[3Star]

Originally Posted by SubSerpent

I just noted in a movie clip that Skybird posted up that someone else made showing a TOW hitting a few twigs hanging from a tree branch and exploding - NOT destroying the twigs or the tree at all.

True, we're kindof wondering what to do about that sort of thing over in the Beta test crowd. The general opinion is it's not worth worrying over. As long as the AI gunner stops pumping rounds into the tree, we're happy enough. After all, you could hit the first branch, but a tree is more than a couple of branches. Just move a few feet, and you're sorted. Or switch to sabot rounds.

the public on release way less than $125.00 and that too was claimed to be a "military trainer".

After the fact, I believe. We were looking at it as a trainer, but it was already made and available for that to happen. The various sales of SB1 to the military (West Point, 3rd Infantry) were made with unit discretionary funds, not with the weight of TRADOC behind it. Other militaries bought it over time.

Why would the worlds militarys use a PC sim to train with when they have the real deal on the field?

Well, for the US Army, a tank costs $214 a mile to run, give or take. (4 gallons to the mile on fuel alone). Not to mention all the time and hassle taken to get to the field in the first place. Simulators are a hell of a lot cheaper. If it really is such a daft idea, I'm surprised that.. what, seven? eight? militaries have already purchased it and funded its development into SBP.

You just watch, in a few months the company will need and want more money so they will reduce costs to get a profit

What costs are they going to reduce? Not as if there's much overhead, the guy works out of his home!

The US would never buy this considering they can make their own. Look at America's Army - developed by the United States Army and is considered a FPS and infantry simulator!

I believe you'll find it was actually developed as a recruiting, not a training tool. Recruiting and Retention is a highly-funded part of the Army. By way of comparison, look at TacOps (Currently available at Battlefront.com) . That is currently in use by TRADOC for training in field-grade officers. It was developed by a single programmer (Major Holdridge, USMC Ret) and sold commercially by Avalon Hill. Over time, 16th Cav in Ft Knox saw it, and bought a license. (Any US Army serviceman may have a free copy). So guess what: The US Army, funded as it was, saw a COTS application, and bought it, funding its further development. This is exactly how SBP ended up in its current incarnation.

Another thing. The players tank is way too nurfed. How is it that an enemy tank can fire round after round at the players tank and yet it stays intact. To be a true simulator that means that the players tank should only be able to sustain as much damage as one of the enemy NPC tanks.

You have absolutely no idea what you're taking about, do you? To be a true simulator, it must be as real life happens, without regard to 'play balance.' History is replete with examples of tanks which take multiple (Dozens, in some cases) of hits, whilst dispatching lots of the enemy. Take the example of Michael Wittman's Tiger at Villers Bocage. One 88mm round each happily dispatched Sherman and Cromwells, while the 75mm guns coming back at him had all went 'boingggg'. I'm sure that the British were complaining about play balance. Or the Iraqis in 1991 for that matter, which had 125mm rounds bouncing off the front of M1s.

Difficulty settings should be an option considering that in real life it would only take about 1 round to take out your tank and crew.

Present your flank or rear in the sim, and it will only take one round to take out your tank or crew. Or, should you be in a Leopard 1, one round will probably do it from the front, as it's a lighter armoured tank.

Real-world is a very simple pentrate/no-penetrate situation. It takes a certain amount of force to penetrate armour. If the round doesn't have what it takes to punch through, it will bounce. Repeatedly throwing the same kind of round will result in.. gee.. repeated bouncing.

Another thing I've noticed is that the tanks in the sim glide across the ground and don't appear to follow the terrain as if it is light as a feather. My guess is that those of you that paid $125.00 for it wish you had back at least $60.00 of it if not more. If the company was smart they would have tried to reach the masses with the sim and sold it for a reasonable price from the beginning.

Hmm.. Looks like you're saying exactly what the developers have been saying all along. If you want a reasonably priced game where things like play balance come into play, and all the fancy eye candy which provides nothing to the gameplay, then you want to wait for SB2 to come out, which is more mass-market.

My recommendation? Don't buy the sim if you feel that way.

NTM