|
Flikken posted:Was that the SNES tank game? (or maybe it was NES, I can't remember) It was a microprose one, I played it on Amiga but it was on IBM-PC too! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Tank_Platoon I never played the sequel, I don't think. Looks interesting though. The best were the menus:  He would menacingly tap his sidearm on the sheet he's holding up when you selected an option, heh. priznat fucked around with this message at 00:16 on Apr 10, 2012 |
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 00:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 03:01 |
|
|
priznat posted:It was a microprose one, I played it on Amiga but it was on IBM-PC too! Ah, it was Super Battletank I was thinking of.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 00:20
|
|
|
Panzer Elite is a surprisingly good WW2 tank sim, although it's also getting pretty damned dated. Note: Not to be confused with the expansion pack for a more modern game by the same name. I would absolutely give my left nut for a graphically decent, modern (in the sense of computer poo poo, not necessarily the tanks) tank sim. It wouldn't need to be sperg-levels of realism. I don't need to adjust the fuel mix and manually start the engine before every battle. I'm willing to let the driver and loader do their jobs. Just track the individual stats of my crewmen, let me give orders, look pretty, and have a halfway competent damage model. I think WW2 would be the most fertile ground for this just due to the number of tank engagements and the fact that damage modelling is more important (vehicle kills now seem to be much more catastrophic in nature than back then) but I'd honestly accept whatever at this point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 00:23
|
|
|
A10 Tank Killer was one of my favorite games from back in the DOS days. Tons of fun.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 00:36
|
|
|
salt vampire posted:A10 Tank Killer was one of my favorite games from back in the DOS days. Tons of fun. I played it after F117A and was disappointing that all the missions were scripted and had to be done a certain way. F117A I wasted *way* too much time on. It did, however, teach me geography. When Libya exploded, I knew where Benghazi and Tripoli were. Also because I played on a 286 mostly, it ran a little slow, so the enemy aircraft using their guns always missed. I could still hit them, though, and some missions had me shoot down 10 + enemy fighters.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 00:43
|
|
|
Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe. I remember playing through almost the entire campaign on that, and ace-ing every mission, until maybe the second or third last mission. My cat jumped on my desk just as I was landing, and knocked the joystick onto the floor, and I crashed. Because the way that game saved, I lost my character and all of my progress because of that. I don't think I ever started up a new campaign after that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 00:53
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Panzer Elite is a surprisingly good WW2 tank sim, although it's also getting pretty damned dated. Also I agree with everything you said here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 01:09
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:I played it after F117A and was disappointing that all the missions were scripted and had to be done a certain way. F117A I wasted *way* too much time on. It did, however, teach me geography. When Libya exploded, I knew where Benghazi and Tripoli were. Wow thanks for the memories, spent way too much time in that one as well. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGBLRMbDWgs Also played a lot of Chuck Yeager's Air Combat, Comanche, and Wing Commander. Like a DOS.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 01:59
|
|
|
LHX was also the bomb.   Lookit that crazy thing, so awesome.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 02:02
|
|
|
We had Macs when I grew up, so after Chuck Yeager, it was A-10 Attack! all the way for me. The best thing about that game is that it allowed you to reload in flight for some reason. So you'd empty out everything that fit on your A-10 (And you could fit A. LOT.) and just refil the drat plane with whatever you needed. Also had an F/A-18 simulator, I think the campaign was in Iraq... Allowed you to drop a nuclear bomb in the final mission, but I can't remember the name of it. I should look around my parent's, I think I still have the CYAC manual somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 02:55
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Also had an F/A-18 simulator, I think the campaign was in Iraq... Allowed you to drop a nuclear bomb in the final mission, but I can't remember the name of it. I still have the floppies for it around, although I'm not sure where they all are (and I don't own a floppy drive).
