T-64 & its Soulful Rangefinder - GHPC Gameplay

[@Enigma89]

If you ever complained about the Snail's grind then you should take a safe bet on GHPC, more options is good. store.steampowered.com/app/1705180/Gunner_HEAT_PC/

[@WillKinton]

I love GHPC. I’d say it has the same level of sim as Cold Waters, and that’s perfect for something like AFVs. Once your vehicle starts getting to 3-4 crew members, I think any attempt at full fidelity will start to be janky. Even if you’re going to do full interior views and stuff, you’ve still got at least one guy driving, one guy shooting, and one guy commanding. What GHPC and Cold Waters do really well is simulate the environment and the atmosphere of WWIII. Thats ultimately what I want to experience.

[@Rokaize]

Uh what? janky? Steel Beasts is a full fidelity tank and IFV simulator and isn’t not janky at all.

[@cagneybillingsley2165]

fully modeled and animated interiors at the current fidelity level is a pipe dream. the commander view external turret models still need to be improved. those spotlights need more polygons to round them out. i am mostly playing "unbottoned" or in 3rd person view anyway, more interesting to watch my vehicle do its thing especially those autoloader shell ejections. i'd rather see quality over quantity. that is don't model 50 driveable vehicles in a shallow manner, model 4 or 5 drivable vehicles with the same level of detail as the t64 including some auxilliary systems as well.

[@JPazer]

So sad that there are probably hundreds of concepts like this rangefinder we will never see in games. Really cool

[@JD96893]

The range finder is actually a really interesting little bit of tech. They actually used something similar in cameras. I have one with the exact same type of range finder, although in this case being used to merely focus the camera.

[@gepset]

I have a Pentax K1000 with the exact same finder too. Very cool!

[@drrocketman7794]

Yeah, now that somebody mentioned it, my dad's antique Canon camera had a rangefinder like that too!

[@me67galaxylife]

i mean coincidence rangefinders are very old, though their widespread adoption in tank would take some time; ships in the beginning of the 20th century already had rangefinders !

[@Enigma89]

Just to clarify / finish my train of thought on 3:27 What I was thinking about is if they are going to introduce any sort of crew bailing out or anything like that when a tank is disabled and/or any other visual indicators for when a tank is knocked out but isn't on fire

[@ActionScripter]

Currently, hatches open is a good sign that the crew have bailed out. It's possible (no promises) that in the future you'll see the crew climbing out as well. Depends how the art team's workload is looking as we continue to push for a 1.0 feature set.

[@ActionScripter]

@@harrybirchall3308 I am "they".

[@Fedda75]

The T-64 represents such an interesting tank design. So revolutionary concerning armor protection, weight/mobility and armament for its day, but ultimately flawed with the time it took to get into being a mature design. It will be interesting to see other variants of the T-64 in GHPC! Regarding GHPC! we are looking at game which in my humble opinion will fill the void of millsim lite games like Microprose´ "M1 Tank Platoon" and similar games which managed to be both relatively realistic and fun at the same time. I truly hope and believe the devs of this tanksim will avoid falling into the trap of making a high fidelity game. There is realism and there is realism... PS! Even though GHPC! still is in very much early access I recommend everyone slightly interested in a fun, but realistic tank game to pick it up. It does not cost that much and you will surely support a serious dev. team which strives to make a great game, I do believe they will succeed in this venture. Lastly I am so happy Enigma are making videos on this game, it deserves all the exposure it can get - well done!

[@samargrewal929]

the T-64 is a prefect example of "boy this thing is way too advanced for it's time"

[@IOIFox]

I see you everywhere.

[@samargrewal929]

great work also fan fact the TP-K1 found on the T-72 is the same sight as the TP-2-49 but with a laser rangefinder and it's ballistic computer slapped on.

[@2BachShakur]

This game has the best particle effects I’ve ever seen. Explosions, sparks, smoke, debris, etc. all look so good.

[@IronHorse1854]

3:30 not knowing if the crew is dead and a fighting vehicle is truly neutralised or not is a bit frustrating in gameplay sometimes but it is realistic. Tanks don't burst into flames and the turrets blow off 100% of the time in real life. I read a lot of stories from infantrymen in WW2 describing approaching an apparently knocked out enemy tank to be a nerve wracking experience because they were never sure if it was truly dead or if the crew was just playing dead, maybe most of them are dead or injured but still able to shoot at you if you opened the hatch, etc. Sometimes it's obvious that a vehicle is knocked out, sometimes it's not so obvious.

[@MarketChange]

Yeah sometimes is frustrating but I have come to 2 ways of thought for this matter, one is if the turret doesn't move anymore then is probably knocked out, or when in doubt shooot until flames come out

[@joelmulder]

This is so cool, I never knew these sorta of rangefinders were used in tanks! This type of rangefinder is very common in analog manual focus cameras. I wonder who thought of the concept first, the camera manufacturers, or the military.

