptic mod tools that required a sacrifice to the Windows gods to get anything to work.

It's really too bad because they have a better engine than any other tank simulator, but won't create the tools that would allow the user-base to keep it alive.

If we're going to compare Graviteam's work to other simulators, let's look at the former Pacific Fighters series. I played that game before I knew how to spell "high-school", and now that I've finished a tour in the Marines (10 years later), there's still not only an active player base, but an extremely active mod community. They've literally taken a game that was honestly sub-par and turned it into a massive franchise that covers everything from World War 1 to the ass-end of Vietnam, with the tools for the user to create their own campaigns, battles, and custom engagements without trying to manipulate a hugely complicated system.

Now, 10 years later, the developers are using the community that was fostered by the modders and 3rd party add-ons and used it to literally revive a dead game and create new titles.

The irony of it all is that the original game covered a tiny niche in the Pacific Campaign of World War 2, very similar to Steel Fury's Operation Fredricus or SABOW's Iran campaign, and the players decided to expand it to include the next 40 years of airborne combat.

Sit there and think, for a moment, of where this game could be if it was easy to import vehicles and create new campaigns.


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on August 30, 2017, 02:02:32 AM
war thunder just released highly accurate and detailed t-64 model. war thunder has a neutral stance on non profit modding so anyone who wants to extract the model and port it over here is allowed to do so.

here's an article and screenshots for it:
http://worthplaying.com/article/2017/8/29/news/105039/

so excited, my 3dmax student license has long expired, maybe someone has working 3dsmax and knowledge for modding can do this task?

more screens from official site:
https://warthunder.com/en/news/4906-development-t-64a-the-pioneer-of-a-new-era-en


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: Margdons on August 31, 2017, 06:12:40 PM
Just want to say, T-72 is awesome


Title: Re: Do you like a Playable T-72 tank?
Post by: johncage on September 20, 2017, 02:08:57 AM
war thunder just released modern era update with t-64 and its contempoaries in the fulda gap, i will try and get the model working in either this game or spintiires mudrunner