>>1463002
bump

Hello I am just getting into these games. I started with Tunisia. I have many questions but I'll start with just three:

>When an artillery unit (such as an infantry support gun) has low ammo, they will stop an indirect fire missions and only go for direct shots. How can I override this? They're not set to conserve ammo.
>A platoon starts with no radio squad. But the commander there appears as having a "broken link" or something. Is this normal? For platoons with radio squads I just start them next to each other and everything is fine
>How do I know effective weapon ranges? Do I just look up real world values?

>>1469511
Arty in these game have been overhauled so many times that few people understand how they really work now. My guess in this situation is that whoever commands that gun, would rather have make the few shells count than do indirect fire, but it also might be that you don't have proper line of sight. As for squads with no radio, they will either get a telephone link in time, provided they stay put, or get orders via runners. Weapon ranges can be found in the encyclopedia and there is useful penetration chart, so you can check at what range what gun will punch through what armor.

Here's a question, arty related.
Pretty much every deployment is kind of guessing games, since the enemy doesn't always sit where they are supposed to, nor attack where they should (the AI is a bastard that uses low-down tactics, like they know your plan). So let's say I'm deploying troops, I start with my arty spotters and fire missions. Common sense dictates to put some pre-planned spots, zero in and then call in strikes during battle as needed. In reality, I'm getting far better results by just using my crystal ball to figure out where the enemy forces will be and put creeping barrages in those spots with 30-50 rounds per gun starting immediately. I'd really like to play tactically and sparingly, moving my spotters around and delivering rounds as the battle progresses where needed, but it feels like a whole lot of busy work for a shitty effect. And also, it's a shit feeling when you think AI forces will be at some spot, order your guns to lay wasted to that particular patch of dirt, only to find you killed a whole lot of nothing. What do I do?

Bump for interest. This look cool

>>1475932
>using my crystal ball to figure out where the enemy forces will be
If you're attacking, you don't even need to guess, because the game renders the trenches. Another cheesy shit you can do is to move camera where you think the enemy can be and listen for the vehicle sounds. Personally I never do the latter, but the former is kinda inevitable.
>moving my spotters around
You should move them sparingly because it takes time to lay telephone wires.
>And also, it's a shit feeling when you think AI forces will be at some spot, order your guns to lay wasted to that particular patch of dirt, only to find you killed a whole lot of nothing. What do I do?
You cope. I mean, what can you do? It happens. The best you can do is to put multiple zero ins.

Lets get a bit of bump going on here.
Just finished the Stepanovka campaign as Germans. Pretty much an easy-win scenario, with some hard battles. The objective was to dislodge the soviets from the western bank of the Mius river. Taking Stepanovka and later Marinovka was the easy bit. The Lukagansky point was the hard part. Soviets put up some strong defence there and while I was making good progress on the East side of the map, going south towards Marinovka, those bastards at Lugansky just didn't give up. Arty was key here and I could have done better with fire missions, but I fucked up in several battles just doind missions where there was nothing to kill, or not dumping enough rounds on the Soviets. In general I took significant losses, but nowhere near the Soviets. I basically took the approach to wipe them out whenever I could, fuck their cease fire pleads. Most battles were about 20% losses on my side and 80-98% for the Russians. I'd credit most of my success to the southward rush rush on the eastern side of the map which allowed me to kill and capture quite a lot of their command units. At some point around turn 16 I suffered from low ammo and fuel, but still had enough supplied units to keep the momentum going. Most of my tanks went into battle with serious damage, some immobilized acting as static arty. I found that "tanks in front" modifier is pretty much a shit option, since they will ruch enemy trenches and get blasted with grenade bundles, got a few Tigers seriously damaged that way. The good news is that Stugs kinda rock and during one battle I did get a drop on a couple of SU-152s blasting both with only on Stug burning down in the process.
Anyway, had a lot of fun here, but pretty much an exhausted. No idea what campaign I should do next, give me some suggestion here anons.

>>1479643
One of the British campaigns in Tunisia?

>>1463002
How does this game compare to the Combat Mission series?

>>1484126
>>1484126
>>1484126
completely different in mechanics, visuals and vibe. CM is more granular, micro-heavy and abstracted. graviteam is all about simulating large-scale (2 SQ km and up) battles. the graphics in graviteam are far better. AI is often retarded and there is some jank but it's a fucking gem compared to the quality of most WW2 games out there. tank combat is especially great, projectiles are simulated and there's a tonne of damage modelling from broken tracks, leaking fuel to straight up detonations and cook-offs. it doesn't do urban combat well, which is probably one of it's biggest weaknesses, and there's no multiplayer and likely never will be. still the best WW2 eastern front game for my money, not to mention the African and middle east late 20th century dlcs

Do you play limited battle sizes or full?

man i wanna play this game but no way i can afford it and all the torrents are like 2 years old

>>1486407
alot of it is on sale right now-- I'd say its worth it

>>1484126
Combat mission is an actual game. Graviteam is a battle simulator where the "player" has very little control over what's happening.
That description makes it sound better than it actually is.

>>1486437
Now you're just trying to start shit for no reason

>>1486120
Full

>>1486437
Found the combatboomer

>>1485250
Wish they redid Shield of the Prophet in mius front. Also wish theyd make a korean war game

How micro-heavy is this game? I'd like something like Wargame but with much lower cpm or turn-based

>>1490099
>How micro-heavy is this game?
Very micro heavy at the start of each tactical battle, because you need to carefully place each squad, gun and tank and then issue orders. After that it's rather hands off.
>I'd like something like Wargame
It's nothing like Wargame.
>much lower cpm
"Micro heavy" and "apm heavy" are two different things. This is a singleplayer only game with pause, so apm is as low as you want it to be.

>>1490119
I would say this is inaccurate. In Graviteam you never tell an individual dude to peek from a specific window of a building. You give orders in broad strokes and the platoon AI figures out the details on their own based on your general parameters

People say it even punishes "micro", because of the order cost mechanic during combat.

>>1492857
I would say you never really played wargames.
>You give orders in broad strokes and the platoon AI figures out the details on their own
That's Command Ops 2. In Graviteam you babysit your units - and you can have a lot of them in a battle.

>>1492861
Do you play with generous mana regen in Graviteam or something? You're actively punished for babysitting during battles. You can make a few corrections along the way, but getting very particular about everything as the battle is already ongoing is a good way to get the men confused
And like I said, you never tell individual units where to go. You give platoons, squads, or fire teams an order and they'll figure out the details based on the details of the orders through the right click menu

>>1492866
So I was right, Graviteam is the babby's first wargame for you.
>You're actively punished for babysitting during battles.
You're actively punished for not babysitting in graviteam, because AI is retarded and can't figure out shit on its own. The only saving grace is that it's the same for the opponent. The fact that you can't give orders too often just means that you have to be really precise with them.

In Command Ops 2 you can select a bunch of units and give them an order, such as "Assault that village". The AI will automatically rearrange the units' hierarchy if needed, designate the assault group (split into center force and flanks), the reserve group and the fire support group. It'll figure out FUP, optimal frontage, positions, routes. All you need is to adjust some minor details like frontage or how aggressive the forces need to be with the push. When the assault commences, the AI will automatically rotate units as needed to maintain steady force. This is a good example of not babysitting your units. The downside is that it takes a lot of time for AI to process your order and pass it down the chain: a large assault can take an hour just to lay out the plan for every unit and subunit. Graviteam awkwardly attempts to simulate it with the command mana.

In Graviteam if you select a bunch of units and order them to assault, they'll bumrush the enemy position with barely any coordination, with density arbitrarily adjusted according to the exact order you select. The AI only really knows how to plot the route.
>you never tell individual units where to go
You don't consider a tank to be an individual unit?
>You give platoons, squads, or fire teams
You don't consider platoons, squads or fire teams to be individual units? In a theatre of war level wargame, a division can be an individual unit. Which game is more micro intensive: the one where you give orders to seven divisions or the one where you give orders to seven individual dudes?

>>1493085
>Graviteam is the babby's first warfame for you.
should I go with Mius Front or Tank warfare? I'm more of a tank guy but the eastern front is more appealing than the tunisian plains.

>>1493234
I'd say go with Mius Front.

>>1493085
>In Graviteam if you select a bunch of units and order them to assault, they'll bumrush the enemy position with barely any coordination, with density arbitrarily adjusted according to the exact order you select
Just say you have no idea how the command wheel works instead of embarrassing yourself like this

>>1493440
Anons who come into these threads bashing GT and praising CM an CO2 have either never played GT or never played enough to even understand the basics of the game. There is no point in engaging in a discussion with them.
>>1493234
If you are a tank guy, Mius and Operation Victory DLC should keep you happy. Eastern Front has tanks, but I'd say the bread and butter is arty and infantry. Tunisia's title is kinda misleading, cause it really depends on the campaign and the units you choose. US Tanks have shit penetration and shit ammo, so you'll often end up with a bunch of burning wrecks and relying on AT arty to do the job. Also, there is SABOW, which might be up your alley - currently 55% off.

File: results.jpg (229 KB, 1920x1080)

229 KB JPG

>>1493440
You don't have to project so hard. It's gravitards who get filtered by actual wargames and stick to their comfy "war kino generator".

>>1493243
>>1493534
thanks anons, I'll get mius front.
>Sabow
I've had that and Steel Fury kharkov on my wishlist for years, the later seems more up my alley but I've glanced at all the stuff you have to do to get it running and it sounds painful, and with the former I've never pulled the trigger because of the usual GT complains of "muh difficulty" "muh interface" "muh tutorials".
I do miss itch going back to Panzer Elite sometimes but that was much simpler.

