ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 พ.ค. 2024
- Steel beasts, Warthunder, and World of Tanks are great games. However Steel Beasts goes to far into the simulator side making not exactly that fun while Warthunder and World of Tanks are too arcady for my tastes.
- บันเทิง
![โอ้มายก๊อด! ไม่ถึงชั่วโมงหมดเป็นแสน 😅 [cc] แดนแพทตี้ SS2 | EP.42 |](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/OH2ShXfO6tA/mqdefault.jpg)
8:30 War thunder spalling also just stops after hitting a surface it cant pen
while in GHPC fragments can ricoshell multiple times causing more damage I had luck in the T-72 ones the small armor shield above the Autoloader deflected the fragments upwards and killed and heavly wounded the gunner but didnot cause a ammo cooks off and I was still able to fire back
other scenario I get penned and the Fragments hits the gunbreach what was angled in such a way were the fragments could only bounce towards the autoloader and I exploded becuse one stronger Fragment hit a Warhead causing a detonation
the damage system in GHPC is extremly detailed
I was an 11M (active duty 87-94) and a 19K (KYARNG 95-98) and I never had crews scan like that. I assume some of that is due to introduction of CITVs?
Back then, in defilade, we'd ID targets, pick the most dangerous, pull up and engage then pull back. Maybe hit target 2 depending on how close it was to 1. On the move, close target always got it first (excepting on Table VIII when you knew exactly what targets you'd get when).
I also don't recall those long fire commands on the Abrams. They were pretty much the same unless the TC wanted the next round to be something different.
A lot of the reason the voice lines are diffrent is because it can be harder to hear in the game and because a lot of people that play the game haven't had service time to fully grasp all the tanker lingo some people know 👍 not to mention a lot of the NATO vehicles in the game are the later varients with a lot of the having CITV and more modifications
Yeah this is probably a "generational" thing, and a lot of newer gunners/tank crews are gonna have totally different experiences from what the game may portray.
Super interesting perspective, I had considered Steel Beasts but decided against it for the same reason I stopped playing DCS: too hard to pick back up after a few months and the expense of the game or external equipment is too much for their use
if i remember correct Denmark has a tank simulation running Steel Beasts :D
Good stuff, I enjoy your videos alot.
I enjoy this game alot, good mix between realism and arcade.
Easy to get into without any previous experience at all, and I dont know how many times ive heard something slap into the tank and before i finish the thought of "what was that?" its a burning wreck. Going back to retry missions and diffrent approaches is fun, sometimes youre alittle bound by the scripting and AI where your friendly forces are set to do their own thing regardless of what you do.
I think some of the suggested positions feel way off at times. Im not keen on parking out in an open field as a fire position, specially not when there are slopes and hills nearby.
Interesting insight sir, i agree that GHPC is the only tank game where getting hit and damaged is the last thing you want unlike other games where getting detracked is not a death sentence.
Additional question, are there any learning materials how to do proper positioning during an engagement and ambush? also proper berm drills and secondary sight usage?
Arma is the same thing + a bunch of player infantry who would be very eager to kill your tank with multitude of ways. Grenade launchers, mines, drones, ATGMs, artillery, even explosive charges. And I like that game more because you can find servers that host single life events, unlike squad where if you die you just grab another tank.
Arma is more infantry based and its tanks are highly un detailed and not in depth , would be better to play Steal beast Pro to get all those aspects and have all of them be fully detailed for a way higher price though.
@@BC-Freedom-High the way i see it is, that i ain't paying some ridiculous price for smth that mods have already fixed. And i heavily doubt that steel beasts can support a 200+ player server.
@mikelangelo1232 it can't but is highly detailed in what it does , to my extent I haven't seen any mods for Arma that can recreate 100% the fire control system of a T-72B1 or really any tank along with fully detailed interior , voice lines , and use real crew manuals , although I do know the base arma vehicles have interior It's a decent trade off , arma has never had a heavy focus on vehicles It's always been focused on infantry , steel beast pro is almost made exclusive for military service wich is why it's so expensive and detailed .
