Play style: simulator or tactical

[Haferja]

Well it's a stupid question, but i just want to know, which play-style you prefer in most of your single-player mission time. The correct answer should be "it depends".. i know ;-) But anyway:

 

a) tactical (using the map, changing waypoints and positions,..)

b) inside a vehicle (as tank commander or gunner)

 

The last month i was struggeling to find the right game in my libary for having tacital battlefield fun. I wasnt sure which game i prefer (i know it's wierd): Stuff from the combat mission-series, the graviteam-series, DCS (combined arms) or steel beasts (besides some other games like: theatre of war, men of war etc.) ;-)

For now i'm sure i'll spend my little free time with steel beasts and the editor. The only thing i miss is the detail of infantry-combat (compared to combat mission).

 

Cheers!

 

 

[Lumituisku]

B - When it comes to actual playing missions. For me it has come very obvious that I enjoy it most inside the vehicle as Commander or Gunner. (edit Or as Driver) 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 3, 2016 by Lumituisku

[Ssnake]

Haferja, from what you're writing I sense that you will probably like a few of the new 4.0 features.

[Marko]

1. I Often play a mission in SB without even jumping in to any crew  positions sort of RTS style.

[Haferja]

3 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Haferja, from what you're writing I sense that you will probably like a few of the new 4.0 features.

 

That doesn't make waiting easier for me!! ;-)) I'm looking forward to 4.0.

Edited April 3, 2016 by Haferja

[TankHunter]

Ever since I got SB1 I enjoyed the tactical aspect. Thats what drew me to it. I remember seeing an article about it in IGN and I said "this looks like a modern day, 3D version of Close Combat."

[Ssnake]

To be honest, that's what I always had in mind. I figured, Well, we can certainly add a bit "shooty stuff" (and if we do, let's do it right), but the "electronic sand table" aspect is my personal preference. Switchology became more important once that army customers started using SB Pro for crew procedure training, so we kinda deviated from the "path of wisdom", but it seems that lately more tacticians in the armies are picking it up as well.

[JustSomeGuy]

I love SB as the "simulator", the more switches, the merrier.

 

Its far easier to master switches and FCSes than to get the wisdom of leading and planning platoon-sized offensive.

[RENEGADE-623]

I use mixture of both. 

[Ssnake]

4 hours ago, JustSomeGuy said:

Its far easier to master switches and FCSes than to get the wisdom of leading and planning platoon-sized offensive.

 

Exactly, switchology is easier - both to work on, and to master. But the tactical part is a more worthy goal.  

[RattyHHG]

For me it's the sim. I like running the machine.

[ashdivay]

On 4/3/2016 at 6:46 AM, Ssnake said:

Haferja, from what you're writing I sense that you will probably like a few of the new 4.0 features.

 

OMG , stop !! you're driving me crazy. 

[dejawolf]

tactics for me, having study-sim stuff like all the buttons in the tanks work, turret lock and MRS update and such is neat, but not at the expense of tactical realism.

[Brun]

Depends on what My role is.  If I am The Co then 90% tactical 10% sim. 

For situations where I am taking orders, 90% sim 10% tactical.

[matsimus]

Very good question. For me I play both and I know that's a cliche answer but its true. Its nice to step away from one role and into another. 

 

But I would also side on the realism side of things. Plus.....the word "tactical" makes me cringe nowadays. The word has lost all meaning now with how its portrayed onto EVERYTHING. 

 

"The Tactical Pillow is a low profile, high density, reinforced and waterproof sleeping device that provides full 360 degree head comfort. Its inner feather core creates a perfect firing position to allow for 100% pillow fort construction capabilities. This pillow will ensure that when you go to sleep, you stay asleep. That's our tactical advantage with..... TACTICAL PILLOW MK1"

 

Plus tactical play only goes as far as how well you know armored tactics and battlefield strategy. I am still learning a lot. So I would never place tactical play as my go to.

 

Great question!

[Grenny]

1 minute ago, matsimus said:

Very good question. For me I play both and I know that's a cliche answer but its true. Its nice to step away from one role and into another. 

 

But I would also side on the realism side of things. Plus.....the word "tactical" makes me cringe nowadays. The word has lost all meaning now with how its portrayed onto EVERYTHING. 

 

"The Tactical Pillow is a low profile, high density, reinforced and waterproof sleeping device that provides full 360 degree head comfort. Its inner feather core creates a perfect firing position to allow for 100% pillow fort construction capabilities. This pillow will ensure that when you go to sleep, you stay asleep. That's our tactical advantage with..... TACTICAL PILLOW MK1"

 

Plus tactical play only goes as far as how well you know armored tactics and battlefield strategy. I am still learning a lot. So I would never place tactical play as my go to.

 

Great question!

 

Since 1997 is was paid to learn, do and at one point even teach the "tactical" stuff...yet I'm still learning.

 

[Brun]

It is a never ending learning process.  You sometimes forget things You learned years ago, and they have to be relearned.  It is a perishable skill.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Brun