Graviteam

Ramas on the SimHQ Graviteam sims forum purchased SABoW and posted his first impressions.I am sharing them with you:

Allright, just spent the last 3 hours playing BOW. I started a campaign but was shot to pieces within 10 seconds. So I went back to the main menu and started a quick battle. Luckily you can choose to have dead tanks lying around to take practice shots. But I also found out that if you place a enemy platoon on a target square, the enemy will just drive around and not fight back. It took me a while to figure out how to estimate the target, and I am still not 100% sure how I can pass this info on to my gunner. He has the habit to fire the moment he spots the enemy anyway.
Just to give you my impressions so far:
Graphics:
The graphics are fantastic. Vegetation looks good, so does the sky and the tanks. Same goes for soldiers. Their movement is also more life-like than SF for eg. I just love when it when a shell punches through the armor of a tank and it goes up in flames!

Sound: Gun battles are very impressive. Shells whizzing through the air, very entertaining. They are still some crackling noises and the banter from the disembarked crew is, A. hardly audible, B. sounds like it was recorded with a webcam mic at close range.

Other things I picked up on:

-There is a noticeable delay between the turret moving (M60) and the sound that goes with it.
-Crew is not talking - real shame!
-Tanks feel "bouncy" when driven over rough terrain. In SF they felt more planted (with the exception of the bt-5 which drove like an armoured lotus elise). Same goes for the crew, they bob and shake way too much. IRL they´d be getting sea-sick.
-Encountered the dreaded "driver refuses to turn in the ordered direction" known from SF.
-Both the 7.62mm co-axial and 12.7mm MG of the M60 have a very low rate of fire. I´d say that it´s nowhere near the 500-600 rpm!
-Friendly tanks keep on firing at enemy tanks, long after they´ve caught fire and are already shot to pieces - total waste of ammo
-There is an in-game updater. I opened it to check it out, but it never accessed the internet
-In the missions menu, the Iranian operation is described as the "Sousangerd-invasion". "Invasion" is the wrong term, as Iran aimed to drive back out the Iraqi army that had invaded and occupied her land. "Counter-attack" or "counter-offensive" would be more in line with historic and factual accuracy.

I will give the T-62 and the campaigns a shot over the weekend, and find out how the tactical and strategic elements add-up to the experience.
I will report back!

ramas

Just a few minutes in and here are some screen shots for you.

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7171/6524520429_5eb4fcbd89_b.jpg)

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7160/6524518965_7f214144bd_b.jpg)

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7035/6524519305_d084b77769_b.jpg)

(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7014/6524519611_2869af1c48_b.jpg)

Very good write-up, I can't wait to get hold of this game (and hope that it will be a basis for SF sequel).

I like the screenshots too.  The crew corpses look quite gruesome though!

this looks fantastic. How much was it again?

GAMEGATE $29.99. I am downloading.  ;D
HI! frinik! Does this game support Joysticks？ In fact, I have been playing with a joystick in SF. ::)

Wow, nice to hear it's out - thanks a lot for posting!

Amazing screenshots! *drools*

Hi Guys! Hi yl9961027! Just back from a week rump at the beach ;D !I just read on SImHQ that joysticks are not supported in the game!Here's Andrey 12345's post about it:
Originally Posted By: Friday
Hi Andrey, Is there a way to use a joystick? I have tried re mapping the keys but it doesn't seem to work, am I missing something?

Cheers!


No joysticks not supported.

According to the experience of SF with their support is not justified, for double-handed players
 

BY the Way for those interested the game is already available for a limited time at 50% off at Gamersgate ($15 instead of $ 30);
http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3479817/Steel_Armor_Blaze_of_War_Alrea.html#Post3479817

Merry Xmas!

I cant make up my mind whether to this or APOS, and I do prefer WW1. There were very few missions in Oiginal AP and I never really got into it. Despite this I lean more towards APOS. What do you guys think?