[@-few-fernando11]

Probably ships. Rangefinders like that were used in ships up to the end of WWII

[@Galf506]

Well apparently neither, it was civil engineering: "The first rangefinder telemeter was invented by James Watt in 1769 and put to use in 1771 in surveying canals. Watt called his instrument a micrometer, a term now used with a different meaning in engineering" Or possibly this one: "In 1778, Georg Friedrich Brander invented the coincidence rangefinder." "a device used to measure distances to remote objects. In those years, surveying was an important task and Brander delivered a substantial number of optical instruments, e.g. sextant, goniometer, leveling instrument and a predecessor of today's theodolite."

[@jansvoboda4293]

Not sure when it started to be used in cameras, but artillery from 1890s en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coincidence_rangefinder

[@marduk87]

First military use of the concidence rangefinder is indeed with the artillery - both ground and naval. Then it got into tanks when longer ranges and rangefinding became relevant for them.

[@aimesblack]

A lot of early rangefinders work like this first used on ships but you can also see the ports for the two lenses of the rangefinder on leopard 1 and 2k Turrets

[@wmouse]

Thank you thank you thank you for calling out tank interior modeling as a waste of developer resources.

[@TheTrenchcoatNinja]

that is such a cool way to solve the problem of ranging, so neat. also i completely agree with you on the "damn i wish SOME companies would model what matters and makes gameplay exciting rather than tedious." pendantic people are the bane of any sim dev. they demand feature creep hell

[@xXx_SpaceAce_xXx]

i like enigma showing us really cool games that many of us never heard of or forgot about them, all on my wishlist

[@johnnysize6271]

Imagine DCS and GHPC combined.

[@VynalDerp]

You were talking about WW2 online and how it suffers from lack of infantry when you're in a tank - if you own Red Orchestra: Ostfront (the OG Red Orchestra game), you can get Darkest Hour: Europe '44-'45 mod for free. It's got a ton of factions, maps, etc. and just like all RO games, many maps mesh close-quarters infantry combat with tank vs tank duels. Some maps are superior at this than others, but the majority of time you're in a tank it's a lot of fun and a lot of risk vs reward. There's an armoured mode that used to be a lot of fun, but now all of the maps are always underpopulated since they capped the server at less people. I'd definitely recommend checking it out if you haven't already, it's dated graphically but by far my favorite WW2 game in recent history.

[@foxalfa83]

Like the most missing feature in all tank games is truly 'SnowRunner-esk' terrain... many do great job of aiming and shooting, but movement always feels like it on dry lake bed

[@rossmum]

Extremely hard to do unless your entire game is built around it. Snowrunner can do it because that's the whole game. Trying to have decent armoured combat on top of that, along with other combat arms like infantry or air support, would be a tall ask even for a much larger team with a much bigger budget.

[@fabiolean]

Excellent point at the beginning of the video about only modeling things that add value to the gameplay. Sim developers could stand to have that bit plastered all over their office walls.

[@Enigma89]

Thx!

[@FalconAC]

Thank you for championing good sim gameplay!

[@themigmadmarine]

Looks like you need to toggle your subtitles off and on again, the subtitles for Russian crews not working right out if the box in this patch. Also, I assume you've tried the rante finder on the M60A1?

[@cagneybillingsley2165]

your description of why people play sim games is very accurate. i like learning about these systems first hand in an accurately modeled interactive environment. i look for sim elements in every other genre as well. i don't bother if it's just a fantasy cartoon that bears no resemblance to reality.

[@JokeFranic]

good base for tank combat (good mix of sim and simplicity),also agree it don't need interiors (you have steel beasts for full sim experience).

[@aletron4750]

its a good base but lacks indepth and varied missions, good unit controllability, or replayability.

[@sh60guy25]

WWIIOL was the best game for tank play because it was so difficult. SA was king. If your TC got killed your mission was over. The fidelity was also really good. Took a frontal hit in a Matilda and the transmission got stuck in 2nd gear. Took a hit in a Panhard and ran out of gas after all the fuel leaked out. Still watch TGTCWTF.

[@Rosaslav]

I hope they will never add PvP multiplayer, because all the balance criers are going to come in then, instead of focusing on gameplay experience.

[@antred11]

Agreed. Unit performance in the game should mirror reality as closely as possible. F00k balancing.

[@NoRegret08]

Sorry , off topic. I wonder if F4 Phantom will have IFF. Thanks !

[@chukuma4760]

It does

[@matty_lam_937]

Great vid! GHPC! Is certainly my favourite game at the minute, was so happy to finally see the first wave of Soviets arrive with the T-64A! I find the coincidence rangefinder very intuitive and prefer it vastly to the M60A1's! The 3BM32 really seems to cut through the NATO stuff too! Very excited to see the rest of the Soviets whenever they come, the GHPC devs are a really great team!

