SB2 officially announced

[NeonSamurai]

Well i would still prefer a dynamic campaign to dynamic or canned missions. As a tank sim the method falcon 4 used would probably work better, basicly a bubble or zone where the mission is played out involving the player is fully rendered, and the rest of the action happening across the war be completely simplified to unit dice rolls and group movement across the map. I do not know though how sophisticated the AI in SBP is, if it needs to be heavily scripted, with full pathing, or if it is capable of deciding objectives, picking its own paths etc. Mainly though i want something that is replayable, where i dont have to create missions myself (a self contained mission generator would be nice) to play the game. I would even be happy with a dynamic random mission generator campaign, where the action happens on the mission level, and the results of the campaign are based on how successfull i am overall for each mission.

EECH may not be the best example of a campaign, and its ground units do have problems. Also its easier to move around air units then ground units (air units cant fall off a cliff, or get stuck on the terain, at a river, etc).

All i know is i do not want static or semi dynamic campaigns for any game. Sub command, and dangerouns waters are collecting dust. Both lack real replayability in their "campaigns". ARMA has one of the worst campaigns ive ever seen (way too short, bug ridden, broken, no replayability). Games that do not have some form of dynamic campaign or mission generation system dont last very long compared to those games that do (like falcon 4, EECH, SH3, etc) have some sort of open campaign. It is key to a game's long term survivability.

OFP and ARMA are not tank sims, no question (infact they are pretty unrealistic/simplified on all levels including infantry), i just mentioned them to illustrate that they are the only games i have that are even remotely close to a modern tank sim, in almost a decade now.

Well i still dont think they will go with it for a commercial in store release. Dongle's work best where only 1 or 2 programs are on a system that use dongles. They are perfectly fine for a graphic arts program at an office, or a computer that runs simulations for the military. Ordinary gamers wont tollerate it though. Could you imagine if every game you have used dongles, it would be a nightmare of keeping track of the key, switching the keys out all the darn time. You would need a key rack to keep track of them all, not to mention how easy it would be to loose them.

Also dongles are not the super copy protection you may think they are. The only reason why SB hasnt been "broken" yet is because the company and game are so obscure and unheard of that the people who do this sort of thing dont even know of its existence. Most proffessional software that uses dongles has had that protection broken (and btw you would be shocked how many otherwise upstanding companies who legitimatly own the software use illegaly broken code to bypass the pesky dongles).

Anyhow i digress on the above subject, not something we should realy be getting into. If the company does a commercial game release to the stores, they probably wont go with dongles if they are wise, as the dongle will raise the price of the game (which will affect how it sells), dongles will get lost, broken, or be a pain (and people will complain). But mainly the dynamic of the type of people playing this game will shift from dedicated simmers (who are usualy well above 25) who can afford a 125$ game, to everyone we see in the sh3/sh4 section. So though the hardcore simmers and miltary will put up with dongles, i can assure you the rest (which will definatly out number the hardcore people) will most definatly not.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by NeonSamurai

Well i would still prefer a dynamic campaign to dynamic or canned missions. As a tank sim the method falcon 4 used would probably work better, basicly a bubble or zone where the mission is played out involving the player is fully rendered, and the rest of the action happening across the war be completely simplified to unit dice rolls and group movement across the map. I do not know though how sophisticated the AI in SBP is, if it needs to be heavily scripted, with full pathing, or if it is capable of deciding objectives, picking its own paths etc.

It is fully scripted. AI is moving on a railway-like network of paths that consist of conditioned routes. Only at battle positions the AI automatically micro-manages a tanks behavior, it may stroll off a 100 m or so to find better cover, and if possible face the enemy with frontal armour, and get a hull-down position. Your driver also will also sprint back and forth when you fire the gun, to give you cover while reloading, then popping up again when ready to fire.

A mission must not necessarily play in the same manner whenever you start it. It totally depends on the mission designer. Missions could be that much randomized that you should have several possible stories to tell after each time you played them. Since the tactical competence of the AI depends on scripting, the designer has the freedom to add as miuch tactical rafinesse and nastiness as his brain is able to come up with. An AI never could compete with a human in this regard.

BTW, there is a huge ressource of missions to download, and it is constantly growing. Also, the editor is top class - easy, flexible, able to do almost everything.