Well Tonyuk if you prefer WWII then you have answered yoru own question.However I suspect - as Mistwalker mentioned in a post - that SF models can be imported into SABoW which means you could have that game with WWII mod with all the graphics, new Maps( for desert missions) and AI improvements...As happened with the i44 mod for Arma II or Forgotten Hope 2.4 for Battlefield 2.So you may wnat to hedge your bets.Or if it WWII appeals more to you wait until SABoW is sold at a discount price.

Thanks Frinik

From what I have read, I think it would appear to be best to wait and see whether SABOW is developed further, or if Steel Fury is going to get an expansion. For me anything outside of WW11 has limited appeal, speaking as a HOI3 player. Right now I think APOS has more potential than SABOW. Strange though Gamersgate are already selling SABOW for only £10.

Cheers

SF is definitely going to get a new mod( I wouldn't call it an expansion) with new tanks and likely new missions.,It's also likely to be the last major mod for that game as Mistwalker clearly indicated.Future improvements will be minor and limited.As for SABoW it's a good idea to wait and see what happens to it.

Isn't there supposed to be a sequel set around Kharkov in August 43? I mean, if that's the case, it couldn't be just a mod, I think, since it'd require new skins for the German and maybe Russian vehicles, in addition to all the new ones that ought to be added to that timeline, probably the new inf. models from APOS, the new anims, updated AI and all that - seems more like a whole new game, or at least an expansion to me :)

Well technically Fall Blau was to be the expansion for SFK42 but thats a dead end now. From my understanding from the interviews I did with Graviteam the next game after SABoW will be AP style based, after that another armor simulation but it has only been hinted too that it might be Kharkov based, indications are good but nothing written in stone yet.

A little word about SABoW, guys please consider supporting this title by purchasing it (it's still on sale at Gamersgate for $15.00). I know for some it historical setting holds very little or no interest. For myself the AP series is like how some feel about SABoW. But I still purchased the AP series and if I play them very little or not at all, I know in my own small way it helped Graviteam continue making the types of games I want to see. In all honesty Graviteams games are overall a cheap purchase but are solid games compared to many others titles that cost more, are overly issue ridden and many turn out in the end to be make and drop titles with no future. If anything SFK42 has shown us just how expandable and solid Graviteams core game design are, it may not be the prettiest girl on the block now, but she sure is dependable and adaptable and I really expect SABoW to be no different. As far as first impressions go they are just that... a first impression and really Ramas wasn't that critical of SABoW. Some issues sure, but definately nothing gamestopping and I really havn't seen anybody post yet that SABoW won't work on their rig. Thats one thing I'm glad Graviteam brought to SABoW from SFK42, it will run well on just about any rig  ;)

Also I saw a similar post at SimHq concerning SABoW Gamersgate sale, it's a business pratice at Christmas time and really nothing new or an indication SABoW is somehow in trouble. The publisher wanted to move allot of units because it's the best time of the year (especially this year) to do it. I picked up so many new simulators I have been wanting at 50% off that week that I really did feel like a kid on Christmas morning  :D The timing was just a coincidence, even if SABoW was released a couple weeks earlier it still would have been on sale anyway. Also I think the release of SABoW caught Graviteam somewhat off guard, I definatley got the impression from some Graviteam employees here and at SimHq that they were not expecting the release when it happened.
Cheers

Very good  point Panzer faust!Do you know if the game is going to be released in dvd-rom form or is ti digital download only?I am interested in it despite my mediocre interest in the Iran-Iraq and Angolan conflicts.I just hope modders will create European and Middle East mods to allow the game to become more interesting .

I have successfully created an Israeli mod, but I don't know how to re-compress the files.. Something to do with making a ".cmd" file..?

@ whukid,
Thats excellent news  :) Have you tried to contact andrey12345 at the SABoW subforum or in a PM? I'm sure he could let you know what you have to do. Just a couple quick question about your mod whukid, did you manage to get the skins redone and get missions in it too? Also what map did you use?