If you want the less realistic and detailed tank experience , get arma . If you want to be dedicated to realism and experience get GHPC or steel beast
@mikelangelo1232 plus not everything is about the amount of players , I've played a few arma servers with tanks with very little amount of people and had tons of fun , just because GHPC and steel beast can't have a ton of players doesn't mean it's bad , not to mention modern tank combat and battles aren't very large.
@@BC-Freedom-High how do you expect it to be realistic without infantry? 10 times\10 i would be trading away some knobs and switches over smth that involves actual people, where they are assigned with poper tasks corresponding to the unit size, gear, vehicles and equipment. Company level incursion isn't a "large battle". I'm not familiar with steal beast pro system, but if it is one of those games where you fill the tank with bots and fight other players who have similar layout, then i find no interest in it. Even if you can assemble full player crew and arrange 15 tanks vs 15 tanks battle that would be a highly unlikely scenario, from the realism standpoint. Most of the time you have the infantry that is supported by the armor. The company has their own AFV and other means of fire support and are often accompanied by atleast a platoon of tanks. After playing 200 people arma missions, based upon that, i can assure that there are plenty of vehicle vs vehicle combat, and supporting and interacting with your own squad of players feels way more engaging than fighting off bots and an occasional player tank.
Glad I got recommended this on youtube. Look forward to seeing more content from you, sir.
Love your videos so love from sweden
I often play Project Reality which is a MP shooter, usually as infantry.
But when I play as a Vehicle Crew (could be an IFV, APC or Tank) I usually take the driver/Commander (its that way for coordination + 100 player limit) spot exactly because I don't trust most users to position their tanks right, in a way that won't lead to a loss, same with scanning, tho I'm not perfect, specially when the other player acts in a bad way (last time I played in a bad map I lost my Bradley twice because 1st the guy engaged an helicopter when there was 2 BMP-2 and an ATGM on top of a hill that we were sneaking behind, but second time from being obsessed in seeing if he woud engage an ATGM team which he failed to do, the other Bradley got it, but that throw me away)
I like my self some steel armor blazes of war,despite not having many options to play it feels much more real
I was just wondering how tall are you allowed to be for an abrams crew. Since my country was (and still is) using older russian tank models when i signed up for the army. Because i got denied because im 2 m tall.
Would i be able to fit into a abrams being so tall? xd
73 Inches tall.
@@zagstrukk Limit back in the day for our version of the t72 (M-84) was 1.70 (70). I always thought abrams allowed tall people in haha
I think you haven't played Steel Beasts much. Their damage model is actually pretty busted in a lot of ways. The crews won't stop fighting until they are all dead as well. I hope they can improve it when version 5 releases in maybe five years.
And you are missing the cost of it
Yep. I've already sold one of my kidneys for it so I only need to sell half of my other kidney to upgrade to version 5
at least, i should say, better than playing trud thunder and world of wussy tank.
@@Mechanized85 I think "world of wussy tank" is actually a lot better than "trud thunder", since "wussy tank" actually give us people such as the Chieftain.
@@chrisblack6258 oh yeah, my mistake.
You think heavy armor is still viable as a battlefield unit in today's army's arsenals?
Yes since it provides a capability that can't be replaced with anything else. Infantry can only carry so much weight due to physical limitations of the human body.
GHPC is just too easy, you can sit in the open while AI fumbles around. No real need to reposition after each shot and limit exposure.
I mean, last time i played the AI were very precise and reactive. It was a couple of months ago.
War thunder, for the most part, is a 1-shot game. I've had more situations in GHPC than in WT where I pen and it does fuckall
I've had the opposite experience.
@@zagstrukk weird shit I guess. I've had a few shots in WT that did absolutely nothing, but that's either because the round hit ERA (russian bias) or cause I hit it on an off angle. Unfortunately war thunder is quite random in the postpen effects, so different people get different results a lot of the time. I will admit you're completely right on the stabilizer and (somewhat) right on the sights. I say somewhat because you can download or make realistic sights for war thunder and apply them to specific vehicles with specific guns. E.g. I have a Leo 2PL with the real sight, plus the accurate soviet sights on thd T64 and T72. Unfortunately I didn't manage to find the US ones but I may have just not looked hard enough.
at least, Steel Beasts was good game to be learning lesson how to fight and use doctrine.