[@fenny1578]

12:00 It should be noted that it was very similar in Aces High 2 about 10 years ago, and still is today. The occasional loser who hides his tank in a bugged out building because Hitech hasn't fixed that exploit yet not withstanding. Tank battles often revolve around playing defense with your engine off and letting the sound of the enemy units (which you can make quite loud, of course) guide you to where they are. It was very very rare to end up in long range shooting matches or even really close range brawls because the winner was the fellow who was quieter and more patient. Nothing like encouraging not playing the game to give the player the feeling of victory. At least in AH, compared to WT, most tanks had real issues dealing with airborne threats, as well as having the storch available for spotting GVs. I think that was the best change they made in years when they added that little liaison bird and gave it extended vehicle spotting ranges. It really opened up the possibility of gameplay tactics that weren't really viable before. Sadly very few people fly the thing because it takes a special breed of crazy to fly around in a Cessna with an mg sticking out the back whispering sweet nothings into tankers headsets. Now go fix that L-39 spawn on Sukhumi for me baby, its the first spawner. :))))))))

[@David-vx4jq]

what are you using for a controller and how sensitive do you set it? I'm having trouble getting my turret to move like you do

[@Mightymoose02]

Wow, DCS World should learn from the explosions and smoke effects!

[@control_the_pet_population]

"ranged in correctly" was a very well placed bit of explanatory text... as all I heard was "ranged incorrectly".

[@peteypyotr8158]

They probably should've focused on "mastering" the game engine first. It's coded like a potato.

[@gaminglabrador5797]

seems similar to a naval range finder

[@Sethorion99]

I remember cranking my sound up in WW2OL to detect enemy tanks in the distance, and sappers running at my tank. It was great until they'd go prone and sneak up without making a sound. The sound of a satchel charge detonating on the tank was loud at normal volume, but at max it was unbelievably frightening. And yes you absolutely could hear enemy tanks turning their turrets. From quite a distance too.

[@Enigma89]

God that sound of the satchel going off was so annoying. Glad I am not the only one who can't unremember

[@Sethorion99]

@@Enigma89CL-CL-CL-CLAAAAANG

[@themastrofall]

Enigmoid

[@unfortunately_fortunate2000]

I've never seen a range finder like that, however I have seen exactly the same kind of setup as a focus on the lenses for my Nikon FE. in game I see very little difference between the M60's coincidence range finder and the T-64's, granted I found the T-64 to be a bit easier to use.

[@wongarnold2879]

Just use the stadia metric range finder at the bottom right

[@antred11]

Is the AI set to "idiot"? How do they keep missing from such close distances?

[@freakmusicaddict]

The biggest downfall of this game is still the AI. Both your team mates and the enemy. The AI still does the same dumb stuff they did in the Demo.

[@Enigma89]

I would guess that it makes sense to flesh that out more when all of the different pieces like infantry are in so they don't have to duplicate work

[@freakmusicaddict]

@@Enigma89 I hope they do. I know AI in video games is hard to do convincingly, especially in these kind of settings.

[@rossmum]

They're improving incrementally but it does take time. They're a lot less prone to turning their back to incoming fire now (though will still sometimes traverse their guns behind themselves if arty fragments or something get their attention) and they seem able to find their way past trees without becoming permanently stuck circling them now. As long as they keep improving each patch, they should get there.

[@antoninvenzl3772]

I whish this game came little bit earlier, I could save tons on time and money I put into War Thunder.. :)

[@shenyathewelder9695]

I'm glad they did rangefinders and not some dumb shit like "oooh it's too Smokey, your crew is high on gunsmoke" like IL-2. Genuinely hate IL-2 tank crew. Its controls are so overly complex and simultaneously so shit that it upsets me even though I quit the game after buying it. GHPC on the other hand is designed for humans to play it.

[@idiotgaming4701]

day 2 of yak52 for ecw request

[@triangleenjoyer]

yakfor will rise

[@seaharrierfrs1]

i support this

[@Doosteroni]

its spelled SOVL not soul

[@branbon2691]

I would disagree strongly that they are focusing on what matters. Adding more content doesn't mean much when it's over a very barebones tech demo. The AI and very limited mission constraints are the biggest thing holding it back from being fun. A mission editor like dcs or ARMA is also desperately needed to give this game longevity but at this stage it isn't even on the road map.

[@Enigma89]

It seems pointless to flesh out the AI so much when they haven't finished adding in the infantry yet which will totally change the entire game

[@igorcosta-hh2ud]

Did you play wharthunder 10years ago ? ( not moking you). Nowadays ppl complain about cas bc they can’t focus on ground battles without being bombed. I see no problem, there are AAA and SAM to use