@frinik,
Thats a good question about hardcopies, while I'm definately not in any possession of inside knowledge on what Graviteam may or may not do here comrade, I am suspecting we won't see hardcopies of Graviteam games for along while in the western market (North/South America and Canada) because they have no publisher here that I know of. But you can get a hardcopy from other western markets like Germany.
http://www.amazon.de/Steel-Amor-Blaze-Play-Indie/dp/B005I0HS3Y/ref=sr_1_1?s=videogames&ie=UTF8&qid=1322745087&sr=1-1

Well it looks like people  (like whukid) are attempting an AIW frinik, but I got this feeling that if skins are made and if you do pick-up a copy, were all going to see some middle east mayhem from our resident battle mayhem maker....you  ;D  :)
Cheers guys!

To get to the skins and insignia's, all you have to do is unflatten the files and convert them to .DDS. I made a tutorial in the Subforum, and I read up on the manual to re-compact them. It was something along the lines of making a completley separate .cmd file and stuff, all of which I have no experience with, Thus, my mod remains untested :(

Oh, And I didn't make any missions. I just changed the Iranian Skins and Insignia's to that of the Israelis

Humm so using the in game battles where Israel sub's for Iran against Iraq? Sounds interesting can't wait to see it  :) .
Cheers

Thanks Panzerfaust!I may order the game from Germany.I read German so it's not a problem for me. :)

Well doen Whukid!That's what I call initiative!Did you get my PM?

Cheers and bests for the New Year!

I did! and Thanks! I recommend only using it for Custom battles once I get it released. It's merely an asthetic mod :)

Review Steel Armor: Blaze of War (PC).
http://zcint.co.uk/article/steel-armor-blaze-of-war-review
As my point it's quite adequate article, especially "the simulation section of the game is competent, but only for the very keen sim fan". Author made only one mistake. He decided, that he had a game, but in fact it's a simulator.

Wow 55% rating only???I think the reviewer was too tough.I think he found the game too complex and difficult to get into.I haven't played it yet but I think it would certainly deserve at least a 70% rating from reviews by gamers who have it..

I think reviewer is just ordinary player. He supposed to see something similar to WoT and failed. No wonder, that rank is 55%

I think its a beautiful tank simulator, when the modders finally decided to sink their teeth into it, it will be a masterpiece.

And another review Steel Armor: Blaze of War Review:
http://www.gamerzines.com/pc/reviews/steel-armor-review.html
Now rank is 62%

Well he kind of gave it away in the first sentence of his review:

"Having recently played World of Tanks, the historically accurate tank-based shooter-MMO blah, blah, blah"

Now I'll be busy for the next hour cleaning all the coffee I spewed all over my monitor from reading the first sentence of that review  >:(

Haha, i actually laughed at this to: "Having recently played World of Tanks, the historically accurate tank-based shooter" It is so far from historical it can be, its a pure arcade game with slightly historical like tanks, nothing more and nothing less :P Nothing in that game is near reality. Its bad because the game have potential to be great. I have played i few historical made matches and then it shines =)

WOT accurately reflects real tank warfare as Need for Speed is a realistic depiction of car racing!


That being said, Graviteam should take note of the similar negaitve comments about the poor quality of their game tutorials.It seems to be a persistent problem in their games probably the result of poor translations.

I agree frinik Graviteam sure could use a good RU to Eng translator/writter for it's tutorials. While I have seen a lot worse there's tons of room for improvement in this department. But what irk's me to no end is these writters "reviewing" something like SABoW that really just don't have a clue of what a simulator based game is. If I was the chief editor of that site I would at least try to find a writter on my staff who knows the differances between a simulator based game and an RPG/Action/Adventure based game. I could just imagine that staff meeting:
"Hey whatup playerz, anyone here got experiance playing armor simulators?"
"Yeah homie, totally owned WoT's and it's the shiznit"
"Awesome sauce! you got the gig" 
"Hellz yeah!" as he jumps on his skateboard and roll's on down the hall to his cubicle, Xbox controller in hand.