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 03:02
|
|
|
Gunship 2000 and M1 Tank Platoon 2 were the poo poo when I was a big mil-sim nerd. M1TP2 let you command not just your platoon but up to a full company with attatched mech infantry, arty and air assets and so on. I remember one mission where the OPFOR air-assaulted infantry into my rear area and lit up half my company with ATGMs before I knew it. Edit: Also, I had every single Falcon 4.0 game expansion pack. Really pissed the A-10 pack never came out.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 03:13
|
|
|
I had the original Operation Flashpoint and its expansion back in the day. I thought it handled platoon level tank combat ok. It didnt have a great tank shell penetration model, but just about everything else i wanted in an armor sim was there. Plus the ability to create combined arms missions and play tank while cobras dumped ordinance on the tiny village with a church 1km ahead.. If playing as the commander of a tank, using the WASD conrolls issued verbal orders to the driver AI soldier. Same thing with the gunner, the commander had a 360 copula and spot targets with a left click, the gunner AI turned the turret till it was on target, and awaited a fire command. Could be done while giving move commands to the driver, so all in all a good simulation of mobile armor combat. Playing as a tank commander and platoon leader made for some difficulty in situational awareness, not many games can give you that "what the gently caress is happening 300m to my left, what is half of my force doing at this time" feeling and keep the 1st person perspective. Then of course you get schwacked by the RPG team you didnt see, being too far ahead of any friendly infantry to screen AT traps. Or a HIND comes over the hill, you get enough time to see the missile come. Flashpoint really presented the weakness of the MBT or any AFV to BVR air to ground missiles. I dont know if real target aquisiton radar and fire and forget would work that well. You could detect a dozen hostile vehicles, launch one at each, turn around and watch the radar contacts die out from red to destroyed. Dogfighting skyhawks vs frogfoots vs cessnass armed with rpks. Or the sopwith camel which seemed to just chuck frags over the side for the bomb attack. Horrible flight sim engine, but fun for helis and CAS arcade/sim And of course "OH NO: TWO IS DOWN" Raw_Beef fucked around with this message at 03:35 on Apr 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 03:28
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:We had Macs when I grew up, so after Chuck Yeager, it was A-10 Attack! all the way for me. Maybe a microprose game? I know they liked having nukes in their flight sims. Pretty sure every campaign in F-22 Lightning 3 ended with you nuking something. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 03:51
|
|
|
But then you hit precipitation and it was GAME OVER F/A-18 Interceptor ruled on the Amiga except you had to destroy a goddamn enemy sub carrier using your sparrow missiles for some reason. You had to land on your carrier a couple times to rearm iirc. (fuckin hard!) priznat fucked around with this message at 08:43 on Apr 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 08:40
|
|
|
688 Attack Sub was by far my favorite cold war video game. Man, I played that for endless hours as a kid. I never could beat the final mission, though. I'd get the nukes off and evade the ships, but the Akula would always come out of loving nowhere right as I was about to win and sink me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 10:37
|
|
|
Raw_Beef posted:I had the original Operation Flashpoint and its expansion back in the day. I always had the most fun with tanks in the Combat Mission series. Battalion sized pure armor battles between Russia and Germany in late '45 with everything available was so much fun. Especially since the game rewards proper use of terrain and cover so drat well. I had a friend I always used to play this with, I'd always go Russia for the glorious IS-2's, T34-85 hordes and SU100's 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 14:16
|
|
|
Insert name here posted:According to wikipedia they're the same game: My first thought was "Feh, what does Wikipedia know," then I went  My buddy and I need to have a talk. But, then again, if it's just $5 . . . or I could get Panzer Elite off of GOG. Decisions. Sorry, I didn't mean to turn this into the videogames thread. Just another reminder that I need to work on the Tank thread OP - I feel so much pressure to make an effortpost for my first OP! I mentioned the Greatest Tank Battles episode on 73 Easting earlier and how it had an interview with a  Bradley commander. Here's the clip:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sum91rgJXkI Worth watching the whole episode just for this guy's story, including what happens after this clip ends. I want to buy him all the beers, especially because he's a funny SOB.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 16:05
|
|
|
Myoclonic Jerk posted:
Jesus christ, there is no decision. P.E. - tracks individual crewman stats for things like their jobs, spotting ability, morale, etc. - lets you play as the Germans or Americans - poo poo ton of mods out there that let you play against the Russians or add vehicles and do other stuff. Vanilla is pretty awesome though. - incorporates infantry as well. If your commander rides around in his Tiger unbuttoned he will get loving shot by a dude with a Garand. - good tracking of damage to individual components and realistic repair times (if it can be repaired). - good shot penetration model. Good damage model once the shot gets inside the vehicle. - the campaign tracks logistical crap as well. Playing as the Germans? Boy do you NOT want to be wasting your APCR on stupid poo poo, you really don't get more of those all that often. - limited, sane customization of vehicles. We're not talking full-out WOT style "let's slap a long 88 in that Tiger I!" bullshit, but adding skirts to vehicles and applique armor here and there, where historically appropriate. - Graphics "OK" by modern standards. I would pay $50 for a version of this that was just a graphical face lift of the underlying game, engine and all. T72: - better graphics, still not gorgeous by modern standards - worse in every single other category. It doesn't do even half of what PE does.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 16:13
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Jesus christ, there is no decision. I stand
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 16:30
|
|
|
My very first sim was f-19 Stealth Fighter, and I played the pants off that, M1, f-117, 688, Gunship 2000 and later the Jane's sims. Especially ATF, Fleet Command, and U.S. Air Force. I'd pay good money for an updated version of each and every one of those games. Ah, the memories of a wasted youth. Oh, and they need to start making those massive manuals again - excellent reading on the can, and they were educational as gently caress!
