Why I bought it and what I think (imho)

I just wanted to say what fun I am having in this series. I been slowly learning in offline mode mainly and know there is much more to learn. With that said, I thought I would post up as honest of an opinion of the game that I can to those that do stop in over at my website. Not many, just about 25,000 registered and who ever else passes through.. Hopefully a few more will grab this game and enjoy it as much as I do.. thanks guys for a great Tank Sim..I got a few interested I know of..:men_ani:

Review:

http://games-survival.com/pc-games/strategy-games/

I just wanted to say what fun I am having in this series. I been slowly learning in offline mode mainly and know there is much more to learn. With that said, I thought I would post up as honest of an opinion of the game that I can to those that do stop in over at my website. Not many, just about 25,000 registered and who ever else passes through.. Hopefully a few more will grab this game and enjoy it as much as I do.. thanks guys for a great Tank Sim..I got a few interested I know of..:men_ani:

Review:

http://games-survival.com/pc-games/strategy-games/

It will be interesting to read your opinion. Welcome

Welcome to the Pro PE forums Fuby and I enjoyed the review(s) you've posted on your web site. FYI the Challenger 2 has more then the observer position. Driver, TC and Gunner's positions are playable; was enjoying this sweet machine last night.

Welcome to the Pro PE forums Fuby and I enjoyed the review(s) you've posted on your web site. FYI the Challenger 2 has more then the observer position. Driver, TC and Gunner's positions are playable; was enjoying this sweet machine last night.

Thanks CalAB, I must have been stuck in some locked out mission or something..

I thought it was like my poor M60a class..sniffle..will update that..

any other pointers and opinions are welcomed..

it is meant as a Positive review...

Well the M60 was introduced @ the same time as the CR2 (2010)

Also the "8 user limit" is only for "most" sessions.

"Some" sessions (like TGIF and others) can host 20+ players.

Also the guys at eSim can (on application) grant you a temporary licence if you want to run a "one off" session that exceeds 8.

Is "SABOW" how they spell it or is that just based on the pronunciation of SABOT?

Well the M60 was introduced @ the same time as the CR2 (2010)

Yes but I think he wants to be able to gun /command it (I.e. its not "crewable").

Is "SABOW" how they spell it or is that just based on the pronunciation of SABOT?

Steel

Armour

Blaze

Of

War

Ah.

thanks guys.. the 8 player limit mentioned was about a stock PE edition supported. I updated to mention the extended game size servers offered.

yeah, SABOW is the Steel Armor reference.

And I was also mentioning uncrewable for the M60.. best update that too..

I think everyone wants a playable M60 as well. Hopefully time will allow that to happen eventually... (got to be positive).

Patience I have.. I mean it took me ten years to get here..

And the game has a "positive" feeling to it..

As mentioned, it is a "personal" thing for me.. it's the only tank I drove around in..

and then it was the 70's so I remember very little for numerous reasons..

or I wouldn't want to be back in one..lol

I just wanted to say what fun I am having in this series. I been slowly learning in offline mode mainly and know there is much more to learn. With that said, I thought I would post up as honest of an opinion of the game that I can to those that do stop in over at my website. Not many, just about 25,000 registered and who ever else passes through.. Hopefully a few more will grab this game and enjoy it as much as I do.. thanks guys for a great Tank Sim..I got a few interested I know of..:men_ani:

Review:

http://games-survival.com/pc-games/strategy-games/

A positive, well written and interesting take on SB Pro PE. Well worth the read.

My only disagreement with it would be with this statement:

I can only take off scores for the PE’s version of Network having no drop in and 8 player limit.

If SB were a shooter then there would be no disagreement with your contention that players should be allowed to drop in while a battle is in progress.

But - SB is not a shooter (though I imagine there are those that use it as one :evil:).

SB is, as we all know, a tactical level simulation of contemporary armored warfare. In a multiplayer game running a unique scenario both sides need to be setup completely at the start, a commander for each side selected, and appropiate orders/direction given to the players all before the battle starts.

Allowing drop ins after a game has started would be very disruptive as they would not have a clue what role they were to fill in the battle plan. It would take time away from the commander that would be better utilized maintaining situational awareness than spending time bringing a drop in up to speed.

In the chaos of your typical online shooter where it's every man for himself (which in my experience is what they all eventually degenerate into - even if the scenario/map chosen requires teamwork) drop ins are fine.

Drop ins, IMO, are not fine for a game like SB.

Caveat: I've been away from the SB community for some time. Maybe your typical SB MP game has changed to more resemble a shooter. If so...

I really believe any game with network should have at least 16 player minimum along with stand alone server software.

Here we are in agreement 100%. 16 players would be real nice and would be enough for hands on Bn level battles.

I remember the old days of SB1 when high speed internet didn't exist, a few of us had T1 connections and even one guy I remember had a T3. They hosted whenever they could while the rest of us connected via a phone or - eventually - a 2MB/s cable connection. Once we tried to see just how many guys we could get in one game at once. I don't recall the exact number but I believe it was somewhere between 40 or 50. Great fun.

Again Fuby, a good review.

Caveat: I've been away from the SB community for some time. Maybe your typical SB MP game has changed to more resemble a shooter. If so...

Nope.

A positive, well written and interesting take on SB Pro PE. Well worth the read.

Thanks for the kind words werewolf... appreciate it!

Yeah, the network drop-in does seem to be a debateable subject. With no disrespect to the present community and how the game has been played in the past and most likely the future.. I like both systems of play. I just have a hard time getting a few long time friends to turn loose the cash and it always returns to talk about the network setup. Most of us are old Silent Hunter fans and seen how that died, plus IL2 users and see how that becomes an issue with one more program to run to get into an active server.. How rise of flight almost flopped in its first year.. etc etc..