>>1493579
SABOW is pretty much GT where you are limited to command armored units. The tank sim part isn't really hard to learn and pretty intuitive, since you can just control everything with the interface and use tooltips to learn what everything does, plus you can still just play it like a tactical game and just watch everything from a 3rd person camera. My biggest issue with SABOW is the campaigns - the maps are... kinda not fun for tank combat - shallow hills and lots of bushes. Also it's Graviteam, so AI sees more than your eyes can make out, especially at night. Still, in terms of simulating tanks... let's just say I have yet to see any other game depicting stuff like oil leaks or having crews repair broken tracks. It's not a very good "game", but at the same time it let's you experience tank combat with everything boring and exciting that comes with it. I couldn't get into Steel Fury though, learning the controls filtered me hard.

File: 1234124124.jpg (45 KB, 810x481)

45 KB JPG

Let's bump the thread.
Finished the El Guettar campaign as Germans yesterday and in Tunisia. Made some huge mistakes, but still managed to get a minor victory, which all things considered I think of as a huge win. Few things I learned is to fight impatience like cancer, cause it leads to losing perfectly winnable battles:
>check if arty is scheduled or on call
>for scheduled make multiple fire missions with tight spread and no more than 30 rounds per gun
>tanks suck ass for defense, swap them out for gus
>mortars, always have mortars
>forget objectives while defending, retreat and concentrate forces
>Yanks appear to be retards and don't get the MG42 messages fired rapidly from 4 sources - suppression is overrated
>US tanks are shit in this game, worry about half-tracks with big guns
Heading to Angola now, gonna spread some communism, poverty and starvation. Wish me luck anons!

>>1493615
allright, just got both mius front and Steel Fury. Haven't installed Mius yet but I did get STA 3.4 for Steel fury and it's fooking great m8. The tutorial sucks and its the typical sim where you might get lost with all the piano keybindings but you only need to remember the commander/gunner binds as that is what you'll be using for the most part.

>>1495224
Godspeed on SF, I got filtered hard by keybinds and yes, the tutorial sucks. What's difficult about tanksims, is that it's a 4-man job and switching between posts to fight effectively can be a headache and the just playing as commander is always somewhat janky. Pretty much why I prefer SABOW, cause it can be played more like a tactics game, where I get to shoot the gun from time to time. Night battles are shit though, but I refuse to turn them off in the options.

File: 13451345234535.jpg (590 KB, 1920x1080)

590 KB JPG

Apparently this is a minor victory.
>wipe out the enemy force without mercy and with minimal losses
>sorry bro, you forgot that one minor meaningless dot on the map
I fucking hate how objectives are handles in wargames

>>1495267
Yeah I feel you.

What is the best way you've seen objectives / victory conditions be handled in wargames?

>>1496630
It's pretty simple overall, a victory is when you achieve your objectives with acceptable losses, or if the enemy is unable to achieve theirs. Now clearly the screenshot show that I did achieve the objective, an objective that the historical report mentions was not achieved IRL. Looking closely there is something wrong here. It says 68 points for victory. It says I got 91. Max is 170. So let's try and count.
50 points for primary objective (not sure how holding 90% of points only gets you 50/100).
32 points for own force strength.
10 points for for reducing enemy forces to 26% initial state (which might as well be zero, cause they were nowhere new combat capable).
That amounts to 92 point.
The Angola campaigns are notoriously one sided and unrealistic too, since the game's AI is unable to reach the level of retardation the MPLA displayed where their tanks and PCs hot blasted by a smaller force. Ratels aren't really all that good in GT too.

Is there a quick start guide that explains the UI and more niche mechanics? I'm just starting this and it's pretty cool but I'm super fucking confused with some of this shit. I'm not sure how to get my artillery spotter to call in off-map arty during a battle, I'm not sure what the command actually does, and I'm hoping there is some mod that makes the interface just easier to read.

>>1502327
It may be a little out of date but I recommend reading the games manual. It will help give you an idea what's going on but I'm afraid they've made so many changes to how artillery is done I don't know how out of date it is

>>1502327
>I'm not sure how to get my artillery spotter to call in off-map arty during a battle
You can't call offmap artillery during a battle, you can only schedule strikes during the deployment phase.
>I'm not sure what the command actually does
You mean command mana or what?
>I'm hoping there is some mod that makes the interface just easier to read
There's none.

>>1484126
Unironically, Combat Mission feels like a tabletop game (like playing Crossfire on the computer). You need to micro everything, for example if you are going to move a platoon you need to micro each squad or team waypoint because the AI is practically non-existent. However for small unit tactics or heavy urban terrain is a fun game that also support multiplayer.
Graviteam is a simulator, the AI and damage models are great and you can do complex company maneuvers with like two clicks. The AI takes care of pretty much everything, you also have a strategic layer to the campaigns which add a lot of replayability.
All in all Graviteam is the game to go if you like Battalion-sized campaigns and a real "wargame" feeling, Combat Mission if you want to play multiplayer, like heavy urban environments or you really like micromanagement the type where you spend up to 30 minutes assigning each squad in a company their fire arcs and stuff for the payoff of one minute of actual gameplay then rinse and repeat.

>>1495267
That looks about right, you got a minor victory and did pretty good (better than I did). However, you did not do it with minimal losses, you lost about 36% of your force, thats more than a third of your brigade. The objective of this battle was to cross the river and move towards Mavinga to secure an airfield (this last part is not simulated in the game) and that is why even the losses you incurred weight in so heavily, your brigade having lost 1/3 of its strength is probably weakened to proceed with the main objective. That's also why the enemy casualties give you so little points, you dont have to kill all enemies just brush them aside. Also you missed to anchor your right flank, in your image there is another capture point in grid 2-5. If you seize that point and take fewer casualties you might have gotten a full victory.

>>1502431
"Real wargame feeling" is unachievable in SP. Also you seem to imply that Combat Mission is not a simulator, however, both Graviteam and CM are simulators with more or less equal level of detail and abstraction.

>>1502415
>>1502369
I'll check the manual then. As for the command mana, I'm sure the manual will let me know. I was just confused because I'd hop around units and some had more than others, but I wasn't sure if it was like an order delay, spotting delay, or whatever else it could be.

>>1493085
>In Graviteam if you select a bunch of units and order them to assault, they'll bumrush the enemy position with barely any coordination
Combat coper who doesn't know how the game works.

>>1502492
He's right though. In Graviteam, units have no idea how to form flanks, how to rotate around in an engagement, how to move in bounds. They just know how to move in a formation, that's it.

>>1502509
I think a lot of this is because the AI seems to be developed where individual units are processing functions on their own, and the command and control aspect is more of an abstraction then a functional process. I'm not sure how you would even code entities to both work together and separately but requiring the player to still perform inputs. I'm sure it could be done, but at that point the player is more just watching the battle than doing anything else.

File: kek.jpg (372 KB, 2560x1440)

372 KB JPG

>>1502557
>I'm not sure how you would even code entities to both work together and separately but requiring the player to still perform inputs
Field manuals for commanders are rather simple algorithms that aren't that difficult to program. The player selects a bunch of units and issues an order, which is an algorithm. The game assigns roles to each unit and then reassigns the roles or adjusts the algorithm for each role according to the procedures.
For example, you select three infantry squads and order an assault. The game puts one squad in reserve and two squads to the front at a certain distance from each other. If one squad suffers casualties, its role is demoted to reserve, and the game executes an algorithm of retreating, putting the reserve squad in its place.
The player's role is to customize the algorithm's variables, such as frontage, depth, how much casualties can a unit suffer before putting it into reserve, how much ammo to spend, etc.
If you want an example of it in a game, play Command Ops 2 (it's free). Or just read the manual. http://library.lnlpublishing.com/books/wowo/#p=5 Pay attention to the order interface on page 68. Compare it to the Graviteam interface - the latter lacks a lot of options because the AI just isn't programmed to follow military tactics beyond just formation and path selection. It doesn't understand how to retreat, what's frontage, how to use flanks and reserves, how to coordinate with phase lines, etc. - you have to micro all of it by yourself. Graviteam is a very micro heavy game that actively punishes micro with command mana (which is by itself a badly thought out abstraction), it's a very weird design. Luckily the opponent AI is also dumb, and clever positioning is usually all you need to dispatch the enemy.

inb4 you've come here to hate graviteam - I love graviteam and recommend it a lot, but, unlike your typical /vst/ gravitrannie, I've played a lot of wargames both SP and MP so I can clearly see where it's lacking.

>>1502415
>You can't call offmap artillery during a battle, you can only schedule strikes during the deployment phase.
Wrong. There are two types of off-map arty. On-call and scheduled. You can tell which is which, because on-call has a zero-in option. For scheduled, you just schedule missions you want and that's it. For on-call, you can either schedule stuff during deployment phase, or do a few zero-in missions, and then call in arty as needed and the zero-in points help with preparation time and accuracy.
>>1502479
Check out youtube, there's plenty of tutorials explaining everything about the interface step by step. Start with something that explains the turn-based part, 90% of your success during a battle comes from what you did at the beggining of turn, it's especially important to chose the right units for each battlegroup.

File: 20230726022312_1.jpg (630 KB, 1920x1080)

630 KB JPG

This is so damn frustrating. Ok I get it, my losses were huge, but it's virtually impossible to take those damn points while being cautious. Not to mention enemy air is tearing me a new one later in the campaign.