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 18:17
|
|
|
Mzuri posted:My very first sim was f-19 Stealth Fighter, and I played the pants off that, M1, f-117, 688, Gunship 2000 and later the Jane's sims. Especially ATF, Fleet Command, and U.S. Air Force. I'd pay good money for an updated version of each and every one of those games. I liked sinking ships with SM-2's in Fleet Command. I was too impatient to wait on the subsonic Harpoons and Tomahawks to hit
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 18:34
|
|
|
Mzuri posted:I'd pay good money for an updated version of each and every one of those games. I assume you're aware of Sub Command and Dangerous Waters? Admittedly DW feels more like a job than a game, but Sub Command was pretty awesome. The world does need a new maritime RTS game, however.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 18:39
|
|
|
Myoclonic Jerk posted:My first thought was "Feh, what does Wikipedia know," then I went Sounds cool, I'll be readin' it. Will you be posting it in GiP, or here? One thing I hope you can help me out with is understanding the technology in post-war tanks. In WW2, everything is so simple: bigger gun = better, moar armor = tougher. The technology was easily understood, even by clods like me. Post-war, things get hella complected. Kinetic energy perpetrator: I get it. A pointy super-hard thing that takes its kinetic energy and dumps it into a tiny bit of an enemy tank's hull, liquifying it. A excellent way to drill through a hard thing. Explosive reactive armor I also understand. Make a counter force to the dangerous force penetrating the tank. I'm pretty much lost beyond that. HEAT explosives are explosives that only explode in one direction? Composite armor: it protects against KE rounds and cones of exploding with ceramics. And so on. These things, and the science behind them, escapes me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 18:55
|
|
|
HEAT = An explosion forced into a single direction so that a small area of amour is overwhelmed with force. Ceramic armour = Dunno about everything but IIRC Chobham works because when shattered it breaks in such a way to disrupt the explosive jets created by HEAT charges, which compromises their effectiveness.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 19:09
|
|
|
Forums Terrorist posted:HEAT = An explosion forced into a single direction so that a small area of amour is overwhelmed with force. OK, I understand this, but...how?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 19:11
|
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaped_charge
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 19:15
|
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munroe_effect#Munroe_effect e: fart
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 19:15
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:OK, I understand this, but...how?   You can see the hemispherical liner ('shaped' bit) in image 3. http://www.feainformation.com/avilib/67.avi as the liner gets squished at about 30 million psi, it shoots out as a long, thin jet (still solid) with the tip going about Mach 25. At that pressure and velocity, it just pushes the target material aside.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 21:01
|
|
|
joat mon posted:
Thank you for getting this right. If I see one more pseudo-explanation about a molten jet, or a gaseous jet, or a jet of plasma, that burns or melts through the armor...well, I guess I'll be annoyed again.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 21:19
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Jesus christ, there is no decision. FrozenVent posted:I assume you're aware of Sub Command and Dangerous Waters? Also since apparently all I do is talk about dumb video games in this thread anyone have any book recommendation on the Korean War? I know next to nothing on this war and it makes me feel bad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 22:03
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Thank you for getting this right. If I see one more pseudo-explanation about a molten jet, or a gaseous jet, or a jet of plasma, that burns or melts through the armor...well, I guess I'll be annoyed again. Reading through the relevant Wikipedia articles, it may amuse you to know that all of them are prefaced with "BTW don't confuse this with burning or heat, it's not that"
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 22:18
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Thank you for getting this right. If I see one more pseudo-explanation about a molten jet, or a gaseous jet, or a jet of plasma, that burns or melts through the armor...well, I guess I'll be annoyed again. Same effect gives you self forging fragments that shoot holes through the tops of tanks. Rather than a deep cavity with a thin liner, it uses a shallow cup shaped cavity and a rather thick liner. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_formed_penetrator Nice fun stuff for skeet warheads and similar top attack weapons.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2012 23:49