The reason I mention Rise of Flight so often is because they also said it couldn't be done and needed a briefing. I ran one of the first servers for it and made scenarios a lot of people liked.. some still used.. and they seen how drop-in was more of a benefit rather than a burden in the long run.. that game has evolved into one of the best darn flight games on the market due to imho, their acceptance on noticing the crowds that wanted to jump into running servers instead of a lobby wait.

We been playing games a LONG time..and have seen titles well worth playing fall to the side or not get the proper respect they deserve due to lobby games. People just do not like to come and sit in Teamspeak as much as we all wished they did. Most want a servers list with games/sims and the chance to drop in to a game in progress. With that said, I ran a tank only server for darkest hour mod over a year, that stayed packed on both game and teamspeak server till I took it down. They provided the server listing, we provided the server and TS.. and it was just a great time all week long instead of just a friday nite..

As the devils advocate, you guys do realize in real war that sometimes reserves do come into battle with little knowledge on the onset of what is going on? Wouldn't this be the VOIP/TS Commanders job to update as it would be done in real life? Plus the map would show current radioed positions and action? Is this not a real life situation more so than the briefing room alone? On going wars do not matter at this time, that's why they have map rotations.

If the game never changed from it's current form I would still be happy with it and grateful to the programmers up to this point.. but, it is something to ponder over.. Server listings and drop-ins do not make run and gun games nor any less a sim experience.. server admins and lack of server rules do that.

I got to get back to me SB tanks... this leather cap is itching the heck out of my head!!

Thanks again werewolf for the kind words...

If the game never changed from it's current form I would still be happy with it and grateful to the programmers up to this point.. but, it is something to ponder over.. Server listings and drop-ins do not make run and gun games nor any less a sim experience.. server admins and lack of server rules do that.

I got to get back to me SB tanks... this leather cap is itching the heck out of my head!!

Thanks again werewolf for the kind words...

Except the core issue is that SB Pro PE is a commercial spin off from SB Pro the Mil Sim foundation product.

A very large percentage of the PE version's R&D pretty much comes from the Military Customers (e.g. figures of over $100K per country for projects).

Without trying to sound too egotistical, "we" (the military customers) don't want and wont pay for these features and therefore there is little incentive for them to be developed.

I doubt very, very much that eSim would develop them just for the PE version (esp. as most of the current community aren't interested in it either).

Without trying to sound too egotistical, "we" don't want and wont pay for these features and therefore there is little incentive for them to be developed.

Well, I own it.. even if I am new to the series, wouldn't I be part of the "we"?

sniffle...

Is there a poll on this subject that I have missed?

The "we" I was referring to was the military community that pay for the R&D into SB Pro which then, to varying degrees, flows on into SB Pro PE (what you bought).

I've expanded on the original post to hopefully make it clearer.

The "we" I was referring to was the military community that pay for the R&D into SB Pro which then to varying degrees flows on into SB Pro PE (what you bought).

Ahh..ok, so your on the Military side and pay for the contracts in Australia?

makes for a strange forum.. and absolute ending to a discussion.

Just out of curiosity, how many nations use their software and do they all feel the same? Wouldn't you want your commanders to think outside a briefing room as the ground force changes and reserves are brought forward?

I can understand the Military side having the role and major role in development by all means.. Just the strong "NO" we don't want that... I guess that's military huh.. no disrespect meant.. I didn't take none towards me..

Ahh..ok, so your on the Military side and pay for the contracts in Australia?

makes for a strange forum.. and absolute ending to a discussion.

I'm not the sole guy but one of them for Australia.

I also own Pro PE so based on the description of this thread as "Discuss general topics directly related to Steel Beasts or Steel Beasts Pro PE." I think its fine.

Just out of curiosity, how many nations use their software and do they all feel the same? Wouldn't you want your commanders to think outside a briefing room as the ground force changes and reserves are brought forward?

Well at the SB International User Group meeting I went to in Koln last year - no one asked about what you want.

Reserves never turn up with no idea what is going on (refer all the numerous posts on this in this thread and elsewhere - search is your friend).

The fundamental basis of your request is flawed (except in maybe <5% of the time so its of not needed).

I can understand the Military side having the role and major role in development by all means.. Just the strong "NO" we don't want that... I guess that's military huh.. no disrespect meant.. I didn't take none towards me..

No, its because we just don't want it, don't see a need.

No point in being vague - we don't want it therefore we wont pay for it so its unlikely to happen.

No point in being vague - we don't want it therefore we wont pay for it so its unlikely to happen.

Agreed.. and subject is closed.. we all have our opinions.. and yours is the absolute.. no harm..just thoughts.. wont hear/read me mention it again here..

Have a great day mate..

Ahh..ok, so your on the Military side and pay for the contracts in Australia?

makes for a strange forum.. and absolute ending to a discussion.

Just out of curiosity, how many nations use their software and do they all feel the same? Wouldn't you want your commanders to think outside a briefing room as the ground force changes and reserves are brought forward?

I can understand the Military side having the role and major role in development by all means.. Just the strong "NO" we don't want that... I guess that's military huh.. no disrespect meant.. I didn't take none towards me..

Well, I've been playing online sims for a quite a few years now and IMHO there are two distinct types of server. One is the open 'dogfight' server where the battle is pretty much continuous (with periodic changes in the maps) and you can drop into the war at any time and do your own thing and leave at any time. The other is the coop server where specific scenarios start with the people present at the beginning and run through to the end. Once it is underway, the 'doors are closed'. I have never known a coop scenario/mission that you can jump into halfway through.

AFAIK SB doesn't operate in the former fashion ('cos it's not really a game?) so there's no requirement for this feature.

But I am relatively new to SB and happy to be corrected.

Best wishes

Tjay

C.O UKArmour.