Matrix Games Forums

Looks like a kiddy game to me. Slitherine is not known for making the kind of Grongard games i like. It say's it's been developed alot like panzer General. This means a Beer an Pretzel game thrown together quickly to capitalize on the Monster hit of WitE.

No thanks, i an having to much fun with Wite and WitW is on the way. I would recommend that we stay with WitE and continue offer input on that Ammazing game.

ORIGINAL: Uxbridge

Looks downright silly. Is this really a serious game?

+1. It seems more like Axis&Allies (very fun but simple game), not WITE.

I really don't care. There was once a heated argument that the use of NATO symbols is goofy and wrong for a World War 2 game - just because they are the symbols we all know, we agree they are "right" for the circumstances. Indeed, it took me a while to get used to the German World War 2 symbols in The Longest Day.

Of course, I was trained a decade ago to be a cultural anthropologist (to go along with my worthless MA in history), so that might just my own education induced brain damage.

ORIGINAL: Wild
Looks like a kiddy game to me. Slitherine is not known for making the kind of Grongard games i like. It say's it's been developed alot like panzer General. This means a Beer an Pretzel game thrown together quickly to capitalize on the Monster hit of WitE.

No thanks, i an having to much fun with Wite and WitW is on the way. I would recommend that we stay with WitE and continue offer input on that Ammazing game.

Slitherine and Matrix are just publishing/distributing the game, but they're not the developers. Without giving too much away, UOC uses a traditional CRT to resolve its combat. Say what you will about the graphics, but the rules and mechanics are no less 'kiddie' than any other Eastern Front tabletop wargame.

If you've ever played any of SSG's Decisive Battles series (Ardennes Offensive, Korsun Pocket, Battles in Italy/Normandy) or Battlefront series (Disaster at the Donets, Across the Dnepr), it's quite similar to that.

Besides, UOC and WITE won't necessarily be in direct competition; the scope of the two games are largely different.

I agree that a "lighter" game will be nice while waiting for the turn to arrive from ones opponent. One might even be tempted to try playing against the AI in such a case. But it mustn't come out too light. In the YouTube-video two disheartening factors seem to stand out. The first is the lack of stacking, which usually leads to a lot of compromises, where realism, as often as not, takes the main blow. In addition, it looks as if there no way to attack a single target from several hexes, which could be the other killer. This might lead into a stone-paper-scissors way of playing, where the overall feeling of military strategy might be replaced with the kind of think-pattern experienced in a card games. I haven't played all of the above mentioned games, but I don't think they have these deficiences.

But one should keep an open mind. Sometimes there's days of waiting bwtween our PBEM-turns of WitE and this game might just be the odd apple between two proper meals.

Sorry. Double post.

ORIGINAL: Uxbridge
The first is the lack of stacking, which usually leads to a lot of compromises, where realism, as often as not, takes the main blow. In addition, it looks as if there no way to attack a single target from several hexes, which could be the other killer.

Thanks for pointing these things out. The sprites and the relatively narrow campaign focus were strikes one and two, this is strike three, I'll definitely take a pass on this one.

Update: The limited scope made me disinterested in the game.
Sounds like a more detailed Panzer General.

error

ORIGINAL: Ketza


I almost killed a cat when I found him in the middle of a FITE set up that was waiting for the game attendees to arrive for one of our weekend wargamimg blow outs. He mainly devestated AGN and the Luftwaffe. He actually knawed on a Panzer division counter but it was still usable...

I played mainly with minatures in the 1970s and we often had to rely on conversions of airfix plastic figures. One lunchtime, my dog ate half my opponent's celtic army. My Romans were all metal so an easy win for me.

Luckily my opponent was a dog lover so did not mind too much..

ORIGINAL: Uxbridge

Looks downright silly. Is this really a serious game?

One of the things I love with WitE is the map. Each hex seems unique.

+1

Seems like a beer and pretzel kinda of game.

ORIGINAL: gradenko_2000

ORIGINAL: jzardos
Forget $5 for that game, you'd have to pay me to play it.

With Matrix as the publisher, I'm not holding out much hope on the price dropping to anywhere near that. Maybe if it was on Steam.

[:D]+1

ORIGINAL: Ketza

I hate sprites. Does it have a Nato symbols option?

+1 I couldnt get beyond the first screen shot because of the sprites. Looks too much like Monopoly with panzers.

Looks too much like Monopoly with panzers.

That's funny!..[:)] would make for an interesting game if they did include that.

Like most of the posts here it's not what I would like but the other thread about comparing WITE with WIP AE did get my interest in that. If my general staff needs a break from the long Russian winter I may transfer them to the Pacific to warm up a little.

ORIGINAL: jomni

Update: The limited scope made me disinterested in the game.
Sounds like a more detailed Panzer General.

I was turned off by PzG, I got it as bundleware and never even loaded it on a HDD.

ORIGINAL: pompack

ORIGINAL: Ketza

I hate sprites. Does it have a Nato symbols option?

+1

+10

ORIGINAL: PeeDeeAitch

I really don't care. There was once a heated argument that the use of NATO symbols is goofy and wrong for a World War 2 game - just because they are the symbols we all know, we agree they are "right" for the circumstances. Indeed, it took me a while to get used to the German World War 2 symbols in The Longest Day.

What's become known as standard "NATO Symbology" has it's origins in pre-WWII and WWII U.S. Army Field Manuals and US Army doctrinal publications. The little rectangles with cross-bars for infantry, tread for armor, ball for artillery (etc. etc.) was in common use -- at least by the US Army -- prior to WWII. To me, it's seems completely legit from a historical perspective to use NATO symbology in a WWII wargame. For example -- below is a scematic taken from the 1942 edition of FM 7-40 Infantry field Manual, Rifle Regiment.

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/97 ... yfrom.jpg/


German symbology like that used in Avalon Hill's old boardgame "The Longest Day" would also work and -- historically speaking -- seem completely legit for a WWII game. I agree that the German symbology does take a little getting used to -- at least for me -- if you grew-up on US-Army\NATO-Symbology.

I think standard NATO symbology sort of got engrained into wargames yars ago as a result of Avalon Hill, SPI\S&T, GDW (and etc.).

For people loving games with more control about everything I'd recommend Advanced Tactics Gold Edition. I am having a lot of fun with PBEM games there...