|
|
|
NosmoKing posted:Same effect gives you self forging fragments that shoot holes through the tops of tanks. Related, but different effect, EFPs are created through the Misznay-Schardin effect, basically it's a flattish sheet of explosive rather than a conical shape. Penetration of a shaped charge is very tightly related to the proper standoff distance, and goes up as some multiple of the charge diameter. Advantage there is that a relatively small increase in diameter of the charge can yield a significant increase in penetration (which is why supercaliber projectiles like RPGs are so penetrating), disadvantage is that if the charge goes off a little too close or a little too far away from the armor, penetration falls of a lot. That's why spaced armor is effective against HEAT, the outer layer of armor's just causing detonation of the warhead, and by the time the penetrator makes its way to the inner layer it's already lost a lot of punch. Penetration of an EFP is far, far less dependent on standoff distance, but it also doesn't scale with warhead diameter anywhere near as well as HEAT penetration does.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2012 00:06
|
|
|
NosmoKing posted:Same effect gives you self forging fragments that shoot holes through the tops of tanks. I hate EFPs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2012 00:11
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Pretty sure every campaign in F-22 Lightning 3 ended with you nuking something. This is true. I played that game and I did an idiot's loop with one it, um, didn't end well e: also it had exactly one background music track which you heard all the time and it wasn't very good, so it quickly got Extremely Annoying http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5QtePUQ9aU e: in trying to find that video I found one where someone redubbed Linkin Park into his nuclear strike mission video.  Psion fucked around with this message at 01:16 on Apr 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2012 01:12
|
|
|
Insert name here posted:This game literally just came out today so I don't know if it's any good but it certainly looks interesting: Naval War: Arctic Circle It's good ! It plays like old-school Harpoon 1, only with a slicker, more useful and informative interface. At $20 it's a loving steal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2012 02:44
|
|
mllaneza posted:It's good ! It plays like old-school Harpoon 1, only with a slicker, more useful and informative interface. At $20 it's a loving steal. You had me at Harpoon 1
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2012 04:04
|
|
|
Speaking of Harpoons, 40th anniversary last year. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HSszSESmB0
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2012 04:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 03:01 |
|
|
Insert name here posted:Also since apparently all I do is talk about dumb video games in this thread anyone have any book recommendation on the Korean War? I know next to nothing on this war and it makes me feel bad. This Kind of War by T.R. Fehrenbach is widely considered the classic history. It is a bit dated, since he wrote it in the '60s (so it has a distinct anti-communist/monolithic communist bloc tint to it) and therefore he didn't necessarily have access to a lot of archival material, especially relating to higher level government decisions. Fehrenbach also has a very blatant thesis, which is that the U.S. suffered unnecessary casualties early on due to the unpreparedness of U.S. soldiers which was in part caused by the softening of the U.S. military in the post-WWII years. While this thesis isn't really incorrect or even controversial, he really hits you over the head with it, so there's that. That said, it is well written (if a little blunt/overly straightforward at times), comprehensive, and contains brutal descriptions of several representative engagements at the tactical level while weaving those in with the operational situation in a given region as well as the overall strategic picture. I hear The Coldest War by James Brady is an excellent memoir. For the air war component, it is very hard to beat either The Hunters by James Salter or The Bridges at Toko-Ri by James Michener. Both are novels but both are heavily based on the personal experiences of both authors. daskrolator posted:Speaking of Harpoons, 40th anniversary last year. Haha, initially I thought you were talking about the game and got really confused. iyaayas01 fucked around with this message at 04:23 on Apr 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2012 04:20
|
|
