Is this a good game ?

[wallas]

I own and play both War in the East, and War in the West by Gary and many other hex games and enjoy them very much. What I am looking for in this game is a period accurate game that plays easy.I do not want another time sink for my hours and if I want detail the above mentioned would satisfy my hunger. Is it a Balanced Game which is not biased to historical accuracy but biased to being a balanced game that any side could win ? Would this be an accurate observation of this title from you guys who own it ?

[battlevonwar]

Tough question, I would say that War in the East and West is something I cannot answer on well. I played Op Barbarossa and that's fair in historical accuracy. This is a little more open as far as strategic options. Hence Strategic Command. Meanwhile the games you mention lock you a little bit into doing precisely what was done in history but in your own way. I would definitely say the feel of a hexagon WW2 war game is there entirely though.

Personally it's entertaining and you can utilize a lot a lot more tactical and strategic options than in rigid wargames.

After practice a game turn takes me 10 minutes via PBEM, not a time sink at all.

[elmo3]

It's certainly much easier to learn and play than either Grigsby title. The trade off for that is more abstraction. Check out some of the AAR's here and look on Youtube for gameplay videos. That way you can form your own opinion.

[wallas]

ORIGINAL: elmo3

It's certainly much easier to learn and play than either Grigsby title. The trade off for that is more abstraction. Check out some of the AAR's here and look on Youtube for gameplay videos. That way you can form your own opinion.

I have been now I am wanting your opinion [X(]

[battlevonwar]

You feel like you are in WW2 if you play historically and you can. I have enemy troops at the gates of Stalingrad and I'm encircling the 6th Army. I am however overextended and did not prepare proper fortifications in front of Moscow so my opponent has succeeded in a '42 version of Operation Typhoon...meanwhile US lendlease tanks have arrived in Egypt to help along the British to Destroy Rommel. Game over... Totally worth it! Unless you're squeezed for cash, buy. It is grand strategy mind you. So weird things can and do happen... do not expect predictable outcomes always!

[FF_1079]

It's an engrossing game, because you aren't focused on "micro mechanics and rules", but on developing and executing national level strategies for your armed forces. You can play the game straight up ( I recommend so for the first play through ) and follow most of the historical choices made by whichever alliance or nation you choose. You can try out some of the historical "what if's" that have been discussed since the 1950's - Sea Lion, Spain or Turkey joining the Axis, etc. You can even try some serious out of the box stuff, as Germany, attacking the Soviet Union BEFORE taking France. It is very replayable, with many mods available for alternative types of gameplay.

The AI is competent, even crafty in operational situations - grand strategy exposes some of the flaws endemic in trying to counter wily human beings - but it still plays the game adequately. It is worth the VERY reasonable purchase price, and check out he mods section after some playthroughs to extend the game value and experience.

[vonik]

I can say that I am expert in WitE and I posted a few strategy guides for SC so that I am quite familiar with both .
First to say is that those 2 games are not similar at all even if both use hexes

The biggest difference is the map size . WitE plays in USSR while SC plays in whole Europe, Africa, Atlantic and NA .
From that follows that the scale of the map and the unit size is much bigger in SC . WitE plays with hundreds of units, SC with dozens . You have régiments in WitE where you have army corps in SC .
The whole micromanagement of WitE doesn't exist in SC .

First corollary is that SC is much faster . A turn in WitE may take 1-2 hours, in SC 10 - 20 minutes .
Second corollary is that SC is more strategy oriented . You have to balance your forces over 4 theaters (West, East,Africa and Atlantic) . You have to manage navies as well as ground forces . You have to do research .
Third corollary is that SC allows very large variations in the "what if" compartment while WitE stays necessarily very close to what happened historically .
Fourth corollary is that SC is relatively balanced (more so than WitE) - both sides may win even if there is a certain bias to Allied because of the massive US industrial production .
So let's say that both sides may win but it is much harder for the German player to win .

Now SC uses scripted events which follow strictly history but they can be edited and you don't need to follow them all the time .
So yes, there is historical accuracy in SC but you have often the option to refuse to take a historical decision . F.ex Should Italy DoW Greece ? You may say yes and follow history . But you may say no too .

Finally as a conclusion I would say that SC is quite similar to Decisive Campaign but has more complexity and more historical accuracy .
And like other said, it is easy and fast to learn to play SC even if becoming strategically skilled (especially with Germany) may take quite a few games against human opponents
Of course like in WitE a human will always beat the AI .