>get absolutely outplayed, outgunned, lose two thirds of my armour
>take the cease fire
>DRAW!
ok

https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/549080/view/3681181639301518297

They finally reduced volume of smoke grenades

>>1517590
noooooo

>losses during main battle
merely inconsequential
>losses during mop up
beyond excessive

I'm a shark, I see red and I bite, just rushing out of my positions to finish off every enemy I can. Not a good tactic.

>>1519391
?

>>1522543
nta but probably trying to grasp at any straw for discussion. I don't know what it is about Graviteam but it doesn't get a lot of arguing or fighting outside of the Combat Mission drama

So I've been playing a bit of Tunisia 43 lately to learn how to play this series, and I'm wondering if there is anything out there at all that's basically Graviteam with its realistic slow pace etc, but at the Company level with smaller maps and more micro management of each team/squad? Basically the most enjoyable moments for me playing Tunisia 43 are when I'm focusing on one company of dudes taking a hill or something. Maybe I'm still just a noob, but I find the full battalion command a bit too much.

>>1526938
I think that you basically have to look at stuff like the various digital implementations of Advanced Squad Leader like Second Front, of course its not RTWP in a physical 3D environment, but Graviteam is pretty special.
There's also some smaller scale campaigns out there for Mius-Front and Tunisia. I don't know if there's a good list of them to say which ones are, but I know Cactus Farm for Tunisia is pretty small scale - especially for the Germans where IIRC you have one infantry company and two Tigers and that's it.

Honestly, I pretty much play the game at the company level anyways, one or two companies get deployed as the key assets and most everyone else is either in defensive positions, on standby, are a second phase of battle, or just periodically get defense line moved behind the attacking companies as a base of fire. The hardest part is making sure groups that aren't my focus aren't wasting ammo or aren't shooting at things they should be.

>>1526938
>basically Graviteam with its realistic slow pace etc, but at the Company level with smaller maps and more micro management of each team/squad
Combat Mission.

bump

File: Santa Maria Infante.png (409 KB, 643x836)

409 KB PNG

I'll necropost for a bump

>>1502575
>such as frontage, depth, how much casualties can a unit suffer before putting it into reserve, how much ammo to spend, etc.
If you read any combat narrative you'll find most of the words above absent. What you'll always find though is: direction, time and line as formation of choice. Graviteam gives you much more tools than that.
>the latter lacks a lot of options because the AI just isn't programmed to follow military tactics beyond just formation and path selection
Again, combat narratives paint that troops rarely could follow anything else and sometimes even struggling with the formation or a direction even either. Like, for example, if infantry in any wargame behave themself like in picrelated, then the players will be fuming at 'unrealistically' dumb AI.
>Luckily the opponent AI is also dumb, and clever positioning is usually all you need to dispatch the enemy.
At least it has AI. Everything else aside from CO2 doesn't have any to speak of.
>I've played a lot of wargames both SP and MP so I can clearly see where it's lacking.
Sure, I did too. And without human opponent I wouldn't even consider majority as games at all. More like interactive tactical vignette. Which could be interesting in itself, but only once.

>>1538059
>If you read any combat narrative
"Combat narratives" is what battlefield kids watch on youtube. Wargamers read field manuals.

>>1538077
Don't do that or you'll have a very poor opinion of the US Army.

File: A_tank_sunk_in_5_feet_of_(...).jpg (1.88 MB, 2451x3000)

1.88 MB JPG

>>1538077
>Wargamers read field manuals.
I like fiction too, dunno what it has to do with wargaming tho

File: Flying Sherman [sound=fil(...).webm (3.5 MB, 1664x936)

3.5 MB WEBM

>>1538059
necroposting isn't a thing on 4chan
>>1538089
Here, have me when I was first learning the game accidentally getting my tanks all stuck together and then this happens

>>1540889
Holy shit that webm

File: Op Pugilist.png (2.61 MB, 1536x864)

2.61 MB PNG

Turn 4 of Operation pugulist
Managed to create a bridgehead with ease, and one of my Armour companies took a little beating in a differensive action, but this is the first big battle of the campaign. Never have had this many units to work with before

File: my Pugilist fail.png (2.55 MB, 1920x1080)

2.55 MB PNG

>>1543665
>Turn 4
>only at the bridgehead
I'd wager that's too slow. Still, interested to see the results.

>>1540889
damn they really were deathtraps

File: Op Pugilisttanks.png (996 KB, 1191x695)

996 KB PNG

>>1543730
its been a clusterfuck so far; burned through most of my Valentines in a singlebattle, trading 1 for 1 to Panzer IIIs
will post results soon; have a terrible defensive operation with only infantry against armour

Do you guys use any mods? Which ones if so?

I like the sound mod personally

File: lotsa dust.png (1.24 MB, 1920x1080)

1.24 MB PNG

>>1546516
None. Uniform mod breaks more than it's worth, and sound one is too "atmospheric" for my tastes.

are there custom campaigns that are worthwhile?

>>1550288
Not that I know of. If you rally need more content just pick a DLC you like and buy it. Wait for a sale, if money is an issue. I don't think there is one that's lazy or bad value for money, but you also need some level of autism to appreciate the attention to detail, which is a big selling point. Also, there's a lot of hours you can pull out of base campaigns, if you try to experiment with different strats.

Did I fuck up by getting Tunisia first?
Trying to learn this games UI is hell.

>>1555235
No the UI is basically the same; both recieve the same engine updates; but Graviteam Tactics gets the new DLCs

File: Tanked.png (2.1 MB, 1920x1080)

2.1 MB PNG

>>1543730
Well, my clusterfuck of a defense went fairly well
those tanks were really nothing much to fear, pic related--- if they didn't get stuck somehwere, I managed to surround them with BOYS and plink them to death.
Using good mortar cover, I actually managed to counter-attack and take all of their points before the show was over-- many surrendered on mass; more pictures to follow

File: Surrounded.png (2.22 MB, 1920x1080)

2.22 MB PNG

>>1555458
I did get a platoon of three Valentines for this particular battle, but one of them immediate immobilized himself on a rock or something, so I managed to rock with two for a while
They both become immobilized by the end, but not before tearing through many swaths of undefended infantry and light vehicles-- they still were no match for the Panzers at the end; so I'm very grateful they had so few and generally used them retardedly
pic related, a slow pinking of .55

File: Results.png (1.97 MB, 1920x1080)

1.97 MB PNG

>>1555461
>>1555458
Overall results of the battle; not bad for a a complete defense
it later set me up for a really good attack; I'm well on the path north; but probably still too slow to seize the operation's main objectives

File: Night Op.png (2.41 MB, 1920x1080)

2.41 MB PNG

>>1555463
This time; I was fully on the offensive and managed to bring up four platoons of Valentines; set against a bunch of their infantry and a few platoons of Marders. I was worried about the Marders and what effect they're big guns have on my Valentines, but through a combination of luck, good use of concealment through the stretches of jungle, I managed to to out flank their Marders and the main objective-- I caught them in sort of a mirrored L shape, with an anvil of relatively slow marching infantry and a couple of tanks at the bottom and a nice quick flank with the majorities of the Matildas on top-- almost of their SPGs where caught up on the objective, and between the tanks, mortars and assault sections it wasn't before long that I managed to melt them and the enemy infantry away.

File: Perfect flank.png (2.89 MB, 1920x1080)

2.89 MB PNG

>>1555472
The flanking Valentines made short work of the SPGs; I only completely lost three of them during the battle

File: Marder cover.png (2.47 MB, 1920x1080)

2.47 MB PNG

>>1555473
This particular Marder seemed really attacked to this truck, using it as cover, and bumping into and around it until my tanks and infantry overran its position

File: Marder overrun.png (3.51 MB, 1920x1080)

3.51 MB PNG

>>1555476
all the combat took place at extremely short ranges

File: Ambush with a Boys.png (1.69 MB, 1920x1080)

1.69 MB PNG

>>1555479
Eventually; I managed to bump into a few of their remaining Marders, which were hanging to the north, outside the objective-- they were easily overwhelmed, and I'm pretty sure this Boys ATR killed at least of the operators. Some remaining enemy infantry on the map were easily rolled up by my armour; it all felt very one-sided

File: Silly valentines 3.png (3.61 MB, 1920x1080)

3.61 MB PNG

All of these guys nearly got stuck in this ditch; I got lucky that none of them did

File: results 2.png (1.5 MB, 1920x1080)

1.5 MB PNG

I'm pretty happy with the results-- I seem to be capturing scores of them; and I'm pretty close to the secondary objectives of the operation
General Moll's unit is within my reach, and If I keep pushing north as quickly as possible, I can hopefully make the primary objective

File: big ditch.png (3.5 MB, 1920x1080)

3.5 MB PNG

>it all felt very one-sided
It's supposed to feel like that. Means you set up your battle right.
>>1555483
That's not a ditch. That's a ditch.

>>1547504
Does anyone know what the uniform mod breaks? It seems to be very popular.

File: Final three turns pugulist.png (2.37 MB, 807x1365)

2.37 MB PNG

>>1555529
Managed to recover from my slow start and pull off a regular victory; after the few big tank battles at the beginning the rest was mostly a big mop up, and I managed to punch through to the north easily enough. Encircled a couple of battlegroups in the process, too
Unfortunately, I lost part of the main objective on the enemy's very last turn, but it didn't seem to affect my mission rank very much
Good operation overall; this is the longest Graviteam campaign (turn wise) I've played so far. Not sure if I'll play the German side next, or do something in Eastern Europe. Probably the latter.

