On the fence

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

On the fence

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> On the fence

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

On the fence - 12/2/2007 8:06:02 PM

thefunction

Posts: 6
Joined: 12/2/2007
Status: offline

I'm kind of on the fence between this and TAOW3 kind of leaning towards AT. This kind of hinges on mod ability of units for the creation of an O.G.E.R./G.E.V. in WW2 alternate history scenario.

Is it possible to create a "super unit" a unit that gets multiple attacks at different ranges?

Is it possible to have a units abilities degrade as far as number of attacks/movement with use (supply?) and with damage?

Can terrain affect a units movement / attackability?

Thanks in advance

Post #: 1

RE: On the fence - 12/2/2007 10:22:57 PM

IRONCROM

Posts: 679
Joined: 8/19/2007
From: Las Vegas, Nevada
Status: offline

HMMM.
I think I would answer that: NO,YES,YES.
As far as comparison between AT and TOAW 3.
I would say if you have ever owned any of the TOAW's than you should go for AT, since all the TOAW's are pretty much the same thing.
If you have never owned any of the TOAW's than it's a tougher choice I'd say.
Now I can say that if your the type of Wargamer that also likes a good game of civilization or some simular type of game, then AT is probably your game.

(in reply to thefunction)

Post #: 2

RE: On the fence - 12/2/2007 10:50:27 PM

thefunction

Posts: 6
Joined: 12/2/2007
Status: offline

Hehe in general I prefer (war)games (tacops 4, combat mission, and steel panther tend to be my favorites) with no unit production (tactical mostly I suppose, atleast when it comes to computers. When it comes to dorking it up with cardstock, playability (usually) demands a slightly larger scale), but the editability (is that a word?) of AT has me pretty intrested. Would be kind of hard to do the scenerio I have in mind without a "unit" having multiple "weapons platforms" to use in a single turn against other units.

I kind of wish Steve Jackson would realease actual computer versions of some of his out of print games, but thats getting way way way off topic.

< Message edited by thefunction -- 12/2/2007 10:51:28 PM >

(in reply to IRONCROM)

Post #: 3

RE: On the fence - 12/2/2007 11:20:07 PM

IRONCROM

Posts: 679
Joined: 8/19/2007
From: Las Vegas, Nevada
Status: offline

Well, AT does have a more flexable scenario editor than TOAW 3.
I can see how you would be on the fence here though...Sounds like you like it hardcore and TOAW is hardcore.
AT may surprise a lot of people with some really hardcore scenarios though once all those scenario designers figure out the editor.
Have a look at this scenario.
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1627657

(in reply to thefunction)

Post #: 4

RE: On the fence - 12/2/2007 11:46:04 PM

PDiFolco

Posts: 1200
Joined: 10/11/2004
Status: offline

Thefunction,
Game systems with various weapon platforms are mostrly tactical, you won't find this in AT neither TOAW nor any other operational-strategic game I have in mind, because they simulate days of combat by many units/soldiers, not shot-by-shot depiction of battles.
Whatever, I second Ironcrom, go for AT if you have a previous TOAW version. Else it's more debatable, TOAW is more realistic, detailed and has tons of historical scenarios, AT is more fun and varied, has random games and pbem with up to 10 players, but scenarios are currently not very historical, even if they do a good job at capturing the operational/strategic challenges of the depicted theatre.

(in reply to IRONCROM)

Post #: 5

RE: On the fence - 12/3/2007 12:13:47 AM

thefunction

Posts: 6
Joined: 12/2/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco

Thefunction,
Game systems with various weapon platforms are mostrly tactical, you won't find this in AT neither TOAW nor any other operational-strategic game I have in mind, because they simulate days of combat by many units/soldiers, not shot-by-shot depiction of battles.
Whatever, I second Ironcrom, go for AT if you have a previous TOAW version. Else it's more debatable, TOAW is more realistic, detailed and has tons of historical scenarios, AT is more fun and varied, has random games and pbem with up to 10 players, but scenarios are currently not very historical, even if they do a good job at capturing the operational/strategic challenges of the depicted theatre.

