when compared with TOAW's FiTE...

[Templer_12]

All in all, WitE is the specialized game.
A valuable tool for specialists - no allround, use for all tool.

It is a scalpel for precise cuts and not a Swiss army knife!

[jjax]

ORIGINAL: Templer
It is a scalpel for precise cuts and not a Swiss army knife!

I think thats a good analogy, but thats the case for most scenarios in TOAW. It's just the nature of the beast that is TOAW.

[Zaratoughda]

If you get WitE, I believe you will find that you never play TOAW FitE (and the other TOAW east front scenarios at this scale) again.

There is simply no comparison.

Zaratoughda

[Panama]

ORIGINAL: Zaratoughda

If you get WitE, I believe you will find that you never play TOAW FitE (and the other TOAW east front scenarios at this scale) again.

There is simply no comparison.

Zaratoughda

Exactly. There is no comparing the two. One is specifically designed for one theater and was released 7 December 2010. The other was designed to be an all purpose design tool and was released in 1998 and re released by Matrix in 2006 as TOAW III. Apples and oranges.

[Zemke]

TOAW was too general, too same same. I found one of the best scenarios of TOAW to play was the Korean War scenario, the scale and scope seemed to fit the engine well, beyond that I found TOAW did not do large scale well, or very small scale well. TOAW was designed to be flexible and general in nature to have any chance of doing what it was designed to do. I like the comparison to tools Templer used. WitE is a one of a kind tool for one job, eastern front land combat. TOAW is, as Templer said, the Swiss Army knife of war games, does a lot of different things, none great, but good enough to get it done. When I reach into my war gaming tool box I want the best tool I got for the job.

[solops]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx
Smokes it.
Note that virtually every tester in our group has both games. Every single one of us prefers WITE.

Forget the designer notes and AARs, this is the strongest endorsement I have seen or could imagine.

[lparkh]

There's a lot of depth to these points. But since we know WITE is going to be done in west and africa it is more general then some arguments suggest. Maybe it is actually a grand operational WWII battle simulator of a fixed scale? Not just an east front engine.

[pionier]

Ouh, is Win7 better than WinVista ?

I think it is a bit too early to do more than just a few guesses. I don't know much about the combat system, how depth and how predictable it is! Next year when it is cheaper I will buy this game for christmas' special.

[SGHunt]

That takes some self-control!

[amatteucci]

ORIGINAL: JMass

ORIGINAL: jjax
BTW, I actually like the phased turns and could never understand why so many people did not like them. For better or worst, It added an extra dimension of strategy that took some time to understand.

I like very much the phased turns and I subscribe what you wrote.

Seconded.

Moreover, even after a cursory look, WitE looks (and, indeed, is!) very different from TOAW in two respects: 1) it's a stragetic game and not an operational game forced to function as a strategic one, 2) it's engine was custom-tailored to the Eastern Front (I know that Western Front and North Africa are in the pipeline but I'm sure that the game engine will be further modified to take into account the peculiarities of those fronts).

I think that WitE is a must buy for every wargamer that is an Eastern Front aficionado.

[ComradeP]

Never expected to see so many fans of phased turns in one thread, I sometimes got the impression that Norm Koger was the only one on the planet who liked his system. TOAW is good on paper, though, so I'm happy that many people enjoyed it much more than I ever could.

[solops]

ORIGINAL: JMass

ORIGINAL: jjax
BTW, I actually like the phased turns and could never understand why so many people did not like them. For better or worst, It added an extra dimension of strategy that took some time to understand.

I like very much the phased turns and I subscribe what you wrote.

Yes. I like the phased turns as well in spite of the peculiarities. I hope I will come to like WitE's oddities as well.

[Great_Ajax]

I did a ton of TOAW scenarios but never worked on the FiTE one. I loaded it up a few times and the unit density was just too high to be of any interest to me and it looked like too much work. Some of my works that I enjoyed the most like in 'West Front '44' were at the divisional scale with 10km/hex and thats why I like WiTE so much.

Trey

ORIGINAL: Brad Hunter

ORIGINAL: Wikingus

... I know I know, it's unfair. WiTE is a completely new beast, but I am a long-time TOAW player and WiTE looks a lot like FiTE, with some extra options thrown on top, and with much better graphics.

I'm kind of not sure whether to get the game or not. Can any fellow TOAW player convince me it's worth buying?

El Hefe had alot to do with the TOAW FitE Scenario - he can give you the details.

[Fastheinz]

As an old WiR player I have to say this is a great effort and should consume my life for a few years. Thank you all who made WitE possible![&o]

[Wikingus]

Well I went ahead and bought it so I guess you could say I was convinced. [:D]

[SlickWilhelm]

If this thread doesn't convince non-owners to purchase WitE, I doubt anything will. 

[Jonathan Pollard]

As someone who has neither game but who has the original TOAW and all of Grigsby's previous Eastern Front titles, I think my next purchase will be TOAW3. If WitE had daily turns like WitP AE, and/or a "wego" system, I would buy it in a heartbeat. It seems too contrived that one side would be able to conduct operations for an entire week without the other side being able to react. My understanding is that FiTE uses 2 turns per week, but I hope it won't be too difficult to edit the scenario into 1 or 2 days per turn.

[Oleg Mastruko]

Funny no one mentioned my favorite East Front TOAW scenario and that was DNO, Drang Nach Osten by Daniel Mc Bride....

Anyhow, not to repeat what others said before me, WITE is completely different beast. In my eyes, the biggest advantage is (IMO) great system for managing support units in WITE, which do not have to be represented as separate counters on the map anymore.

TOAW phased system - I actually liked it, even though I think it was designed with small to medium scenarios in mind. With TOAW people really REALLY pushed the system to the limit with some scenarios so big... I am sure Norm Koger never envisioned his system being used for Barbarossa, whole WW1 or any such monstrosity...

Finally, what killed TOAW for me, was absolutely dreadful, atrocious quality control when it comes to scenarios, both official and unofficial. I mean I could live with some scenario from some Internet dump being total crap, but when TOAW 3 came out, and carried 100+ scenarios with it, of which at least 80 were total BS that's when I realised this whole thing is more work (culling good scenarios from bad from utterly horrific) for my taste.

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: el hefe

I did a ton of TOAW scenarios but never worked on the FiTE one. I loaded it up a few times and the unit density was just too high to be of any interest to me and it looked like too much work. Some of my works that I enjoyed the most like in 'West Front '44' were at the divisional scale with 10km/hex and thats why I like WiTE so much.

Trey you were one of my absolutely favorite scenario designers in TOAW days, played your scenarios A LOT, I think I played some vs you in PBEM during testing.

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Never expected to see so many fans of phased turns in one thread, I sometimes got the impression that Norm Koger was the only one on the planet who liked his system. TOAW is good on paper, though, so I'm happy that many people enjoyed it much more than I ever could.

Well add me to the list of phased turn fans. They were great for what TOAW was initially intended to do, medium sized scenarios with player commanding forces up to 2-3 corps worth. In those scenarios, if designed WELL, phased system really added another layer of quality and strategy to the game.

Where phased system failed....?

a) When people started designing monster scenarios - phased turns were simply a nuissance in that case.

b) When time per turn was too short. 6 hour turns, with units having 4-5 movement points per turn? FAIL! But that's the design scenario problem not the problem with system as such.