File: Op stats.png (1.21 MB, 1527x1215)

1.21 MB PNG

My overall stats.

File: PZIII.png (3.44 MB, 1920x1080)

3.44 MB PNG

>>1555529
>That's a Ditch
no, THIS is ditch
Look how effective it is! I can't believe I lost my one captured PZIII to a fucking crater

New DLC out wooo

>>1558428
We made it. Thread from previous DLC was up long enough to make it to the next DLC

File: bigger hole.png (2.53 MB, 1920x1080)

2.53 MB PNG

Pretty good. Guess, I was wrong. Maybe I should replay that campaign at some point.
>>1558274
I see your "ditch", and I raise you a bigger one.

>>1558428
how is it?

>fighting retreat campaign
>either get smashed or retreat too early and lose the campaign

File: 20230930215822_1.jpg (425 KB, 1920x1080)

425 KB JPG

My drivers are just getting a little bit TOO silly for my tastes

File: summer evening.png (1.58 MB, 1920x1080)

1.58 MB PNG

>>1563692
Eh, it happens infrequent enough is that I can count it down as an accident. In my current campaign I had made plenty of wet crossings and all I can show for it is one drowned and later recovered PZIII.

>>1564009
What was his wisdom?

File: kinda failure.png (2.61 MB, 1920x1080)

2.61 MB PNG

>>1564139
>What was his wisdom?
I don't speak german. Still, adding reinforcements to soviets was right decision. I still won, but it was more of a struggle.

Fresh kino
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VHLxEk0A0M

>Surround 1 T34 with 6 Panzer IIIs
>it takes them like 15 minutes to plink it to death
this is going to be a long war

File: oh no.png (2.28 MB, 1920x1080)

2.28 MB PNG

>>1569583
>T34
pffft, amateur

>>1566867
Swear that operation is impossible as Soviets.

They just get all shit tier ammo in their little 45mm guns. You can't do much against the tanks

>>1569579
>Doesn't even credit the music he used
>It's just jerking off muh german armor

File: a tank and a gun.png (3.27 MB, 1920x1080)

3.27 MB PNG

>>1569758
>Swear that operation is impossible as Soviets.
Well, that's the "problem" with real operations: they aren't always balanced. Kinda why I added reinforcement to soviets on this. Not sure if I liked it, way too many regimental guns for a force this size.
>They just get all shit tier ammo in their little 45mm guns. You can't do much against the tanks
Yes and no. It's much easier to concentrate armor, so unless you can match their firepower at the place where attack takes place, you wouldn't achieve much regardless of capabilities of the gun.

>>1569770
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtczEuQXO9Q

File: halftrax.jpg (439 KB, 1920x1080)

439 KB JPG

Great game, finally have a PC that can run full scale battles

What's this game like? I like MoHAS2, am I going to like this game?

>>1569942
It's very dry, think of it as more like a documentary than an action movie, or a stack of hand written after action reports as opposed to a novel about war.

It can be boring, however, it can also be intense. Hours of very little happening punctuated by explosions of violence. If you have a genuine interest in conflicts depicted and understand that you are not playing an RTS, but rather a 1:1 recreation of whatever operation you are in you may get something out of it.

It can be frustrating, infuriating even, units are capable of doing basic things well but you'll encounter situations that you just can't forgive, like the time I had a Pz IV sitting a few metres behind a KV-1 in broad daylight with a clear LoS and plenty of AP, it either couldn't see the enemy or just decided not to shoot. That incident cost me scores of men and several vehicles and heavy weapons. But then you'll have moments where you start to believe the AI is alive, recon probing a defensive line before retreating, regrouping and then attacking a weak spot in force with coordinated artillery support, or it'll execute amazing flanking moves.

Levels of detail like ammo and fuel stores, unit morale - all taken from field reports from the archives and actual AAR's, the terrain is extremely accurately recreated, ballistics modelling as well as armour resistance and penetration all simulated, air temps affect trajectory, angle of impact informs damage or penetration, shells break up and the fragments bounce around inside the tank damaging crew and systems, ammo cooks off realistically etc, certain lubricants seize engines at extremely low temps, comms is done better than anything else - all the simulation stuff is second to none.

Unique experience and I think anyone who enjoys military history and fancies themselves as a tactician should try it at least once, you just have to take the rough with the smooth and the annoying tedium as the price for moments that will take your breath away.

>>1569942
>MoHAS2
Didn’t play that dunno. Tried Graviteam. Yeah, it can be fun. Infantry vs. Infantry battles are pretty cool. Cinematic. The jank starts when the AI or either you get armor. And the UI is bad. Setting up an arty mission is so esoteric.
I tried Combat Mission Barbarossa to Berlin right after and didn’t look back. I can live without the cinematic feeling.

>>1569942
This is much more of a sim (combat mission falls in this catagory too). Not a gookclick like most other RTS. The pacing reflects that.

Have they said if they're working on a new game? I really want infantry to be handled better. They're modelled way simpler than tanks and their AI is really dumb

>>1570816
>Have they said if they're working on a new game?
No.
>I really want infantry to be handled better. They're modelled way simpler than tanks and their AI is really dumb
The only way to improve infantry modelling and add actual town fights is to downscale battles. In any case, the engine would need a significant rework. Right now the devs can't even add properly functioning AA guns (throwing the whole "the game is very historical and authentic!" argument down the drain) because high RoF large caliber guns would destroy performance. Wargame audience, especially in this day and age, is way too small for it to be financially feasible. For this same reason Battlefront keeps shitting out reskins for the same game from 00s, which also has severe performance issues.

File: huh.png (1.65 MB, 1920x1080)

1.65 MB PNG

>>1570853
>properly functioning AA guns
pic related
>because high RoF large caliber guns would destroy performance
You mean MLRS and smoke doesn't do that already?

>>1570031
>And the UI is bad.
sorry but the UI is pretty simple and artillery missions are point and click and maybe fiddle with the timer

>>1570853
The 23mm autocannons don't seem to hurt it too much. I got the impeession it's more to do with modeling costs. They won't half arse it, so it's expensive. Took them way more years than reasonable to get the 88mm in.

>>1570031
Once you learn how it works, the artillery is quite simple (like most of the UI). Just need to pay attention to if it's scheduled or on demand - then either lay out your missions, or lay out zeros at the start. It's point and click from there.

Recommend a fun short-medium length campaign

>>1570974
Operation Victory campaigns

>lots of tonks
>late cold war so everyone has radios
>only 6 turns

File: Untitled.png (130 KB, 618x309)

130 KB PNG

>>1570949
You don't even have an idea how an AA gun looked like back in WWII? Here, take a look: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NI1axqrMLis Imagine two batteries of these firing simultaneously in a large battle already full of units.
The game does have some AA guns - the ones with low RoF, like Flak 36 and 8.8 cm Flak.
>MLRS
The game doesn't have on-map MLRS weapons.
>>1570965
>I got the impeession it's more to do with modeling costs.
That's what Andrey has said, but like I said to the other anon, the game does have anti-air guns - the ones with low RoF. And they don't shoot at planes anyway. The Angola DLCs have less units in general, that's why they could afford to put ZU-23-2 in those.

File: all of the toys.png (2.15 MB, 1920x1080)

2.15 MB PNG

>>1570974
Winter Korotich. It's short, plenty of tools and interesting terrain.

It has many issues, but it's the only game out there that tries to pull off realistic combined arms combat at the operational level, and it succeeds more than it fails. It captures the atmosphere and overall grittiness of the conflicts it covers better than other titles, and the simulation of the command structure and battlefield communications, although completely antithetical to the way these things are handled in any other games, is brilliantly done, and once you understand how it works and why it often won't work it endows the planning stages with an entirely new level of importance, and unexpected events take on a whole new dimension when you are unable to intervene as directly as you can on most similar games.

I agree with other posters, it can be dull, but once it gets going it delivers the most intense real time battles you can find.

Flawed masterpiece.

File: lawnmower.jpg (482 KB, 1920x1080)

482 KB JPG

>>1570985
Based winter map enjoyer

File: it come to me in a dream.png (1.6 MB, 1920x1080)

1.6 MB PNG

>>1570981
>37mm
>battalion level
>42-43
Choose two.
>The game doesn't have on-map MLRS weapons.
?

File: the most useful T-26.png (1.85 MB, 1920x1080)

1.85 MB PNG

>>1571043
luv me some snow

File: Advance under fire.jpg (499 KB, 1920x1080)

499 KB JPG

>>1571108
Same

>>1570853
I just want my infantry to actually use trenches and cover instead of thinking crouching at the lip of a trench is a good idea

>>1570981
Some of the angolan DLC was pretty huge actually. Vehicles all over, mostly with dismounts. Plus, heavy shrub too. I really don't think it's performance based.

File: Spoiler Image (1.25 MB, 1920x1080)

1.25 MB PNG

>>1570989
>but it's the only game out there that tries to pull off realistic combined arms combat at the operational level
I'd say Command Ops 2 comes somewhat close, and the only other wargame I would've recommend if it didn't have such boring DLCs Otherwise I agree with post wholeheartedly.

File: 20231012182903_1.jpg (188 KB, 1920x1080)

188 KB JPG

>>1571876
I agree back

>>1571457
if you use the conceal modifier they will IIRC

>>1572990
not him, but even if you using the "act with caution" or use concealment modifier, they'll still crawl out a bit and crouch by the lip to gain a better firing position, but its really not a problem in my experience

File: hide.jpg (95 KB, 790x339)

95 KB JPG

>>1572993

File: 20220707155905_1.jpg (318 KB, 1920x1080)

318 KB JPG

>>1571457
When you issue your move order, let them move freely (ie, not column or row), and select concealed movement. They'll go down the trenchline in this case. If you keep maneuver on, they're much more likely to jump out to try go rambo - keep it off, and they'll stick to the basic order.

