Tell me about AT!

[GBS]

Need some info before I buy.
How complex is this game?
Is this another TOAW? (I liked TOAW.)
If not how does it differ?
How much play time to complete a tipical scenario?
What about command and control and logistics?

[seille]

My tip. Read a bit in the forum here.
Read the AAR´s, too.
 
I´m not neutral enough and i don´t know TOAW 3.
Played the original TOAW for some weeks, but then i forgot it.
 
Including all the test i play AT now since more than 18 months nearly daily.
And it´s still fun. I don´t think i´ll touch a other wargame for a very long time.
 

[seille]

Time to complete scenario´s can differer a lot.
Question of mapsize and number of AI´s. AI, AI+ or AI++ ?
 
Most scenarios you can play several hours. On some PBEM´s i spent probably up
to 20 hours overall. No i think it was more. Nearly 70 turns of the 1939 scenario
which is a very complex one. 

[SMK-at-work]

ORIGINAL: GBS

Need some info before I buy.
How complex is this game?

Fairly...not so much as TOAW, more so than SC2 or CEAW

Is this another TOAW? (I liked TOAW.)

sort of but not quite [:)]

If not how does it differ?

It has some features that are a lot better than TOAW - it handles the strategic side of things that TOAW has to be fudged for, it allows units to be transferred between HQ's, new units and HQ's to be built, etc.

But the tactical aspects such as the combat model is more abstracted.

How much play time to complete a tipical scenario?

Depends on the scenario.....

What about command and control and logistics?

it has an interesting supply system - you produce supplies at some of your manufacturing plants/cities - each such plant/city feeds its units to a set HQ. HQ's and units subordinate to that HQ then "demand" supplies from it, and get what it can deliver.

I haven't gotten to all the intricacies yet, but it's a much better system than most, because supplies actually get used up - unlike most systems 9incl TOAW, SC2, CEAW) where you get a supply value for a hex and any number of units in that hex get exactly the same - which is always the max supply that the hex can deliver.

Ditto for new troops - they get produced, then funnelled straight to a set HQ. But from there you have to allocate them manually to new or existing units. there's a transport limit, and the further your production is from your HQ the fewer troops actually make it - the rest get caught in a backlog and keep trying (at least that's how I think it works....)

Command and control is fairly simple - combat units are allocated (subordinate) to HQ's - HQ's have staff points, and het more combat units they control the more staff they need. there's a staff rating for HQ's which is the % of required staff - this can be over 100% if you have more than required, and the staff rating affects combat performance of all subordinate units - including bonuses if over 100%.

Units can be x-fered betwen HQ's, but lose quite a lot of effectiveness when they do so.

So for the Sov's in 1941, for example, you have several cities feeding supplies and replacements into STAVKA HQ. All other HQ's are subordinate to STAVKA, so they draw their supplies from it. in my game vs teh AI I had STAVKA build some reserve armies around Moscow, while also feeding troops to Smolensk, Kiev and Kharkov. Those HQ's built new units to do the fighting.

Leningrad production went straight to the Leningrad HQ, which built up reserves around that city and crushed the Finns (I think the Finns need fortifications!!). similarly Kharkov production went straight to Kharkov, Kiev to Kiev and a couple of other cities sent it straight to nearby HQ's to avoid transport bottlenecks.

all in all it seems a pretty good system.

[leastonh1]

AT is a bit like chess in terms of complexity. It's very easy to learn and you can literally be up and running with a game in 20 minutes or less, with a basic understanding of what you're doing. As for becoming good with the game, having a complete knowledge of what's going on and to be able to beat the AI on its highest setting, particularly in one of the large, complicated, historical scenarios is going to take a lot longer! Then you have the option of playing against another person, which is always a challenge because people are a lot harder to predict. That's why this game is so good. The novice wargamers are catered for and really don't have any reason to be intimidated (Korsun Pocket is amazing, but still scares me!) and the Grognards (judging by the posts in here) are equally happy because they've started to tap into the amazing depth the game offers to those willing to take the plunge.
 
Scenarios can take an hour or days to complete I suppose. It depends on the size, how many players, whether they are human, AI or a mixture. You could potentially play a small random scenario in your lunch hour with beer and pretzels. Or, spend the next week playing a campaign sized scenario against several other people.
 
I've been playing the predecessor to AT since April 2005. It's a game that has never been off my PC since then and I did play it regularly until I got AT.
 
AT is similar to the old game in the same way that a Model T Ford is just like a Porsche. They are both cars and the similarities are there, but you have to look for them! All I can say is that AT is an order of magnitude above People's Tactics (PT) in every way possible. If I played PT for 2.5yrs and still enjoyed it, you can imagine the mileage I'll get out of this one!
 
I'm not unbiased and can confirm my membership of the fanboi club. Still, I don't admit to that "accolade" lightly and am very hard to please when it comes to wargames. AT is not perfect, but in all the years I've been playing games like this, it's as close as I've ever got.
 
Regards,
Jim

[freeboy]

AT, very different than Toaw3... It uses an build and fill out your unit type army structure which is great, and uniwque. Toaw3 gives you your units, and their components via the game engine and the scenario designer. as above the supply system is very differnent, Strategic warfar and navel gets modeled, not really in Toaw3. Even a complicated scenario turn in Toaw3 can be played in 10-15 minutes, where in FITE I have played 1.5 hours in the initially German invasion turns with my 1500 plus units.
I like them both, user interface is alot easier, more modern for AT. Do you own any Decisive Battles from SSG? It is more similar to this line, adding of course ar  robust design engine, hq supply industrial capacity etc.

A more indepth summery review by myself here: tm.asp?m=1598636

[Willburn]

I havent felt this exited about a strategic game since the panzer general series.