I remember hearing about STW - I came to it rather late - and asking on the comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical usenet whether it was too good to be true. What I'd heard of the real time battles and the turn-based campaign map just sounded implausibly good. This was at a time when turn-based wargames with hexagon maps were still ruling the roost - PG, SP, TOAW, EF etc. I probably came to it rather late because it sounded like something sold by a dodgy double glazing salesman - just too good a deal.

It took a lot of time for some people - the war-historical usenet group, for example - to realise it was the real deal. I think they were put off by the civ-style building aspects and the geishas (STWs equivalent of the flaming pigs or cannon-elephants). It was probably only with MTW that people realised that under the hood there was a battlefield model that arguably was superior to any other computer game or indeed tabletop wargame.

STW did have great atmosphere, but for me it was the battles that did it. That combination of "realistic" modelling - lots of combat factors, morale modifiers etc - plus the excitement and pace of real time. I still remember the hidden rebel warrior monks at Yammato pouring out of a wood into the flank of my advancing army and cutting it to pieces. I could not react fast enough. That kind of thing could never happen in a standard turn-based hex-based wargame. Nor would you experience it in the same visceral way if it did.