Works a treat if you've got a sub-machine gun squad you want to work down a trenchline.

It's not perfect though - they'll sometimes stick their heads up, but if you tell them to act with caution it'll significantly reduce this. Honestly, I find they work better without it. Guys with caution seem to get suppressed much more easily than those who are aggressive. Maybe good if you're just shuffling in your own lines.

Per >>1573100, if you want them in trenches at the start, click that.

File: 20220717180513_1.jpg (333 KB, 1920x1080)

333 KB JPG

>>1573224
misread it - whoops (thought it was about movement).

I think there were some issues with static trenches that were being fixed over time. Some operations had trenches that were too deep (causing soldiers to get out completely to fire) - but they were updating these previously, so the combat trenches were shallower, and transit ones at the old depth. Maybe some of the issues are relating to this.

I still find trenches a net positive (unlike villages - fuck those, little 50mm mortars demoing whole streets, taking entire squads with them)

File: pretty diamonds.png (2.55 MB, 1920x1080)

2.55 MB PNG

So I tried new DLC for commies. First operation is simple enough: just expand the bridgehead, and you ample tools for that. Fun starts in second one: in typical soviet fashion your two depleted rifle regiments 50% strength, maybe get reinforced by a tank brigade and thrown into attempt at the breakthrough. With weak infantry and plenty of tanks hilarity ensues, and my leading tank battalion get smashed along with my hopes and dreams at possibility of the breakthrough. So I cancelled the op, and get deservedly total defeat.

Still playing third one, so not much to say yet.

>>1573363
trundle trundle squelch trundle squelch trundle trundle

bump

>>1509388
This looks like trash, so maybe I my computer can run it.

>>1577419
learn to tankcommand

File: pack of vultures.png (1.32 MB, 1920x1080)

1.32 MB PNG

>>1580863
You mean hit the enemy morer and betterer? Sure, I know about that. Or you some variation of hull-down wonk?

File: Erika Nailbite.png (512 KB, 800x632)

512 KB PNG

>>1580908
Yes
hit em more and betterer
hull down helps you get hit less and worsterer

File: rookie mistake.png (2.16 MB, 1920x1080)

2.16 MB PNG

>>1580914
>hull down helps you get hit less and worsterer
But anon, how could you keep hull-down during ridge crossing?

File: Screenshot (1425).png (2.2 MB, 1920x1080)

2.2 MB PNG

>>1580933
uhhhh advanced driving maneuvers!!

35% sale on all things Mius

File: 20231013183303_1.jpg (371 KB, 1920x1080)

371 KB JPG

1 - i like this game but why cant they make it so the entire map is explorable? the maps are enormous, some more than 500 square km, it's an absolute fucking travesty that we can never experience them in their entirety.

2 - they make tank sims right? well how about they make some of the vehicles and weapons in this game controllable by the player? imagine a dlc where you get the interior of the Tiger or kv-1 and can actually play the role of a tank commander for the battles? or, if that's too much like hard work for these known vodka bingers, what about just heavy weapons, imagine being able to man a, mg42 or flak 36 in tactical battles?

they have become very very complacent and lazy lately, sure they are releasing some new dlc's, but new assets are few and far between, they are basically doing remixes of previous operations which is fine, but throw a bit of meat in with the potatoes you stingy alcoholic skinflints!!!

it's a decent game but a lot of untapped potential, if only they had a bit more vision and ambition and weren't satisfied to simply churn out what are effectively pay to play mods.

>>1581490
try their game Steel Armor: Blaze of war if you want number 2

the also have like one guy who does all the modelling; research takes up a lot of the dev time
and the main dev lives in a literal wazone

>>1581490
>they have become very very complacent and lazy lately, sure they are releasing some new dlc's, but new assets are few and far between
Yeah, I want to see Bagration operations but I know they'll never happen

File: sleepy tankers.jpg (279 KB, 1920x1080)

279 KB JPG

>>1581490
>they make tank sims right?
They did. But they say that the market for those even smaller than for wargamers. But with twice the work.

File: turret-down.jpg (269 KB, 1920x1080)

269 KB JPG

>>1580934
Gotcha, thanks.

>>1581490
I think from an economics perspective, what they're doing now is really the most we could expect. It's a 7(?) year old game - they aren't going to bring in meaningful profit by retrofitting it to be an optional tank sim (unless it was a paid dlc, but even then I think only a portion of people would have any interest). Maybe next game, if we're lucky. Much rather they focus resources on new vehicles or operations. They had something like you said in Total War FOTS - it was fun once or twice to shoot the gatling or armstrong gun - but it was a bit of a gimmick really. Like the others said - SABOW or their older WW2 tank sim, do exist.

I'm just glad Mius is still alive and getting regular updates after this long, given how niche it is. The recent operations have been really good.

>I will never get play my Americans anywhere but the desert

File: American_Sherman_tank_aft(...).jpg (464 KB, 1690x1105)

464 KB JPG

>>1582452
Maybe some Philippines stuff. Depends on what Jap equipment they will introduce in whatever the thing they working at. And a plenty of other things.

>>1582452
Gates of Hell is getting a 'Murrica pack, never say never.

Has anyone done pivot point as Germans? It looks totally impossible. Please give ratings if you have.

5 to 1 manpower, with a ton of tanks and airpower on top.

File: Spoiler Image (2.45 MB, 1920x1080)

2.45 MB PNG

>>1583288
>Has anyone done pivot point as Germans?
I did it for the soviets, so do with that information whatever you wish because of the cucked division boundaries their left flank is basically doesn't have any tanks

File: lmao.png (6 KB, 114x41)

6 KB PNG

lol

>>1582472
Wait, they are actually working on anything outside of EF? Anything WWII in the Pacific would be kino, I'm sick and tired of this EF and Normandy spam. Even with Tunisia 43, that is super rare, so I'm glad we at least go that.

File: RfPttkN.jpg (1.51 MB, 1920x1080)

1.51 MB JPG

>>1587783
>Wait, they are actually working on anything outside of EF?
Namonhan most likely. But they making those models with an eye for using them later, and with IJA you could either go to China or Philippines.

>>1587783
They were gonna do a Soviet versus Imperial Japan in Manchuria thing but I think that got canned-- some of the resources (like BT tanks) have been reused though
hopefully we'll get an IJA campaign at some point

File: 20231103143403_1.jpg (644 KB, 1920x1080)

644 KB JPG

'Counter blow'
Kostrino: November 18-19, 1941
10:00 am
Turn 2 as the Red Army

No idea what to expect, except the Germans are reported to be well dug in.

We have a clear advantage in numbers, with a decent mix of light armour, field artillery and infantry, as well as significant off map artillery support.

an attack against the South Eastern front with a view to capturing this ground and using it as a pivot point from which to pour forces around the enemy's left flank, bypassing the strongest AT units deployed in their centre.

Let me know if you'd like to follow this campaign and I might stream it, battle by battle, over the next couple of weeks.

>>1589356
I would like to! I'm still new and it would be helpful to see how someone else plays it

File: t26.jpg (771 KB, 1920x1080)

771 KB JPG

>>1589381
OK, I will need to set up a burner account on some stream service, any suggestions appreciated, I thought about rumble but you need subs to stream, or a paid account.

Available to us are 3 variants of the cute T-26 (16 in total) a very light fairly fast tank, but in the snow moving across open ground attacking entrenched Germans with various light AT weapons - they are going to do well to survive the assault.Fortunately we have a ton of artillery and infantry to support their advance.

>>1589394
Why not just do it on youtube? That way the VOD is autosaved for people that can't tune in live. Twitch is another option but then you'd have to manually highlight the VOD so it doesn't get deleted 2 weeks later

File: plan.jpg (806 KB, 1920x1080)

806 KB JPG

>>1589399
Possibly, I really do not like having goolag anywhere near my rig.

Rough draft of the battle plan

Final attack positions have yet to be decided, however assets used for the assault have been assessed.

We have 6 artillery batteries at our disposal, on the operational screen it also says air cover is available, although whether or not it arrives during the next 3 hours is anyone guess.

Artillery consists mostly of high explosive, but there is also some incendiary, shrapnel and smoke.

As for the ground forces I intend to commit 7 battle groups and keep 3 in reserve.

I'll open with heavy artillery concentrated on where I feel the enemy is most likely to be situated, then will finish with smoke screens, the wind is quite low so they should provide a nice screen from which to emerge onto the hopefully dazed and confused German positions.

The BGs will attack in two waves, with support weapons attempting to harass and suppress where possible. It all depends on what the Germans have there, how effective the artillery is and whether I can move through the smoke quickly enough to overwhelm them.

Bearing in mind they will no doubt have artillery of their own to call upon, possibly air cover too, ultimately plans tend to go to shit the moment you start the battle and what seems like a great idea can soon turn into a complete campaign crippling disaster :D

It usually takes me a few hours to prepare everything for an assault like this so I may go radio silent for a while.

File: deployment.jpg (778 KB, 1920x1080)

778 KB JPG

Deployment is set, plan is kind of finalized so that's me for today.

