First Impressions of Steel Armour Blaze of war

[hemisent]

 I really liked APK and it provided many hours of gameplay that I greatly looked forward to. I'm hoping that APOS is a continuation and not a piece of shit. APK got me interested in tank games which led me to SF and ultimately to here.

 Guess I need to fire it up and find out for myself.

H

[frinik]

Hemi; from what I read APOS won't disappoint you.I haven't forgotten your request, unfortunately, my desktop crashed and with other things going I haven't been able to follow up on what you asked me.Don't worry I'll get on with it.

[lockie]

Here's a video description how to start the game:


Suppose, it should be kinda of advertisement - to cut off all ordinary and casual players(i.e. like me)
IMHO, I must be really a VERY wise guy to understand what's video talking about

[frinik]

Which is why i hope graviteam will leanr from SAABoW's experience and make their future WWII sim either a simple sim without RTS component like SF but more sophisticated or if they insist on making a hybrid game then make 2 distinct components or modules: RTS and a SIM one clearly divided and with simplified and intuitive controls....I hope they will ask us fans - may be through Panzerfaust - for advice or input ahead of time?

[whukid]

I haven't gotten mine to work after that update

[frinik]

Whukid; there's guy named Andrey12345 on the simhq.com forum who seems ot be a support guy from Graviteam and who might be able to help you with the patch not working for you.I am not ammeber of that forum thus I can't PM nor contact him but both Kyth and Panzerfaust are members and could give you a hand?

[Kyth]

Whukid; there's guy named Andrey12345 on the simhq.com forum who seems ot be a support guy from Graviteam and who might be able to help you with the patch not working for you.I am not ammeber of that forum thus I can't PM nor contact him but both Kyth and Panzerfaust are members and could give you a hand?

Coincidentally, there's a guy named Andrey12345 on the Graviteam APOS and SABOW forums over here as well. Wonder whether it's the same guy?

[frinik]

Hem that's precisely what I said  ???On the simhq.com forum....http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3496948/SABOW_January_2012_patch_beta_.html#Post3496948

[Kyth]

Dude you totally misunderstand 
I'm guessing the same guy visits these forums too,

http://graviteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=10021.0

[frinik]

Uhhhhhh! You are so right Dude!!!! I never realised....
Hem as I wa saying; why go to simhq when you can find him right here

[Panzerfaust]

Which is why i hope graviteam will leanr from SAABoW's experience and make their future WWII sim either a simple sim without RTS component like SF but more sophisticated or if they insist on making a hybrid game then make 2 distinct components or modules: RTS and a SIM one clearly divided and with simplified and intuitive controls....I hope they will ask us fans - may be through Panzerfaust - for advice or input ahead of time?

Thanks for the compliment frinik but honestly I have no real stroke with the guys at Graviteam or Vlad. Sure Vlad and I talk sometimes and I might offer what I think or some suggestions if asked, but I really don't feel it has any bearing on what Graviteam does as a company.

While I hate to be a wet blanket of sorts but I have a strong personal feeling that what you have seen with SABoW is actually going to be the prototype for all future Graviteam tank simulators. I really don't feel they will go back to the type of simulator SFK42 was. Several reasons have led me to this personal view and I really think Graviteam is looking foward and trying to carve it's own unique niche in the armored simulation market. While I totally understand the appeal of SFK42 for many (including myself) but I can also see where the next Graviteam WW2 armored simulator, based on the SABoW game format will offer much more from the start then SFK42 ever did. And really almost everything possible in SFK42, user made missions/campaigns, adding new vehicles and infantry weapons can also be done in SABoW, so a WW2 simulation based on the SABoW game format would probably be the same, so what exactly would be lost with a WW2 armored sim based on SABoW's game format? I for one can tell you that in SABoW  no two missions will always get the same repeating results even if you employ the same tactics. For example I played one mission were the enemy armor came from a certain area. I lost that mission so I replayed it, used the same tactics I employed in the last mission since I now knew where the enemy armor was going to attack from, and to my suprise the enemy armor attacked from a totally different area this time, the AI in SABoW seems to react to your moves and does not seem to follow a predetermined script. In SFK42 we know this isn't the case, pretty much once you put the mission to memory it was hard not to win most of the time, you knew what was coming and from where. So really the only way to compensate for this and keep the missions challenging was to up the enemy force balance. While you were somewhat changing the mission (by adding more targets) you really were not changing the mission in it's essence. In SABoW you have much more freedom to experiment with different force make ups, tactics and logistics. Since playing SABoW I can see where winning a battle or campaign on medium or hard settings using your own devised tactic and force deployments would seem so very gratifing. Now pictured all this in a WW2 tank simulator and really wrap your head around it, I hope you can see why I'm pretty enthusiatic about this new game format. Now there is no doubt it is more complicated then SFK42, but it's not crazy complicated, it's just new and different and new and different always takes a little time to learn and adjust too.

