Matrix Games Forums

Having a tough decision here. Basically the same games but I prefer the building, navy and air style of Commander Europe at War more. Europe at War plays really fast and the amphibious assaults and such work as does the naval game.

However I feel that Time of Wrath may be a bit more in depth for me. I think the thing that could swing it is if naval landings and such work in Time of Wrath and how easy they are to do, as well as how airpower works in the game.

What do people feel about the comparison of these two games? I was looking at Strategic Command II also but decided to rule that one out after less than stellar run ins with BattleFronts customer support

P.S.

Yes I tried the demo but could not figure out naval or airpower on a whim like in Commander Europe at War. Even with the demo I was looking to get other users perspective on the game without resorting to the demo

Thanks

The air combat has been deeply redesign in first patch (and demo is made with unpatched version), so the experience is a little bit different.

The greatest difference between those two games is a scale of the game. ToW plays on div/corps level and CEaW plays at army/corps level.


If you are interested in Naval battles and amphibious assaults operations, you might take a look at recently released Storm over the Pacific.

In response to a similar question I posted here

tm.asp?m=2239571

My general answer would be that both are worth buying, but that doesn't really answer your question.

In making comparisons with CEAW I would suggest comparing ToW (with the recent patches and the addition of a number of brilliant unit and map graphics mods) with the CEAW mod Grand Strategy (though it is a mod in name only and could fairly be considered to be CEAW 2, at least until CEAW2 is released)

If I had to choose one of the two, based on play time I would go with CEAW, but my next purchase would be ToW.

If your choice is down to limited play time I would again go with CAEW as you will get chance to play more games of it as a full campaign will be less than half the number of turns.

If you are looking for a board wargame experience (which I was) done well on a computer with a fairly competent AI opponent then ToW is probably better.

Again funds willing I'd suggest buying both (and they will still combined cost you less than a lot of the more recent releases)

I've got both. Tough call.
I play TOW more.
It's only going to come down to personal preference.
But I think TOW wins for me. As I think it handles land battles a little better.
(Combined attacks in TOW, vs individual unit attacks).
CEAW does naval MUCH better, running wolf packs against convoys is a hoot.
TOW allows you to play any country, and any combination of countries.
-hope this helps.

If you are interested in Naval battles and amphibious assaults operations, you might take a look at recently released Storm over the Pacific.

Yeah I am not a big pacific guy, I was just hoping that you could amphibious assault say England with Germany and such. Has that been fixed up and clear to understand?

I DO like the smaller scale. I may have to get TOW. The thing I dont like about CEAW is the large scale.

by cleared up I mean is it as easy as loading troops onto a transport and moving them?

I

f you are looking for a board wargame experience (which I was) done well on a computer with a fairly competent AI opponent then ToW is probably better.

Yes

Be sure and check out the AARs to see some of the ways the game plays out. As the Allies in my close-to-over AAR I can assure you the invasion of Great Britain is a real worry. ToW for me is a direct successor to board games. I loved them, and I love ToW.

Chuck

OK cool that sounds like a winner then

I'd say:

CEAW for multiplayer, it's fast and easy, TOW still has too many problems in PBEM...

TOW for single player, CEAW's AI does not exist. It's so terrible it's unplayable.

Yeah I am primarily interested in Single player boardgame aspects