Tomorrow I'll set up arty fire and smoke missions, then final orders, although only for the first wave, second wave will react to events as they unfold and support where needed. There's a bit of unit mix in the picrel, sent scouts back to the second wave as they will be of no use during the main assault, but could be useful drawing out any Germans dug in either side of the track that runs east through the heart of enemy territory, also arty spotters have been position in concealment close to the enemy with orders to stay hidden and act with caution, they 'blinked off' at the moment I took the screenshot, but they are dotted along the front line away from their groups.

I also sent two trucks from a reserve group to test the ice, it'll be interesting to see if it can support them. They'll be ordered to cross the river at wider sections before returning to their units, if they don't drown.

hi people

can someone briefly explain to me how repair and replenishment works?

ex if I have a repair bn on the tactical map and I have damaged armor, do I just park them nearby and they help each other out? is there something specific I have to do?

I have some experience in the game, but I rarely get any use out of the repair detachments as it seems like they never do anything (or the pace is very slow)

>>1589608
Resupply and repair units have a radius of effectiveness, make sure to move either them or your units in need of their services within that radius, you can see what that radius is on the operational map, it's colour coded to show which squares are most likely to receive assistance. Manual does explain this.

File: 20231103205356_1.jpg (617 KB, 1920x1080)

617 KB JPG

Recon gets eyes on the enemy held village, 2 km behind him 3 battle-groups move towards the target in attack formation, artillery barrages are already in the air, the peaceful calm is about to be shattered by sudden and extreme violence and slaughter.

This game is fucking incredible. Nothing else comes close to generating this kind of atmosphere. 5 hours of preparation, not a shot fired and I can't put the damned game down.

Masterpiece.

File: 20231103205146_1.jpg (698 KB, 1920x1080)

698 KB JPG

Artillery spotter waits for the first barrage.

File: 20231103211105_1.jpg (562 KB, 1920x1080)

562 KB JPG

Recon platoon awaits the order to enter enemy held woodland, snow will help muffle the sound of their engines and reduce their chances of being seen, but will also reduce their ability to spot the enemy. They must know they are being sent in to draw enemy fire - For the Motherland.

Western front when?

File: frantic.png (1.93 MB, 1920x1080)

1.93 MB PNG

>>1589660
>when
As west as you would get.

This game feels like I'm watching a WW2 movie. Is that a bad thing?

>>1589633
thanks for being so helpful anon.

I have another question if you don't mind. How do the new artillery designation sites work? it used to just be a narrow lane, however now it seems to be a series of green --> blue dots. however, it seems like the blue dot zones are not fired upon ever. Is there some extra step to get guns to roll fire down the wider parts of the designated zone? does it just happen as the barrage progresses?

>>1589818
It happens as the barrage progresses.

I'm assuming you know the difference between scheduled only - and on-demand fires too? Some can only be called on deployment.

>>1589634
>>1589636
>>1589641
Loved this op. Easily the best for flamethrower spam. Be careful with the clown cars offroad - they bog easy.

>>1589760
>This game feels like I'm watching a WW2 movie. Is that a bad thing?

Yes and no, it really depends in what you enjoy. In essence this game is one you play before it starts, then you watch the results of your planns play out, with some occaional interventions taking place during the action, although I played plenty of battles where the only thing I did the whole time was move the camera.

The trick is understanding how to make your plan a reality, in defensive battles that's easy, it's 90% deployment, with perhaps only a little in battle intervention required directing things like mortars or AT units.

Offensive battles are something else altogether, much more complex, especially if you have a large force and artillery support. it can take many hours to work out a decent plan then input all your commands etc, and the battles are far more likely to require intervention as events unfold, although they can and sometimes do play out perfectly with no need for any additional orders.

I enjoy watching the action of a well thought through plan play out more than trying to manage things in real time with a command and communications system that is both slow and fragile. Some people can't stand doing that.

>>1589417
bump for interest in seeing this recorded or live, but preferably recorded

would've honestly loved to see the whole setup like that too because i still struggle with the UI, but anything you'd like to show would be awesome

The one thing I wish combat mission would take most, is the afterbattle statistics. Mostly the ballistics stuff.

Just went through a battle where two German captured t34s came at my lines - my 53k guns opened up from about 800m out - I assumed totally ineffectually. Then, the 122mm howitzers in my back line got aim on them, and started firing. I look away, and one of the t34s goes up in a huge ass fireball - I assume the howitzer got him with HE or something. After battle - no - turns out one of the 53k got a spalling hit on the lower ammo rack - causing a catastrophic explosion. It's satisfying just flying around the after battle space reading the statistics, even it doesn't make a gameplay difference.

>>1590170
I agree, an underrated aspect of the game, but perhaps the most enjoyable 'end of game' experience out there. Also reassuring to know that the detail of the simulation is so deep and granular, just adds even more to the experience of playing it.

It really is something else, I believe a 4 man dev team are behind it, kind puts some bigger western studios to shame when you get a glimpse of what is actually possible if you have the vision and passion to pour into it. Imagine what they could do with a TW size budget and a team of hundreds.

File: salieri.gif (3.41 MB, 498x280)

3.41 MB GIF

>>1590183
>>1590170
CA lead dev reading Graviteams code realizing the game simulates thousands of men simultaneously including the state of their vital organs and tracks the journey of each and every projectile from the moment it leaves the muzzle and even tracks each individual fragment of a broken shell as it bounces around the interior of a tank and any parts of the interior spalling and the damge caused in real time and they did it with 2.7% of the manpower and 1.2% of the budget while working from a shell damaged office in the middle of an active warzone.

>But bruh - flaming arrows tho

>>1463002

>>1590183
>>1590191
I think there is a huge gulf between their working cultures too. Graviteam seem to have a pride in their work, that CA doesn't. I'm certain that if I message Andrei with hard evidence that the 3rd battalion 53 rifle regiment 2nd MG section was equipped with DshK guns for a certain battle instead of Maxims - give it a month or two, and it'll end up in the game, even if the op is years old. Meanwhile, Shogun 2 is still waiting on the hattori kisho ninja fix (something very well known, which should be a simple spreadsheet fix), and simple bugs like cannons targeting the corners of units (instead of center) in Fots or Empire/Napoleon, were never fixed. Passable is good enough for CA.

>>1590558
It's the difference between genuine passion and turning up for work, I don't know the story behind either studio but I imagine they began in a similar way, one or two coders with a real vision of what they wanted to achieve and the drive to make it so.

TW obviously exploded and the vultures circled soon after the 2nd or third game, the ip gets bought by a parasitical corporation who only really cares about profits, the visionary/s get tired of the culture or simply decide to take the money and run and the soul is extinguished forever, it becomes all about monetizing the dream of people who are no longer around.

Graviteam has never and will never reach those heights, so you just have a small team of dedicated autists continuously tweaking and polishing their dream, it matters to them more than anything else, whereas CA jobbing coders would quit tomorrow for an extra dollar fifty an hour.

>>1590558
Just to follow up on your comment about Graviteam responding to feedback, there are at least three changes in the game today that resulted from threads I started on Steam. I won't dox myself by saying which ones, but it's not only me, i've seen other suggestions implemented. Sometimes Andrei brutally shoots the idea down, then a few months later there it is in the patchnotes lol.

I know it's only a game and an extremely niche one at that, I see the same flaws and issues everyone else sees, but it killed every other game similar goals for me. I even enjoy getting my ass kicked, I trust the simulation enough to know that it was either mission impossible, or I fucked up. I love how losing well is a thing, sacrificing units can result in later gains etc.

In terms of testing the players skills as a tactician there's no game to compare it to. Maybe Arma, if you ever played as a commander (company, platoon or even squad) on a well run high pop realism server you'll know what I mean, it's like playing Graviteam from battlefield view. Project Reality too perhaps, but nothing else comes close.

File: cmo_scale.jpg (1.39 MB, 6400x1520)

1.39 MB JPG

>>1590642
>In terms of testing the players skills as a tactician there's no game to compare it to.
There's a whole world of wargames out there. Sure most of them don't have flashy graphics like Graviteam, but they can be even more deep and immersive.

>>1590675
Of course, I'm talking specifically about real time tactical battles simulated in 3D. Command Ops 2, CMO and it's predecessor are outstanding real time tactical games too, but deliver a very different type of experience.

The Scourge of War series is about as close as it gets in terms of delivering a Graviteam style of large scale real time 3D battles.

File: 1684189602148830.gif (437 KB, 350x412)

437 KB GIF

>>1590675
>yeah bro, lets simulate level of war where staff numbers goes into hundreds and C&C becomes ridiculously complex while not simulating any of that
I really don't get why people like this overgrown Harpoon. Even Harpoon was straining it's systems, this is just dod powerpoint-level retarded.

>>1590685
It's not for everyone, no game or simulation is.

CMO is a game I wish I had the time to get into, I'm also put off by the amount of reading and database diving that's required in order to really make the most of it, but I also know if I did have the time then it would certainly become a full blown addiction. I played the previous game CMANO a few times and enjoyed it immensely, but again just couldn't spare the time needed to dive deep.

Command Ops 2 is a nice compromise. Easy to get into and once you know your way around the UI and have a handle on the basics you can dive right in and have a blast.

>>1590685
The numbers depend on the scenario. In some scenarios you only manage 2-3 ships or even a single submarine. There's not that many large scale scenarios and many CMO players (yeah, many out of a few dozen) never touch them anyway.
Graviteam can also be rather overwhelming if you set up large battles and decide to minmax your orders on deploy.

