Difference between this game and Operational Art of War?

[mantrain]

Hello, Has anyone played this game and operational art of war? just wondereing what the differences are?

[Barthheart]

ORIGINAL: mantrain

Hello, Has anyone played this game and operational art of war? just wondereing what the differences are?

Both are great games. TOAW is a little bit more hard core. AT is a little bit more flexible.

[EDGY]

TOAW was my favorite until I picked this one up... I found AT to be MUCH more flexible and intuitive.
 
Someday, somone is going to come up with an AI that can actually think... Until that day, I think both TOAW and AT  AI's are far better than anything else out there.
 

[henri51]

ORIGINAL: EDGY

TOAW was my favorite until I picked this one up... I found AT to be MUCH more flexible and intuitive.

Someday, somone is going to come up with an AI that can actually think... Until that day, I think both TOAW and AT AI's are far better than anything else out there.

I dunno, for me TOAW (and I have all versions) is micromanagement hell. AT is the most streamlined, and next best was Across the Dnepr (which I seem to have lost although I still have Korsun Pocket). Some Battles in Italy are good, but the full BII,BIN and Korsun Pocket are mostly stationary slugfests (like most TOAW scenarios).[>:]

There was ONE TOAW scenario (Nohoman I think) that had a lot of maneuver, but that was the only one that I can remember that was playable for me.

FWIW, BII has the best combat system, but whaddahell, Italy WAS a slugfest - which made it a sideshow in WW2.[:'(]

AT has a lot more in common with War in Russia (as discussed elsewhere) than with TOAW.

I'm thinking about going for the latest Kharkov game, which seems to have SOME back and forth wide open fighting.

Having said this, I am a proponent of maneuver warfare, so battles where one has to slug his way through an enemy line are not my thing...[8D]

Henri

Henri

[82ndtrooper]

ORIGINAL: henri51

ORIGINAL: EDGY

TOAW was my favorite until I picked this one up... I found AT to be MUCH more flexible and intuitive.

Someday, somone is going to come up with an AI that can actually think... Until that day, I think both TOAW and AT AI's are far better than anything else out there.

I dunno, for me TOAW (and I have all versions) is micromanagement hell. AT is the most streamlined,



Henri

Henri

I couldnt agree more

[EDGY]

Yes, I have also owned all the TOAW versions and honestly, I loved them all.  I didn't realize how laborious the turns were until I picked up AT.
Avalon Hill had a boardgame called Blitzkreig back in the '70s ( with terrain modifier charts, combat tables and yes, dice ).  Both TOAWIII and AT have versions of this game and, being a non-historical scenario, it is interesting how each engine approaches game.
In the historical scenarios they all have if-then-else modifiers, penalties and such that will force you into a somewhat historical timeline.(i.e. gotta start Barbarossa before fall' 41 or else! ).
Sometimes around 2am I like to sit down and play a marathon against the AI and one thing all these games have in common is that in order to make the AI harder to beat they have to halve your production or double the AI's. I think most games now are designed mostly for PBEM so there's no real effort to make a smarter AI.
Is it possible that the AI's are plenty smart but just can't match the sneakiness of the human mind?