Now guys I know some of you might feel "Whats up with panzerfaust? He sure seems to be hating on SFK42 as of late" Please believe me SFK42 will always be special to me, it was the sim that reintroduced me to armor simulations after a very long drought (M1 Tank Platoon 2 was my last armor sim). It also introduced me for the first time to the epic WW2 armored battles on the Eastern front. For these things and others I will always be grateful to SFK42, Graviteam, the comrades I have made here and of course the great mod makers that helped SFK42 mature to the premier WW2 armor simulator it is today. I have no plans to bin SFK42 and I plan very much to stay active in promoting it every chance I get. But at the same time I am very stoked about SABoW and the new game format and as I learn more each time I play, it really fires me up for a WW2 based version.
Cheers

[frinik]

Jeez "Whats up with panzerfaust? He sure seems to be enamoured with SABoW as of late" 

I also think the same PF as far as Graviteam's next sim or direction is heading.They will retain the hybrid combo.I don't mind that but I also keep in mind the criticism Graviteam received for their less than well done manuals and sometimes clumsy controls.My hope is that they improve on it, learn their lesson and don't stick to that " We don't really care what you want we know best for you " attitude they seem to have at times.They make real good stuff and can be proud of their achievements taking into accounts their limited means.That does not mean that they should overlook our input and positive feedback.My motto is " Meet your customers expectations and you sure will meet yours as well!"

So asking us for our thoughts and opinions does not mean they are saddled with them it just gives them another perspective...

Cheers

[Kyth]

While I hate to be a wet blanket of sorts but I have a strong personal feeling that what you have seen with SABoW is actually going to be the prototype for all future Graviteam tank simulators.

I'm personally not averse to a combination of strategy and simulation. From a war-gaming perspective, 2 of the usual items on any wishlist are: a) a strategic layer to generate battles dynamically and tie them in logically; and  b) some way to get down, move around and participate at the 'ground-level'. It's great to see both things in one package, although the subject matter isn't really my 'cup of tea' so to speak,

[lockie]

SABOW now has one year since release got started. Just want to know, if possible. How many missions(or whatever they named) were made for this game? As I remember, after one year of SF releasing, there were no more then 10 missions created (Xream, Stone2009). To say the truth, it's not too much. Even now, after five years after SF released, the mission quantity - no more than ~150 or even less.
But to make missions(or whatever) for SABOW it's a piece of cake(abt 100 times easy) to compare to SF mission creating. And it's true. I remember, when I first stared to make my first mission, it took me approximately three months. Well, even now I can't say that I know each detals of the SF mission making. Anyway, just for interesting:
- how many missions were created for the SABOW at this moment?

[Panzerfaust]

Well there in lies the rub lockie, making dedicated single missions dosen't seem as neccessary in SABoW unlike in SFK42. As stated in my previous post select a campaign in SABoW, then play one mission (win, lose or draw ). Then replay that same mission again, make the same decisions or use the same tactics and you will more then likely notice the final battle results will be different then your first play through, either slightly or extremely different. Here is SABoWs AI showing it's prowness as I don't think a mission designer could script/trigger this.

Lets look at an example of a user mission in SFK42. I played stone2009 Un-Named Hill (mentioned in another post) and 3 STuGs got behind my front lines, attacked me from behind and wrecked my KV-1's engine. I replayed the mission (after I installed your fix, more on this later) and moved my KV-1 off the hill after destroying the first German attack to a position where the STuGs showed up behind my lines from the previous mission. Low and behold I spotted the 3 STuGs coming down a hill in a large open field. I brewed them up at long range before they got to the wooded area, where they were following a ravine that allowed them to get behind me in the first mission attempt, they didn't stand a chance. I played the mission a third time with basically the same results, the STuGs were more or less in the same place. And that is the way it is in SFK42. Sure the mission designer can design some very clever scripts and trigger events for their mission, but basically once you put the mission to memory the chances of losing become far less possible, unless you of course change the force balance, but then in essences your not really changing the mission or events just adding more targets to try and kill (no small feat mind you  ).

Now in SABoW I played the first mission of the Iran/Iraq campaign and got a draw. I played  the mission again, used the same tactics and got a major defeat. Why? because I played it like SFK42. I wrongly figured now that I know where the enemy is I can replay the mission and kick his arse, well to my chagrin the Iraqis were not exactly in the same place this time and where in the first mission there were 3 T-62's in a certain spot there now was one BMP and the 3 T-62's came from a totally different direction/area and totally kicked my arse  . So while I don't know from personal experiance if designing campaigns in SABoW is a hard as designing single missions in SFK42, but it seems the micro management of the scripts/triggers is far less as the game engine seems to make the choices on what the enemy AI does in relation to your moves.