Well yes I was aware of the scale, but with a little imagination and creative editing it could work, with the multiple platforms in a "unit". In an sense you could think of it as a Division acting as a single unit against brigades without using a stack of chits. I guess you could look at it the idea I want to emulate in the system isn't exactly at a tactical level to be honest (atleast not in a WW2 or even modern combat sense of the word, anyone who has played OGRE or GEV will tell you that), but the idea of a David(s) Vs Goliath scenario greatly intrests me.

(in reply to PDiFolco)

Post #: 6

RE: On the fence - 12/3/2007 2:18:49 AM

Twotribes

Posts: 6929
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline

You could then recreate this by making your own subformations with varied ranges and power. A "division" can have 8 subformations, think of them as weapon systems if you like. So each UNIT could have up to 8 weapon systems.

(in reply to thefunction)

Post #: 7

RE: On the fence - 12/3/2007 2:38:21 AM

thefunction

Posts: 6
Joined: 12/2/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

You could then recreate this by making your own subformations with varied ranges and power. A "division" can have 8 subformations, think of them as weapon systems if you like. So each UNIT could have up to 8 weapon systems.

Hmmm but these sub formations are in the same chit right?

(in reply to Twotribes)

Post #: 8

RE: On the fence - 12/3/2007 7:39:05 PM

PDiFolco

Posts: 1200
Joined: 10/11/2004
Status: offline

Well you can do much with the game editor, but if you're really wanting a sci-fi tac game you'd better get one instead of AT, which is an operational WW2 themed game !

If I want a sports car I don't look a SUV catalog to see how I can change the engine and remove the roof to make it a sports car...

(in reply to thefunction)

Post #: 9

RE: On the fence - 12/3/2007 7:44:46 PM

rickier65

Posts: 14231
Joined: 4/20/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thefunction

quote:

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

You could then recreate this by making your own subformations with varied ranges and power. A "division" can have 8 subformations, think of them as weapon systems if you like. So each UNIT could have up to 8 weapon systems.

Hmmm but these sub formations are in the same chit right?

Yes what you are calling "chits" are called units in the game. They are actually just containers for items they hold, called subformations. each unit holding up to 8 sub formations.

Rick

(in reply to thefunction)

Post #: 10

RE: On the fence - 12/3/2007 11:03:32 PM

thefunction

Posts: 6
Joined: 12/2/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco

Well you can do much with the game editor, but if you're really wanting a sci-fi tac game you'd better get one instead of AT, which is an operational WW2 themed game !

If I want a sports car I don't look a SUV catalog to see how I can change the engine and remove the roof to make it a sports car...

I'd say that its an abstract war game with a world war 2 skin applied to it. There is nothing, that ties it to world war 2 except the initial offering of scenarios/units as most every variable of a unit and the world at large are editable there is nothing stopping you from Zombie Nazies vs Space invaders except a bit of work and imagination. Heck look at the tutorial for unit creation in the mod forum, someones working on a starship troopers style game for the system.

< Message edited by thefunction -- 12/3/2007 11:06:51 PM >

(in reply to PDiFolco)

Post #: 11

RE: On the fence - 12/3/2007 11:50:22 PM

seille

Posts: 2134
Joined: 6/19/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thefunction
Heck look at the tutorial for unit creation in the mod forum, someones working on a starship troopers style game for the system.

Nobody is working on it (unfortunately). Tom just wanted to show how to make a new unit set, what to look at etc.
A tutorial for coming scenario designers. "How to make units from scratch" was the title.

(in reply to thefunction)

Post #: 12

RE: On the fence - 12/4/2007 4:21:02 AM

Panzeh

Posts: 155
Joined: 4/4/2005
Status: offline

I think OGRE would probably be doable but some of it would be lost with the opposition being unable to target specific OGRE subsystems.

(in reply to seille)

Post #: 13

RE: On the fence - 12/4/2007 6:25:08 AM

Twotribes

Posts: 6929
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzeh

I think OGRE would probably be doable but some of it would be lost with the opposition being unable to target specific OGRE subsystems.

Actually you can designate what a sunformation is MOST likely to attack. So set the specific subformation to attack a set subformation and make it unlikely it will not attack it if present.

(in reply to Panzeh)

Post #: 14