>>1590558
its a artisans' dedication to the craft versus a factory workers-- I'm glad to see eastern european devs able to take off on dedication alone; this is the sort of thing which made STALKER and Metro successful; I am happy to see it in wargames.
Even me, who was not really a wargame player (just RTSes) was able to get drawn in to play Graviteam on its realism/authenticity elements alone, and now I play all sorts of them

>>1590191
the active warzone is what HELPS Andrei & co make the simulation so realistic though-- they've gained invaluable first hand experience and know what's actually important in the field, unlike CAfags
its like a virgin writing a dating simulator-- they'll just never get it

Normandy when?

File: 168265322700837.jpg (162 KB, 415x416)

162 KB JPG

>buy the first Graviteam Tactics game
>open the tutorial
>instantly get filtered because it is godawful
I need to read the manual sometime but fuck me if that doesn't feel like a chore... I'm also open to any video tutorial suggestions if you fags have one at hand

>>1591218
The tutorial I found from a year ago had very different UI than in the game right now, so they're basically useless. I suggest getting the Croatian Legion dlc and learn it the hard way. That dlc is very forgiving for the new players if you pick Axis. Your infantry is basically space marines tier, just order an attack and see millions of soviet die.

File: 20231106005155_1.jpg (615 KB, 1920x1080)

615 KB JPG

>>1591218
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OY1L0OrmpJo&list=PLWnLXaLqhVJiCOE24y90z1gCpD4o7t01h&index=1

There is also a manual on the steam page - it's worth going through - even though the UI is different now, the symbols mean the same as before. It takes a little time to crack into the game, but once it clicks, the UI is fairly logical, and allows a lot of precision.

If you learn the very basics, you can goof off and learn the rest by trial and error - you're not always supposed to be able to win.

File: autist btfos another payi(...).jpg (131 KB, 634x1050)

131 KB JPG

>>1591230
>you're not always supposed to be able to win.
This is such an important point that evades so many new to the game. There are some operations that have never been won, Sokolovo is one example, they were devastating defeats IRL and they are devastating defeats for the player, this simulation recreates real events, and you of ccourse can try to overturn history, but if it's not possible then that's all there is to it, enjoy the experience and give it your best shot. You learn the most valuable lessons on the end on a beating.

>Also picrel Andrey classic :D
https://steamcommunity.com/app/312980/discussions/0/3942399239157257498/

File: 9NZHWUi.jpg (160 KB, 1289x892)

160 KB JPG

My SS-dude without any ammo left sprinted up to a Soviet MG position and started punching the three guys there. He went immediately unconscious in the melee, but one of the Soviets threw a grenade at him anyway and lunged down at his body which caused a collision and the Soviet ricocheted high up in the air.
Their own grenade wounded at least some of them.

>>1592865
>Sokolovo
That mission traumatised me, back when I was first learning Op Star.

I went from playing Germans on Taranovka(? - the one with the Tigers), to that.

I tried my best, but learned that lesson too.

I wish the op star missions were historically balanced though - I think the player perspective side gets worse gear than the AI would.

File: Vinyagolovo.png (2.22 MB, 1920x1080)

2.22 MB PNG

>>1592865
>they were devastating defeats IRL
Interestingly I find a lot of soviet unsuccessful advances quite doable, which I couldn't say about replicating SA or Iranian successes.

>>1593408
>Op Star.
I'd love to see Taranovka and more Op Star content ported to Mius, as the first in the series that I played there are many happy memories, but the many changes and improvements make going back tedious, still in my top 10 all time games though.

>>1593545
Some of the operations are quite easy to overturn as the balance of forces is fairer, or in some cases actually favours the side that failed IRL. Artillery alone can make or break a key phase of the battle, as can air support, luck plays a part too, losing key assets like 88's early on without them making a significant contribution can be campaign wrecking and isn't always down to bad deployment or tactics, but simply how the AI struck lucky with their direction of attack.

It also depends on the players knowledge of what's coming, if you played as the historic victors first then facing a force armed with deep knowledge of when and where certain units are going to appear makes life much simpler.

But even without that advantage or undeserved good fortune, if you have a deep understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of yours and the enemies assets, of the way the game works, and some genuine tactical nous paired with the ability to improvise - most players should be able to overturn historic results.

Of course things can also go the other way and you wind up leading the historical victors to defeat.

Looking to get Mius front soon. Does it ever go on sale? Anything specifically I should start with as someone who's never played any graviteam stuff?

File: lights!.png (607 KB, 1920x1080)

607 KB PNG

>>1593900
>Does it ever go on sale?
It does.
>Anything specifically I should start with as someone who's never played any graviteam stuff?
Depends. Did you play any wargames before? If yes, then just take whatever operation you fancy and try to make it work. If no, watch some tutorials first.

>>1593983
>Did you play any wargames before
Yes, but that experience has led me to expect a somewhat unintuitive UI and obfuscated mechanics, so I'll check out some tutorials anyway and wait for a sale.

File: influences.png (97 KB, 1221x716)

97 KB PNG

>>1593985
>a somewhat unintuitive UI
Eh, I personally did struggle only with order influences demining specifically for which I had to check manual. Other than that I find UI quite easy to learn.
>and wait for a sale
Oh yeah, Tank Warfare: Tunisia 1943 is literally Graviteam but in Tunisia, and when it goes for sale it's dirt cheap. Otherwise it's the same game. Fruhlingswind is really good, like in top five easily.

>>1593900
If you want a relatively chill operation set to learn on, grab the furtive spring, or Croatian legion DLCs. Furtive is better value though, if you're only grabbing one (gives you a winter map, that basegame lacks).

>>1593739
I want more ports as well. I'd love Basra from SABOW to port over, plus the South African one from Op Star.

Anything modern really.

>>1594038
I really don't get the UI drama either. I had more trouble learning CK2 (& I was already well acquainted with Vic2 - so not new to paradox) than Graviteam. I think people just expect it to be out of the box like total war.

File: Forest fun times.jpg (1.5 MB, 3440x1440)

1.5 MB JPG

Earlier poster

File: Poised.jpg (1.34 MB, 3440x1440)

1.34 MB JPG

>>1594441
Going to try and stream this weekend

File: 20231111020828_1.jpg (646 KB, 1920x1080)

646 KB JPG

>play leapords leap
>barely engage the enemy, only take favorable fights, maneuver around and take out their HQ and starting cap points
>get in a few scraps, do pretty well with single digit casualties overall for the op
>win threshhold is 100 score - pull out with 122
>still lose
thank u andrei. truly, some battles aren't meant to be won. I still had fun though. Maybe it was the reserves usage - but the friendly AI was the one that would have used them.

>>1463002
How hard is this game to get into? I remember looking it up almost a decade ago, but it looked like such a disorganized mess, where you can't tell what's going on, and where you don't really understand the strengths and weaknesses of the various units, or the tactics required without a lot of experience. I'm fairly certain it's not as messy as I perceive it as being, but it also looks like something that has quite a bit of a learning curve, and it also seems janky from an outside perspective.

File: Hidey hole.jpg (716 KB, 3440x1440)

716 KB JPG

>>1594606
It is messy, but that's because war is messy.

The game itself though is pretty tight and well structured, there have been a lot improvements to the UI in recent years. It's almost unrecognisable from its release, you often see posts from people saying they haven't played in a while and everything has changed.

The manual is better than it's ever been too, but it is a complex simulator, there is a lot to learn, but it's not hard to learn, it just requires time and patience.

But yes, when big battles kick off all your carefully laid plans and intricate mosaic of orders can rapidly descend into complete disorder, the key is to just relax, understand that there is a lot of deep simulation going on, that this isn't an RTS and that spamming orders will only make the situation even more chaotic.

Definitely worth a punt during a sale if it appeals to you, watch some videos, you can read the manual, lurk on steam forums and if you still fancy it pull the trigger when the next sale drops.

>>1594622
Thanks. I no longer play any AAA stuff, and mostly stick to strategy and indie stuff, for a variety of reasons that I won't get into. Graviteam Tactics seems like it should be right up my alley, and I need something else to play, as I've already played the Men of War games to death.

>>1594652
It's an acquired taste, but if it clicks with you it'll become a life long hobby.
Definitely worth putting the difficult first few hours in, rewards are spectacular, there's a very helpful and active community on here and steam that enjoys helping new players with their struggles.

>>1594498
It's the objectives I think, but this scenario is impossible to recreate the win that really happened and it was discussed on the forum and they basically admitted that they aren't able to recreate the retardation of the commie forces with the AI in the game. The only way I could "win" was with huge losses.

This game needs a proper tutorial

>>1595533
Have you read the manual yet

File: 20231117004542_1.jpg (439 KB, 1920x1080)

439 KB JPG

>when you're just trying to have a good time, and the entire Cuban airforce appears

File: 20231117005002_1.jpg (551 KB, 1920x1080)

551 KB JPG

they tried. my guys got one before going down.

File: 20231117205420_1.jpg (843 KB, 3440x1440)

843 KB JPG

Night maneuvers are scary as fuck. I know there's a soviet AT company out there somewhere, within 3-4 km of my position. We need to take the river crossing this turn or the operation is lost.
Lights off in dense forest during a thaw isn't an option, we just have to take the long way round using what tracks there are and then go dark before we leave the trees behind the village. One hour till sunrise, if they spot us we're fish in a barrel.

File: 20231117210838_1.jpg (580 KB, 3440x1440)

580 KB JPG

Recon company about 1.5 km ahead, the game simulates sound of course, so the enemy will already be orienting their guns in our general direction.

