Prev: RE: [OT] Next: Re: Walkers

RE: [OT]

From: Brian Burger <yh728@v...>
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 03:42:34 -0800 (PST)
Subject: RE: [OT]

On Sun, 25 Nov 2001, Chen-Song Qin wrote:

> On a similar note, a *very* good recent game is Steel Beasts.  Which
is
> sort of a hybrid modern tank simulation/wargame.  You could command up
to
> a company of tanks as a part of a battalion-sized unit.  It was
actually
> playtested by a bunch of ex-US Army tankers, and one of the people in
the
> company that made it is an ex-Bundeswehr tanker. (The game simulates
the
> M1A1 and the Leopard 2A4)  The graphics are so-so for pure eye-candy,
but
> the engine is awesome for displaying large terrain accurately. (Max of
> something like 1600 km^2 at 5 m terrain resolution in their 3D engine,
> really long and realistic horizon distance)

A good friend of mine (and GZG gamer) is also ex-Bundeswher; he was/is
an
Lt. commanding a reserve panzer platoon; he got a beta playtest release
of
Steel Beast, and helped proof their 2A4 model for accuracy.

I still haven't bought the program, but the beta he showed me was pretty
spectacular.

Brian - yh728@victoria.tc.ca -
- http://warbard.iwarp.com/games.html -

> 
> 
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2001, oglover wrote:
> 
> > M1 Tank Platoon 2 is getting in years now but is a really good
Mechanised
> > game; but I don't think you can get better than Coy level though.
> > 
> > A really old game now, but really enjoyable was Team Yankee.
Graphics are
> > badly outdated and it was purely scenario driven but I loved it for
an
> > Armoured or Mech Inf Coy level game.
> > 
> > I'd be interested if anyone knows of any other games at Coy/Bn level
too!
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > 
> > Owen
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> > > [mailto:owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU]On Behalf Of
Laserlight
> > > Sent: Sunday, 25 November 2001 4:33 PM
> > > To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
> > > Subject: [OT]
> > >
> > >
> > > Anyone have a favorite computer game, company/battalion level, WW2
or
> > > later?
> > >
> > 
> > 
> 


Prev: RE: [OT] Next: Re: Walkers