 I really miss Andy Mahood. Andy if your out there buddy PLEASE come back and start writting simulator reviews  :'( 

Well on the SIMQH forum I think there's a guy who makes pretty good and well thought out reviews .Is it Magnum?

Let's ask Skybird - a well known Steel Beast devoted-to-the-core addict and fanof that sim to review WoT and see what's left of the game once he has finished with it.

WoT reminds me of Panzer Elite Action( not to be confused with Panzer Elite)Fields of Glory or Dunes of War just with better graphics and better designed tanks but barely....It's good for teenagers and mindless fun for those you like that style of play.

I like SF style of play: minimum tactic, medium simulator and a BIG part of fun!
SA is too much complicate and boring, imho. And I don't like tactic/stategic and never will.

Not to be a smart arse lockie but I don't think SFK42 would have fare to well with that same reviewer either  ;D

Like Lockie I much prefer SF also it's a straightforward sim.I am going to buy SABoW out of curiosity and to help Graviteam but like Lockie I hope the next WWII sim by Graviteam won't be a hydrid like SABoW but a pure sim.Although I am dubious...

I agree, at first I too wished SABoW was more like a carbon copy of SFK42 (with the updated engine and improvements) then being part Actung Panzer and SFK42. But here are some things to consider, for all intensive purposes SABoW (like SFK42) is a piece of contracted software made for a publisher and as such the publisher has alot of say so as too whats in the game. As a matter of fact depending on the contracts language they may have 100% control. I was always under the impression that SFK42 and SABoW were Graviteam originated, presented to a publisher and if the publisher was interested they signed on (like Actung Panzer), but apparently that isn't the case. This had myself and other puzzled for along time why there were never no "official updates" or addons from Graviteam for SFK42 (excluding the money problems between Graviteam and Discus over SFK42) despite the good sized fan base and the opertunity it presented Graviteam with making more money with sequels and probably paided DLC. Now I fully understand as per a recent conversation I had with Vlad, Graviteam does not own the rights to either SFK42 and apparently SABoW and as such they cannot make official changes to either game without the publishers consent and a new contract to do so or Graviteam would be in violation of copyright laws which Discus and UGI own for their pespective Graviteam titles. So while Graviteam made the software, Discus (for SFK42) and UGI (for SABoW) own the copyrights. The only way for improvements/fixes or DLC to be done on these games the company that owns the copyright has to contract Graviteam to do this. So bacically if the publisher has no interest in improving the game it's pretty much dead from an offical standpoint and Graviteam is legally bound by the contract so it cannot just do stuff on their own and release it for free or even as a paid DLC. But as for SFK42 Graviteam did provide a way for the community to modify the game via the editors, so technically anyone who owns SFK42 can modify the game within the limits of the editors without being in copyright violation, even the employee's of Graviteam  ;)

Now SABoW appears to be the same way but it's quite apparent it was written differently. Besides the use of the new game engine the editors work differently then in SFK42 and SABoW is a hybrid of two game genres. Believe me I think most would have preferred if SABoW's editors were like SFK42 but I'm getting the feeling that if SABoW's editors were like SFK42 then Graviteam would have probably been in violation of the copywrite laws protecting SFK42, so they had to make them different. So I think thats why SFK42 and SABoW are so different in many aspects, if Graviteam would have made SABoW a carbon copy of SFK42 but with a new game engine and a different era of tank warfare they probably would have still been sued by Discus. Many people feel that just by making a few superficial changes to something they can skirt a copywrite but thats just not the case. I can't remember what my son told me the % was when he was in school to be a game designer but I remember the % was pretty high to aviod copywrite infringments.