Mainly though i want something that is replayable, where i dont have to create missions myself (a self contained mission generator would be nice) to play the game. I would even be happy with a dynamic random mission generator campaign, where the action happens on the mission level, and the results of the campaign are based on how successfull i am overall for each mission. i do not want static or semi dynamic campaigns for any game. Sub command, and dangerouns waters are collecting dust. Both lack real replayability in their "campaigns".

For that reason I did a small handful of randomized scenarios for SC, for my personal use. arena-type missions: randomization of enemy number and type of units, and own team units. But compared to the highly dramatic and dynamic battles in SBP, SC/DW are very much static sims. Better do not compare submarines, and tank battles.

Games that do not have some form of dynamic campaign or mission generation system dont last very long compared to those games that do (like falcon 4, EECH, SH3, etc) have some sort of open campaign. It is key to a game's long term survivability.

SB1 has no dynamic campaign - and still has survived until today. Same is true for the Lockon-series. Jane'S FA-18. I think Balcan on Fire is lacking a dynmaic campaign too, nevertheless it was so successful that the re-released it. SB1 was in very heavy use until SBP came out last year. Do not get me wrong, I like dynmaic camaigns a la F4, too, but with a scripted AI it is very unlikely to happen. The sim simply is too good to waste it's tactical depth by giving it a mission generator that produces nonsens missions like in M1TP2. when I caution you or anyone else of expecting a dynamic campaign, then this is only meant to save you from dissapointment, for I followed SB over the years since SB1, and I am 95% sure there will be no dynamic campaign.

Also, you said you never have played SBP, and I assume even not SB1. You then simply do not know the taste of the gameplay of these sims. I strongly recommend to get SB1 for 5-10 bucks via second hand shop, and give it a try. I can hardly imagine you will put it down again because it has no DC. The gold edition had many dozens of user-created mission instead. they had been finetuned by hand, and manually developed. the quality of the mission experience reflects that. No auto-generated mission ever could compete with that. chances are that you will collect your favpurites, and play them time and again. If the design is no turkey shooting, but reflects competent tactics considerations, it will keep you busy every time.

[BigBadVuk]

I agree it is realy hard(but : not impossible) to make fuly dynamic campaign for tank sim.However im 110% against linked&scripted mission campaign.
There are so many ways around that (even random generated missions in M1A2 platoon II) are ok if they are concipied corectly...They can make 20 diferent conditions ( like convoys escort,urban patrols,crosroads blocks,frontal assaults,ambushes,etc..) and then depending on situation on battlefield just fill the template with units who are near ( arty.support from that and that unit..infantry from that etc..) and put all that on map where players unit is..rest of battlefield can be calculated on day basis like IL2 forgoten battles.
This way it will be possible to pull player more deep in game,and it will have much greater replay value.
2nd Great thing will be ( but i think we will not see that) opfor tanks playable (t-72,t-80),BMP3......
Oh,yeas..and attack chopers and aircafts...

[Skybird]

I say nothing on dynmaic campaigns anymore. No need to repeat myself.

I disagree on playable OpFor tanks. there already is a very high demand for a playable T72 or T80 in SBP. that they are not there is becasue no military customer has ordered them as playables. I am very sure we will see one of these as playable in SB2 - and maybe from there being exported backwards into SBP (like much eyecandy stuff will be backward-exported into SBP as well).

aircrafts: add a whole new complexity level to programming. If you do not take entertainment from being blown up together with the rest of your tank per company time and again while being found by a pair of gunships, you need air defenses as well, and that is a whole new game in itself. We will need to see if they find the time to implement this in a simplified form. Not impossible, but I do not bet money on it. However, I am very sure that we will not see adequate air warfare in SBP in the forseeable future. They have very explicitly ruled that one out.

[Skybird]

Braking News :p

The latest quote by the technical director of the producing company:

"Releasing SB2 without a playable T-72 is unthinkable for me." - Ssnake on 18-07-07

That settles it, doesn't it!? :p

[Castout]

Playable Merkava would be nice too.... Also a playable T-80. Hmm yummy.

Abt big bully on the battlefield i think any tanker must be ready to die a horrific death. At the minimum is losing some limbs. Ever seen burnt up bodies coming out from tanks? I can imagine how horrific it would be if one was to get shot inside a tank be it with infantry AT, Artillery or opposing tank.

The big bullies on the battlefield are the visiting politicians:rotfl:.

[Skybird]

Everybody better takes care that his expectations are not going skyrocketing. eSim is a very small company, with tight time tables, and plenty of other obligations - they can do only so much, not more.