I have the highest and deepest respect for the people who make anything for SFK42 because without you guys SFK42 would have been just another mediocre WW2 armor sim with a few stock missions and few playable units (ala Battle Tanks TvsT). Graviteam made us a good basic tank simulator that was modable, but you guys made it great and took it to totally new heights and I feel it is now a classic. But despite this the honest reality is SABoW really does not seem to require dedicated user made single missions. SABoWs engine and AI is without doubt far superior to SFK42 engine in this aspect. Where SABoW really lacks compared to SFK42 is in new user made campaigns and new user made units, and there are several factors that I feel are contributing to this
1). Subject matter and timeframe
2). Complexity of the new engine
3). Creating mods/campaigns in SABoW is much different then in SFK42 and no one fully understands it (yet).
4). Limited stock game maps (way less then SFK42).
5). No map editor (a major omission by Graviteam on this title).
In all honesty if Graviteam does release a new WW2 sim based on APOS (SABoW pretty much uses the tactical part of APOS) I feel we are going to get a much better well rounded and more indepth sim then SFK42. And the fact that Graviteam could release DLC's for it will help Graviteam stay in business. Will SFK42 stay on my HD if Graviteam does make this new sim I described? Hell yes it will  Just because something new comes along and even if it's better does not mean to me that what I had before has become obsolete. It's the same reason I have DCS A-10 on my HD and Strike Fighters 2 on my HD. Both have A-10's in them, but one is very complex (study sim) and the other isn't (survey sim). There are times i want to really exercise the ol'grey cells and times when I just want a mission and go blow things up 
Cheers

[frinik]

I agree with you Panzerfaust! The next WWII sim that comes out of Graviteam will be better in every respect.Bigger maps, better AI,hopefully a more optimised game engine that takes advantage of multi core processors, better graphics, ballistics and physic. However I just hope thye will retain some of the best features of SF; i.e a fairly accessible Mission Editor, a Map Editor and more so an instant battle generator. I think MP or Co-op is out of the question as Graviteam just doe snot have the resources to provide support to either.Having played MP on games made by biggies like EA, Ubisoft, Tripwire, Activision I know how complex and frustrating the issue of servers maintenance can be. But an instant battle generator coupled with good AI could go a long way in keeping gamers interested. The RTS/SIM format is fine with me as long as the game user manuals are clear and well written.

[lockie]

Panzerfaust, thank you very much for the detailed explanation!

[whukid]

I think alot of people are scared away from SABOW by the command aspect. This typically requires an in-depth discussion on the matter, but I'll be frank;

If you're a control freak with your units, you'll lose every single battle.

If you're not scanning for bad guys, you're a sitting duck. The enemy in SABOW rarely is identified before they take the first shot (unless you're the one defending, then you have an advantage), so the player is forced to be more focused on finding the enemy, who comes from any direction - as panzerfaust stated-  and pretty much any point in time. If you're busy worrying about why that M113 is out of place in your perfect attack line, you're not focusing on the T55 platoon just beyond the tree line or the Infantry company that's lying in wait with an ATGM or two in tow.

The best part about that whole deal is, unlike APOS, you have the ability to identify the enemy on your own before the AI ever knows what's coming. In APOS, if a KV-1 is hiding behind a tree, odds are you can't see it, no matter how close your units are. It's plagued by the "phantom tanks" issue that plagues most games with a "fog of war". In SABOW, there are no phantom tanks, just enemies that have been identified and enemies that haven't.

While I like SFK42, I generally stick with either SABOW or APOS these days. Something about tanks not bouncing into the sky after nailing a fallen tree..

[Panzerfaust]

Panzerfaust, thank you very much for the detailed explanation!

Sorry lockie, I get a little carried away sometimes 
Cheers

[Panzerfaust]

I agree with you Panzerfaust! The next WWII sim that comes out of Graviteam will be better in every respect.Bigger maps, better AI,hopefully a more optimised game engine that takes advantage of multi core processors, better graphics, ballistics and physic. However I just hope thye will retain some of the best features of SF; i.e a fairly accessible Mission Editor, a Map Editor and more so an instant battle generator. I think MP or Co-op is out of the question as Graviteam just doe snot have the resources to provide support to either.Having played MP on games made by biggies like EA, Ubisoft, Tripwire, Activision I know how complex and frustrating the issue of servers maintenance can be. But an instant battle generator coupled with good AI could go a long way in keeping gamers interested. The RTS/SIM format is fine with me as long as the game user manuals are clear and well written.

Well it's part way there frinik, SABoW has multicore support, better GFX, ballistics and physics and an instant battle generator and a pretty good AI and a Game Options section that we would just die for to have in SFK42. But unfortunatley Graviteam has retrograded in some areas like an easy to understand ME and the total ommision of a map editor. Fortunatley the AI tank drivers in SABoW are just as retarded as the AI tank drivers in SFK42 
Totally agree about the MP aspect, without some major backing it would probably drive Graviteam broke. But there are some sims out there that have developed their AI almost to a point where you would be hard pressed to find a better human opponent. Also a BIG nod to a clear, well written user manual.
Cheers