Fyi, incase anyone else suffered on Angolan ops like I did - turn on AI controlled fires, on all your ratels, buffels, and whatever. It makes a huge difference. Whenever you see a blob of BTRs or even t55s - just group select and group prioritise fire. The ratels rip the t55 sights to pieces, and the BTRs will usually freak out and try to run.

Dismounts will relay to the cars too - and the car lights up anything that they can fire at, shooting through the scrub. Everyone has radios, so word spreads between units quick.
Absolutely night and day. Like a totally different operation.

File: foglights.jpg (310 KB, 3440x1440)

310 KB JPG

>>1602208
One of the drawbacks of the incredible range of order modifiers.
You can tailor unit behaviour to suit most scenarios with incredible subtlety, small changes can have a dramatic effect, and in certain situations the wrong modifier being activated or deactivated can have a catastrophic effect.

I know your issue isn't related to the command radial, but it's still a powerful part of the command tool set, but I for one advocate for players to reset the command radial to default at the start of every battle, and really pay attention to what you are telling your units to do.

File: Eagerly a hundred thousan(...).jpg (129 KB, 950x1200)

129 KB JPG

>>1602581
>>1602208
my tanks and spgs seem to eat shit in almost every scenario-- rarely a clean victory and I consider it a win if most of them are in for repairs and not burned

>>1602582
One of my favourite things about these games is that they simulate the vulnerability of armour, not just against other armour, AT units generally as well as light infantry with molotovs and mines. But also against the environment, or more often than not the combination of enemy + environment.

Sucks to lose tanks cheap though, usually with the benefit of hindsight there's something that could have been done to prevent it, not always, sometimes it's just bad luck.

>>1602594
for my losses, it's always when I grow a bit too bold or impatient haha
although losing tankers to ATR infantry always saddens me a bit

File: Screenshot (6850).png (3.51 MB, 1920x1080)

3.51 MB PNG

I love giving lil rides to infantry

File: Screenshot (6864).png (3.1 MB, 1920x1080)

3.1 MB PNG

Managed to knock out a KV-1 with a sneaky flank using a PZIII
I was suprised it worked; my PZIII then proceeded to run over the escaping KV-1 crewment-- see smushed here in pic related
Good revenge; that dug in KV-1 was quite a headache and took out a few of my stugs-- I look forward to using them during my Soviet playthrough of this campaign

>>1602612
I love when they try run things over. I've had a T-34 go for the ram/crush kill on 3.7mm paks before - immensely satisfying.

shit game

>>1603192
yeah man command ops 2 now thats a game for real army men

>>1603353
rent free

File: jungle fighting.png (2.48 MB, 1920x1080)

2.48 MB PNG

>>1603361
hardly, when you go out of your way to shit in our thread with your garbage

File: StuG.jpg (268 KB, 3440x1440)

268 KB JPG

Red sky in the morning, the devils warning.

Lads, we're going in.

File: 20231122003005_1.jpg (629 KB, 1920x1080)

629 KB JPG

>start round
>immediately dynamite fishing in my own square
ebin :D

File: 20231121105913_1.jpg (418 KB, 1920x1080)

418 KB JPG

>>1603364
Which map/op is this on? It looks great.

I've never given TW1943 the attention it deserves - this looks like a fun one to try out.

>>1603577
I'm pretty sure it was on Pugulist-- I had a real hankering to play with British tanks and I had a real swell time-- I managed to catch a lot of Marders off guard and swept them right up-- I think I posted about in earlier in this very thread
yeah It was, operation deets are >>1555458
and its related posts
I'm playing through a kraut clusterfucking of the 21 turn Stephanovka campaign right now, after that I want to return to TW to play as the Americans, now that I have some expertise using undergunned tanks against heavier ones

I figure this might be a good place to ask: Is Steel Armor: Blazes of War worth a buy?

>>1604198
no
shit game

>>1604198
It's a very dry sim, but I enjoy it.
I'd take a look at Steel Fury Kharkov 1942 with the STA mod which is still being worked on and is very good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAt5gEg6DL4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnMzlqT2AeE

Playing tank warfare for the first time and just got raped in the attack tutorial. Is that the point or am I doing something wrong? Seems like it may be trying to tell me that I shouldn't attack entrenched enemies with AT head on.

File: __nishizumi_maho_and_itsu(...).jpg (440 KB, 1403x1906)

440 KB JPG

>>1605045
No its working as intended
Tanks are great but good positioning with an AT gun will ruin your day
welcome to the gang, friend

>>1605045
They have a very darwinian tutorial experience. They're not always supposed to be winnable. It's important to get used to it from the start. They don't tell you though.

>10 seconds into first battle
>order tanks to move to a more advantageous position
>half (about 7) break down 20 feet into the move
>commander hops out of his tread-less tank and starts running around like a retard
How do I prevent this? Is it rocky terrain that fucks them up? Are they recoverable, or is that basically the end for them?

>>1608364
if you keep the territory that they're on, most tanks will be repairable
>what fucks them up
mines, anti-tank ditches, extreme slopes, slight changes in the weather, and the alignment of the stars

File: 20231128222907_1.jpg (487 KB, 1920x1080)

487 KB JPG

that feel when you have a single space marine tier squad that clutches the battle

have been playing short campagins in tunisia, having good times when things go well but the obscure mechanics are frustrating

>Chouigui
US zerg rush with tanks and halftracks, there are a lot of stuarts but as long as the armor company is present they can be easily destoryed by flanking them before they hit the infantry position
except that one time command tank spawn on top of a rocky hill and detrack itself, fuel tank ruptured and abondened next battle

>Cactus Farm
Brit have double everything on a linear map. The only advantage Germans have is the schduelled arty
Cactus farm itself is barely defendable. The attacking side is filled with concelment. What make it worse is that it is a night battle for the first turn. But for some reason the Brit always push from the far open side with two lines of trenches, leaving moutain of corpses
schduelled arty is very hard to use. It's is almost impossible to predict their movement or bait and holding them or move back without taking significant casualties, they also have a enormous reserve force whenever I flare their backline.
At turn 2 Germany got 2 tiger 2 short barrel panzer 3 thats only good at infantry support, and they usually ran out of HE shell if they somehow survive for the next battle. And the Brit got 5 Churhill
Tigers always freak out and target infantry even with act with cauation. I tried having them doing ambuhes in plantation and crossfire with another tiger on the other side but they got focused on easily
Only get a tank battle win by pushing infantry forward and somehow dont end up in a battle. Sacrificed an AT platoon to have the tank column engage a tiger at 1km, flank them with another tiger then mop up everything with panzer 3s.
Cant reacreate it again because terrain behind the farm is shit, half of the map is covered with platation.
Also I have no idea how resupply work. Tried reinforce AT squad with no ammo and they give me 4 naked dude with AT grenades.

File: 20231130134954_1.jpg (530 KB, 1920x1080)

530 KB JPG

>>1610638
found out I can stop them shooting at infantry and the tiger start killing shit
This bad boy killed 7 Churill in a single battle, 2 more in the next battle, stall the advance and managed a minor victory

File: 20231130143311_1.jpg (488 KB, 1920x1080)

488 KB JPG

>>1611212

>>1611212
Good job anon; I haven't played Cactus farmyet but am looking forward to it
what did you do to get it to target enemy tanks? Priority fire?

What's the best beginner video / guide? I did the first tutorial mission but I'm honestly not sure that my mortars were actually attacking? I somehow won also but is every tutorial "do this do this do that do this do this GO"?

File: 20221116211338_1.jpg (515 KB, 1920x1080)

515 KB JPG

>>1611917
Warsimmer on youtube. Basically youtube is your best tutorial.

Tonci is another video-maker - less tutorial, more playthrough - but it's helpful to watch how they make things work.

>>1611937
seconding this, warsimmer has really comprehensive stuff

>>1602610
What operation is that?

>>1611212
>found out I can stop them shooting at infantry

How do you do this? My tanks get retardedly mesemerized by shooting at infantry and turning their turrets and side profiles away and to enemy respectivley. Then they are easy pickings for enemy at crews.

>>1611917
Seconding this. Bought the game on sale and tried the tutorials. Attack tutorial consisted of game telling me to attack infantry position head on with tanks and one inf platoon. By the time they got there, everyone except one tank got obliterated by mg's from the infantry and one at or light infantry gun on the hill overlooking my attack line lol. Not to mention that my sole survivng tank kept shooting at that gun position instead of infantry which was meters in front of him and was the mission objective. Managed to still win that mission by manually moving tank around until I ran over most of the enemy platoon.


Other than that I still dont understand why my wire crews sometimes try to lay the lines from my commander to arty and sometimes just bug out and do nothing. Tried reseting their ai movement option and it works 30% of 50% of time.

Also, how on earth those radio trucks work? Does my coommander have to be near them to establish connection with another commander that either has a radio of its own or is in close proximity of his own radio truck? One of my squads had two of the radio trucks so I got one positioned next to the commanders (which didn't help in hiding his position) and other next to the unit I wanted to establish connection with but that didn't work either (they were part of the same company dw, I know about the order of battle). Some of the batteries don't even have either wire or radio connection capabilities, so I don't know how on earth is it supposet to transmit positions to its subordinates.

File: trenča.jpg (244 KB, 1200x628)

244 KB JPG

This game would be such a gem if they made the wires phisically visible on map and added sandbags and wooden covers for trenches plus other decorations. It's a small thing to ask but adds so much to the immersion.

>>1612673
Stepanovka 30 turner

File: 20231202235351_1.jpg (391 KB, 1920x1080)

391 KB JPG

step t-55! w-w-what are you doing?!?!