But, soon I got used to it and TOAW III grew on me.
This is one distinguishable aspect of TOAW. As an operational scale game it doesn't present the same appeal as tactical level games and the first steps, before one get used to the game system, can make it seem arbitrary (at least for me it seemed), but after you get used... well, just give yourself enough time and you'll see. There is a reason why Toaw is around after all those years (and for me this maturity is one of it's greatest advantages) against dozens of other more modern titles with 3d graphics, WEGO system, no hexes, etc.
In fact, I can't stand this kind of argument: 'The way wargames will be played in the future: no more hexes, real time...' etc. Let us all play Close Combat then: 'no more counters', 'no more strongly abstracted concepts'. I don't see old Combat Mission players satisfied with what was done with the new, 'more modern' version; nor would chess players be happy with a WEGO chess variant.
Don't understand me wrong... I'm not against those concepts, I just think a game doesn't have to use them necessarily. Well, but I don't know why I'm talking about those things; it has nothing to do with this thread... let me shut up.