[Gorshkov]

Originally Posted by Skybird

They do pay. in a dozen nations. It is a save bet they do not waste that kmoney on a purpose they are not cionvinced of. Hell, they even order addtions to the packages that they got.

Yes, but you still cannot notice military users most probably pay much more for completely different tank-sim than civilian users.

Originally Posted by Skybird

The Abrams share the same cockpit because principally the M1A1 and the M1A1HA share the same design.

So count them as one cockpit. The same applies to M2A2 and M2A3 Bradleys - that's also one cockpit.

Originally Posted by Skybird

On the Leopard-2, you are wrong. All Leopard-2s (A4, A5DK, Strv-122, 2-E,) in the game have different cockpits, though sharing many design features, since they are the same family. But some aspects function and are designed quite different. TC override in the A4 workjs very different than in the other Leopards. The A5 has no digitised map. The 122 has different GSS, the 2E also, I recall. And so on. protection values are different for the armnour. Gun is different. Ammo is. Sorry, this is not about science fiuction ideas of future tanks, but about modelling the real counterparts. It is four diferent tanks. And four different cockpits.

Nope, buddy! You are - possibly intentionally - wrong because I did not mentioned Leopard-2A4 but only Leopard-2A5 clones. Their cockpits are almost identical except tactical map display which is anyway accessible in other tanks too by pressing F5 key. Moreover I don't know why you mentioned their guns and armor differences because all that has noting in common with interior graphics. Simply stop seeking artificial arguments to improve poor interior numbers available in SBPro PE vehicles.

Originally Posted by Skybird

While the CV-9040 Bravoi and Charly are quite close, the CV9035 and CV9030 look and function quite differently, have different interiors, different handling, and different procedures from programming that highly sophisticated ammunition they use.

Yet those four "different" vehicles are basically variants of the same IFV. I suppose it is clear to you, isn't it? Of course marketing strategy advice to create as many "different" vehicle types as possible but customers should know they are not different models. Maybe instead of introducing tenth CV90 variant into this game eSim should think about modeling interiors of dozens of playable, yet still "internally castrated", vehicles?

Originally Posted by Skybird

I had that title, as well as Steel fury. Both did not coinvince me. They are gamish, and partially heavily flawed in functionality. I had a draft posted with a review of SF. Neal never released the final version since the reaction to my listing of its weaknesses caused so many hostilities. The draft is still somewhere on this site. Especially the terrible sound engine, the bad AI and the often suicidal path finding caught my antipathy. The tanks themselves felt not likm, tanks, but like light matchbox toys. And the two occaisons I saw TvT on someobody elser'S system, did not made me break out in hooray, too. None iof that compared to the immersion and realism one gets from a well-written SBP scenario, or as they also point out: multiplayer.

We are not interested in your review of Graviteam games. You asked about any other game possessing many playable vehicles and I provided you with such title. You cannot disagree SFK42 with modes offers plenty of playable armored vehicles so you have started some rant about how bad SFK is. I think the "worst" is SFK42 mods are free while SBPro patches are heavily priced. That fact you cannot deny!

Originally Posted by Skybird

2.640 is not even two months old. The graphics engine is old, the sim is new.

Nope, buddy. SBPro 2.640 patch is a month old. Don't mix up games with game patches...

Originally Posted by Skybird

You may want to discuss that with those incompetent defense ministries willing the costs for buying that useless and fictional stuff that offers no tactcial experience. Heck, the Austraölians were even so insane to equip all members of their tank troops with copies of the sim, for training purposes. They muist all be dumb and not knowing their stuff, else they would not waste their time with this useless game and burn hundreds of thousands of dollars over it.

You still cannot spot what is my point. So my point is I strongly suspect military customers buy professional tanksim paying fifteen times more than civilian enthusiasts paying 125 bucks for significantly stripped down and open-sourced toy.

Originally Posted by Skybird

But some of the info you give here, simply is wrong and misleading, and unfair, and I cannot help but think that on a few occasions you even started hairsplitting just to try to give it a bad name.

Now you really sound like salesman...

Originally Posted by Skybird

SBP has deficits, and features they want to include, but still had no resource and time free to include. But I stick to it, and SBP users agree with me there: what you already get right now beats hands down any 3D mechanised ground warfare simulation on the market, and brings you as close to the tactics and realities of tank warfare as you can get on PC today. [...]
Point is that there are no showstopping issues or design flaws - and that'S what makes a difference to many others.

I don't even have to try SBPro PE to rebut your claims. SBPro PE users made it themselves! I have only needed to look at eSim forum to find out that. For instance in this thread many users complain that armor modeling of lightly armored vehicles is a derision. So eSim guys to rebuff them provided users with their BMP-1 frontal armor estimated thickness. Yet eSim guys included...engine as a part of frontal armor thickness! That finally proves PE game is a childish toy made for people knowing nothing about military hardware.

Now I think brand-new Graviteam production - Steel Armor: Blaze of War - is much superior to SBPro overpriced oldie. It has much much better graphics and wonderful tactical commanding experience intelligently linked with advanced tank simulation. Let's wait for free SA:BoW mods and multiplayer patch. Then we will say goodbye to eSim toy. During Christmas Holidays you could buy SA:BoW for only...15 bucks!

I don't see any reason to continue this discussion with Skybird. I am sure other forum members will be able to draw right conclusions about SBPro PE game after reading this thread.