[freeboy]

MY SIMPLE ANSWER
GREAT GAME own both GG titles and they are gathering dust, meanwhile this is enjoyable against both ai and a HUMAN!!!

[gwgardner]

All of the positives mentioned above, plus the mods that are coming out are outstanding. A+ for me, and based upon your criteria, I think it's exactly what you're looking for.

[dox44]

i would say no in context with what you wrote. SCWW2 is a great game.

i own WitE, WitW, and WitP. I play all 3 against AI only. top shelf games all the way.

i think you would be disappointed.

[Titan]

I own both WITE and WITW by gary, Love them both, i love SC3 as well as as i sometimes dont feel like spending huge amounts of time on detail. Look at it this way.. Your at a restuarant and any good main meal is always well complmented by a nice desert

[wallas]

Thanks all for the feedback and purchased the game and the simplicity and abstraction is very refreshing.

[Happycat]

My opinion as an old grognard who has played war games since the early 1970's, and loved the complexity of games such as WIF, Fire in the East etc. and who still enjoys computer renditions of the same complexity is that SC is:

(a) not a time sink
(b) not a waste of time
(c) tons of fun

and
(d) infinitely replayable.

I think you would be pleased if you were to add it to your collection.

[vonik]

ORIGINAL: Happycat

(d) infinitely replayable.

I don't agree .
Having an editor does not make a game infinitely replayable . Boosting research or changing the numbers of units or any other parameter (or even, God forbid, tinker with the AI) doesn't mean that it is replayable .
The simplicity of the game comes with a price - it becomes soon "been there done that" .

What I would say is that it is infinitely editable/moddable .
But the majority of players (to which I belong too) is not interested by editing or modding . They just want to play a game .

[Seminole]

ORIGINAL: vonik

ORIGINAL: Happycat

(d) infinitely replayable.

I don't agree .
Having an editor does not make a game infinitely replayable . Boosting research or changing the numbers of units or any other parameter (or even, God forbid, tinker with the AI) doesn't mean that it is replayable .
The simplicity of the game comes with a price - it becomes soon "been there done that" .

What I would say is that it is infinitely editable/moddable .
But the majority of players (to which I belong too) is not interested by editing or modding . They just want to play a game .

Nice thing about the Internet is you can play with mods made by others.

I've played Grigsby games since Second Front, and found this game plenty of fun. I took a new job a year ago and welcomed a second child to the world, so I don't mind the level of abstraction and reduced complexity. Still love (and miss) WitE and WitW, but have been enjoying solo and multiplayer in this title without the degree of commitment I demanded of myself in the Grigsby titles.
Dollars to hours enjoyed this game is a no brainer.

[Happycat]

Of course not all will agree but I feel the game is infinitely replayable, especially in pbem because of the plethora of strategies that can be tried, the ability to play different people who also will employ different strategies, the mods and the fact that new vistas will sooner or later come into view. Look at SC2 which started with Europe and then went Pacific, Global, AOD and so on. It's great to have a game available where one can reasonably hope to finish in one's lifetime [:D]

[vonik]

To avoid misunderstandings .
I did say that the game is worth the money and that I had fun with it (after all I did pay it too) .
It is just that after a dozen of PBEM it starts to look more and more like the same thing over and over - e.g most variations one could try are actually far inferior to the one or two "standard" strategies .
Latest end 41 you always know who has already won and why so that everything that comes after end 41 feels somehow useless .

[Szilard]

ORIGINAL: vonik

Latest end 41 you always know who has already won and why so that everything that comes after end 41 feels somehow useless .

IMO the basic prob is that this was historically the case, so no big surprise that it's true of the game. Strategically, WW2 in Europe is kind of dull after around that date - mainly a matter of grinding down the Axis or slowing down the grind, without much scope for real high-level strategy except at the margins.

[vonik]

ORIGINAL: Szilard

ORIGINAL: vonik

Latest end 41 you always know who has already won and why so that everything that comes after end 41 feels somehow useless .

IMO the basic prob is that this was historically the case, so no big surprise that it's true of the game. Strategically, WW2 in Europe is kind of dull after around that date - mainly a matter of grinding down the Axis or slowing down the grind, without much scope for real high-level strategy except at the margins.

This .

[IrishGuards]

maybe wee awl just learing the game at our curve eh'
and nay yours, but then again
maybe a few games may change your limited scope.

[:-]
IG