after the battle it looked like the t-34 was only hit by ricochets even though you said it penetrated. i did a bit of searching (never played it) what triggered and partially means in that context and i am even more impressed by this game, being this far simulated
@sirtrax1586
3 ай бұрын
i am an idiot, you explained some of it a few minutes later still impressed
@CATASTEROID934
2 ай бұрын
If I remember correctly the story is that having made one or more Steel Beasts titles they wanted to make a grander strategy game beyond controlling a single vehicle, and they already had all the unit assets, mechanics and simulation features they needed, it just required reworking into a strategy game and they did just that. If you play the Steel Beasts games you'll notice a lot of similarities in how they function, if you played the WWII titles it's almost like you're playing one of the little tanks in this game with the penetration simulation and infantry going about their business and all.
@RM97800
Ай бұрын
The DS-39 machine gun looks so big because it eventually became the famous DShK 12.7mm (.50cal) machine gun. Although, DS-39 was such an unreliable failure of a gun that the Soviet Union went back to making WW1 Maxim machine guns shortly after Operation Barbarossa started, until an alternative MG was made to replace it (the SG-43).
@Tonci87
25 күн бұрын
Oh is that the reason why they had so damn many Maxim guns?
@arkadiy9321
3 ай бұрын
@34:49 - the game does not display vectors on the hits that struck detachable parts, so it’s likely that coup de grace for the T-34 was one of the hits that led to the wheels flying off
@Tonci87
2 ай бұрын
Yeah, that is why I think happened
@fulgrimventris8506
3 ай бұрын
Yet more of some of your best content. Graviteam is right up there with the U-boat series, IMO.
@willchalloner706
2 ай бұрын
These are great fun to watch. Thank you!
@nikbear
3 ай бұрын
Awesome episode, extremely addictive to watch, seeing the tactics being deployed and there outcome in real time, with the enemy responses 👍 👏👏👏
@Ripulintuoja
2 ай бұрын
Yeah, you took some tough blows there, but without the AT guns there, you would've been overrun completely and lost your positions in the south. I'd say you come out on top.
@Tonci87
2 ай бұрын
Thank you, the number of tanks that the enmy has has really surprised me. You‘ll see what I mean in the next Episode
@BlaBla-jz2lx
3 ай бұрын
I am now watching the stream working on my PhD. Great feeling, thank you Tonci. I am a little bit scare to begin with Graviteam Tactics because of the much more complexity and factors that need to follow. I played Close Combat series, Theater of War series, but this is next level ;). Hope that my campaign will be also good enough :D Actually, question - do you prepare a long time before battle (tactical or on map) to study plans, units, tacts from historical period or "the game teaches you"?
@arkadiy9321
3 ай бұрын
Things you mentioned are all important for the immersion, not necessarily with the results (for obvious reasons, the game, while being in some aspects close to the actuality, in most aspect is very, very far from it :). But at least to me, the immersion helps with keeping up the interesting playing through the long grind of an operation. There are two DLCs (Bird Grove and Stalemate on the Donets), which come with very detailed companion books (100+ pages of material from both sides) - so you don’t have to do the research yourself :)
@Tonci87
2 ай бұрын
A bit of both to be honest. I read up on the operation before I start to play it so that I can place it into a historical context (the stuff I talk about in the first episode). Preparing each battle (checking the troops, making a plan, deploying every single unit) takes a really long time as well.
@BlaBla-jz2lx
2 ай бұрын
@@arkadiy9321 Which are far far away from reality? I am thinking of the most most- authentic WW2 game but unfortunatelly everyone has different weak points :D
@arkadiy9321
2 ай бұрын
@@BlaBla-jz2lx the game is doing a great job in aspects that other games don’t even touch. For example, with the information exchange, a tank getting into position where it can make visual contact with enemy would “know” to look in that direction based on the data it received (whereas if a tank drives in “blind”, it would take it quite a while to fine targets). The weakest link is the transition between discrete turn-based world of the operational map and the 3-d continuous world of the tactical battle - very little of that is “realistic”. Ironically, this is infinitely more than any other game does (SD2’s Army General is a Total War system with real OOB). Another aspect that is unrealistic is the level of control and data we have: if we are to be Bn commanders, we would barely even know where the troops in the field and are could only impact the course of fighting with significant delay. At present, we can grab an FO, run him to the spot where he sees the target, and “profit”. Again, not that other games are doing any better: CM’s “orders go out every 1 minute, directly into everyone’s brain” is pretty arbitrary (yet fun).
@arkadiy9321
2 ай бұрын
@@BlaBla-jz2lx but the main reason I suggested that the historical documentation is for immersion vs practical application in the game is simply the level of the information that’s captured. It’s too high for the meat and potatoes of GT, which is the actual firefight. Check out those two companion books, you’ll see what I mean.
@Erich1889
3 ай бұрын
really nice video
@cobrageneral556
2 ай бұрын
33:13 it isn't a lot bigger than a maxim.
@Tonci87
2 ай бұрын
The Maxim is a bit shorter, is it not?
@CATASTEROID934
2 ай бұрын
@@Tonci87 About three or four inches shorter Vs the PM M1910 it seems,
Пікірлер: 24