Matrix Games Forums

I always felt it was ironic that the game was called the Operational "Art" of war, when you had to plan your turns with scientific accuracy to avoid the dreaded "turn ends after 1st combat phase" problem.

No such problems with WITE, as it does make you think much more realistically about your actions.

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

I always felt it was ironic that the game was called the Operational "Art" of war, when you had to plan your turns with scientific accuracy to avoid the dreaded "turn ends after 1st combat phase" problem.

No such problems with WITE, as it does make you think much more realistically about your actions.

Thankgod...

ORIGINAL: Pford

Well at least it's not going to have, unlike TOAW, those rivers running down the middle of hexes. A fatal flaw, from my perspective.

Hi!
This was a try to make hex side rivers in TOAW.
GoranW

Turn planning was quite complicated in TOAW.  And rivers running through a hex and not along its edge was strange to me. 
I haven't read all the zillions of posts here but the one thing I heard early in the development of FitE that turned me off a bit that may be changed (but I doubt it); was the method for breaking down Divisions.  FitE breaks down Divisions the same as TOAW; its divided into equal regiments with all equipment, weapons and men equally allocated.  That's OK in some situations but there are others where you'll want your armored regiment to be separate from your infantry regiments.  I would rather you have the option.  There are cases where armor can't move through the same terrain an infantry unit can.  ... if this has changed please forgive, I'm just an occassional lurker here ... too much time spent playing BftB and AtD.  [8D]

ORIGINAL: goranw

This was a try to make hex side rivers in TOAW.

Like putting lipstick on a pig.[;)] Putting rivers down the middle of hexes is, imo, inexcusable for any wargame above the level of tactical. This gives rise to all kinds of distortions, not to mention the clumsy aesthetics. If a unit bestriding a river attacks another unit on the same river, does it suffer a penalty?

That said, Kroger's games had (have?) a lot of beguiling qualities mixed in with truly head scratching design decisions.

It seems that nobody liked the way TOAW handled movement/turn ending. I thought it was just me, but it appears to be wildly unpopular.

I disliked a number of the basic features of TOAW 3, primarily the "truly head scratching design decisions" Pford mentioned, which is why I'm not playing it anymore.

ORIGINAL: pvthudson01

Well it is 2010, not 1999. that alone is enough to answer this question

I've been away on business and was grateful to see all the replies here, which have been a great help. I'll be buying the game for sure.

Just one comment to pvthudson01 - trust me, I have purchased a lot of bad games between 1999 and 2010, mostly in 2008,9 and 10. In fact, I often find myself going back to the older games. They don't have the fancy graphics, but many of them have better design and even superior AI.

I have purchased a lot of bad games between 1999 and 2010, mostly in 2008,9 and 10. In fact, I often find myself going back to the older games. They don't have the fancy graphics, but many of them have better design and even superior AI.

Agree with that. [:)]