I was a little suprised to see the problem with the tactics that some have with SABoW, especially the mission designers for SFK42 since isn't tactics considered when you design a mission? One big difference between SFK42 and SABoW is instead of the individual SFK42 mission designer deciding the tactics they want the player to use in winning the mission (with some small variations allowed), SABoW allows the player to totally decide his/her own tactics for winning. Also while I love SFK42 to death and will never stop playing it but unlike SFK42 I am not limited to the tactical choices the mission author designed in the mission as in how to win, with SABoW there is limitless outcomes depending on what tactics I choose to use and what tactics the AI chooses to counter with. Definately SABoW gives you much more user control over the assets you command compared to SFK42 but you really don't have to do all this to play SABoW. How much control you want is really up to you. I personally have played most of the Iran/Iraq campaign and have really only used the 4 tanks in my platoon to take objectives (sometimes one at a time) and it works okay for me since I am currently winning the campaign. Now if I choose to learn SABoW more in depth it will add a new layer's to the game depending on how far I wish to delve into it, but if I choose not to thats okay too as SABoW plays just fine no matter what level of command you wish to control, from indivdual tank to platoon to the whole army. These differing levels (if I choose to learn them) will keep SABoW pretty high on the replayability factor for a long time.  Now guys I'm not trying to say SABoW is better then SFK42, far from it in certain aspects, but I wouldn't be so quick to diss this new game format out of hand either. I know most wanted WW2 and what was presented in SABoW is very niche indeed and not a lot of people mia cuppa, but when the next WW2 tank sim comes from Graviteam I think many will be suprised as to just how much better this new game format probably is compared to SFK42.
Cheers

Panzerfaust
 Yours was a great review of the various Sabow playing styles and Graviteam's limitations on why they can or cannot release any updates for various games. I recently purchased APOS (still haven't tried it) and I think I'll pick up Sabow also to support Graviteam if nothing else.

Cheers
H

Where I come from, APOS stands for "A Piece of Shit"

Just thought I'd throw that in there ;)

Whukid I can guess what SF stands for.where you come from.... ;)

 :D well maybe whukid, but if you look at the traffic at the english APOS forums compared to the english APK43 forums there is about 3x more postings and topics in APOS then APK43 (about the same at SimHq). Providing most are not bugs or gripes (don't know as I hardly play either game or partisipate in those forums) those probably are not bad numbers for this type of game just released here in the west last November. Also as much as I hate to admit this the number of forum postings/topics for APOS right now far exceeds the number of forum postings/topics that SFK42 had with the western release in the same timeframe. Granted some of that had to do with many peoples early misconception that somehow Lighthouse was the developer of SFK42 but even after the word was spread that Graviteam was the developer and was very much in business, still it was a real ghost town here in the early days, much more nicer and populated now  ;) But there is no denying many people are enjoying and playing the AP series and I'm happy for Graviteam that the series appears to be successful for them, even if I personally have a very lukewarm enthusium about them. The lengthy post I made earlier was just to try and explain some new information that has been revealed and kinda to let people know that the new game format we are seeing in SABoW will probably carry over to the next Graviteam simulator (as eluded to earlier by frinik). Change is hard and most people don't like leaving their comfort zone, but if a game format has been made into a dead end due to copywite then for Graviteam to survive as a company and keep producing simulators they has to find an alternate route. While I cannot say exactly the terms Graviteam signed for SFK42, I do know that by the time the copywrite runs out on SFK42 most of us will have died from old age by then (no kidding).
Cheers

And if we compare APOS vs SF there will be ~9x more postings in use of SF ;)

It's true on the SIMHQ forum practically 95% of the posts are either for APOS/Kharkov 1943 or SABoW.SF seems to have been relegated in second plan which is Ok since the main forum for that game is here anyway.

 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

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.

Here's a video description how to start the game:
http://youtu.be/_qZwFUvfnVE

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

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????

I haven't gotten mine to work after that update :(

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?

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

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

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

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 ;D

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

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

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

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,

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?

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  :D . 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  :D 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

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.

Panzerfaust, thank you very much for the detailed explanation!

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.. :P

Sorry lockie, I get a little carried away sometimes  ;D
Cheers

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  :D
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

" Fortunatley the AI tank drivers in SABoW are just as retarded as the AI tank drivers in SFK42 "

 This is unfortunate because I was counting on improved AI... ::)

Lol. There's been more than once when some dolt got stuck on my rear grille.