when compared with TOAW's FiTE...

[Wikingus]

... I know I know, it's unfair. WiTE is a completely new beast, but I am a long-time TOAW player and WiTE looks a lot like FiTE, with some extra options thrown on top, and with much better graphics.

I'm kind of not sure whether to get the game or not. Can any fellow TOAW player convince me it's worth buying?

[ComradeP]

It doesn't have phased turns.

[Champagne]

The Fire in the East scenarios in TOAW had more unit counters than I cared to spend time with. From what I can see with WitE, this game will be more manageable, and more realistic because the design is focused on this campaign. That's my guess, anyway.

[Flaviusx]

Smokes it.

Note that virtually every tester in our group has both games. Every single one of us prefers WITE.

[Zovs]

I used to play TOAW a lot, after burn out I just let sit and went on to other things. When I started play-testing this last year I was totally blown away. IMHO WITE totally blows away TOAW, hands down.

Yes, I am biased since I have been bashing it for a year but the interface is elegant and the breadth and scope are like nothing else.

The game play in TOAW is pretty much always the same no matter what year or era. WITE is not, you don't know how many times I have done June 22 1941 either in a campaign game or one of the smaller scenarios and the game play is not the same, on top of that there are some subtle nuances in how to play the Axis or the Soviets based on year as well, all pretty intuitive if you have read operational combat books of the era.

Just one man's opinion.

[Dr. Foo]

They are working on a game play You tube vid should be out tomorrow. I love WitE I bought it yesterday have not stopped playing. IMO, FiTE is hindered by TOAW's limitations. It's not the fault of TOAW it's just cannot simulate everything and it forced players to incorporate house rules to overcome pitfalls in the game.
 
WiTE does one thing an done thing only it's war in the East! Everything is there down to the tiniest detail. The thought and attention to detail is amazing. It's like they made the Eastern Front war game people have been dreaming of for 40 years (perhaps more).
 
I cannot oversell this game, it's worth every penny. I am not saying this is the death of FiTE there will always be those who are dedicated to playing and perfecting that fine game. I played many hours of PBEM games but now there is a full programed and capable AI no more waiting days, sometimes weeks for a turn. Sure once I learn the game I will turn to PBEM but it's nice to be able to test things against a working AI.  
 
Just my two cents.  

[ComradeP]

As I'm doing my best to give honest answers, I might as well add the disclaimer that I just can't play TOAW anymore. I tried, but the phased turn system is just too cumbersome. The units that can keep returning in most scenarios are also extremely annoying. Kill an air group and presto! it's back a few days later.

[Flaviusx]

Yes, WiTE ruined TOAW for me as well. I simply can no longer play the game now.

[ComradeP]

Well, TOAW ruined TOAW for me, I had stopped playing long before I started testing. I had given the game a second chance too, but it didn't work out.

[Flaviusx]

I got many years of enjoyment out of TOAW, myself. But there's no going back to it.

[LuckyJim1010]

Hear Hear - played many hours of TOAW, mainly for the Modern scenarios but it all become a little samey.

Without wishing to digress but I have to ask. Anyone remember the Jeeps vs Tigers debate/arguement [:)]

[pharmy]

Having played Toaw and now tried this, but I have to say that I will return soon to Hoi3 Semper Fi (yeah its not a pure hex game). WIPT AE was great because it had a flexible economic model, and the naval/air combat in it is fantastic and I never felt like I was playing a hex game except in China (first hex game I played was I think called Rommel something in the 80s, but eventually their clunky handling got me off the genre). TOE and realism are great, but Hoi3 handles land combat fantastically well now, and it has the one great thing that that these games lack, - a relatively advanced AI delegation, and the OOB system (especially if you use one of the OOB editors) and this allows you to flexibly control hundreds of units (objective, general axis of attack, aggression level can all be defined).

Of course the naval aspect is horrible and it sucks playing Japan. Air units also not to useful in it, and the percentage strength instant of a proper ToA make it a non-proper/non-accurate hex based game). Combining these three games would make a great game with a proper balance between micromanagement and strategic play. But at a local level, Barbarossa, especially if you start in 41, and use a mod that gives a great balance is a fantastic with proper breakouts, salients, counter attacks. Not having turns, playing real time in multiplayer, makes for a fantastic fluid dynamic Barbarossa.

On a global level, the reality mod or some of the other ones are starting to get the global balance right, but try playing Germany 44 in Normandy, 42-43 in Russia (delegate the other fronts).

[Montbrun]

ORIGINAL: Wikingus

... I know I know, it's unfair. WiTE is a completely new beast, but I am a long-time TOAW player and WiTE looks a lot like FiTE, with some extra options thrown on top, and with much better graphics.

I'm kind of not sure whether to get the game or not. Can any fellow TOAW player convince me it's worth buying?

El Hefe had alot to do with the TOAW FitE Scenario - he can give you the details.

[von altair]

I've played TOAW a lot and enjoyed it. War in the East is musthave game for everyone who likes the genre. This game is like
mother of all previous strategy games, including TOAW. Well worth every "expensive" penny. You will play this game for years.
Hearts of Iron III and this game will stay in my computer very long time.

[jjax]

I liked TOAW tonnes as well. I would have never bought this game if it wasn't for my enjoyment of TOAW.

BTW, I actually like the phased turns and could never understand why so many people did not like them. For better or worst, It added an extra dimension of strategy that took some time to understand.

[JMass]

TOAW and WitE are not in direct competition but are complementary, imo. TOAW is an operational game, WitE is more strategical, I think that Kharkov 42 or 43, Uranus or Korsun play better with TOAW. Barbarossa, Fall Blau, The Destruction of AGC - or the whole campaign - play better with WitE: the first, the second or both it is a matter of tastes.

[Flaviusx]

I disliked the phases because they were tedious. I'm not particularly a micromanager, but even for me it was incredibly irritating having to figure out a way to maximize my pulse count. This chewed up an incredible amount of time and energy for little in return in realism. I regarded it as a not very good compromise between turn based and real time based games and managed to combine the worst of both worlds.

Mileage will vary, but this was clearly a wildly unpopular feature of the game. The design intent was laudable, the execution deplorable.

[JMass]

ORIGINAL: jjax
BTW, I actually like the phased turns and could never understand why so many people did not like them. For better or worst, It added an extra dimension of strategy that took some time to understand.

I like very much the phased turns and I subscribe what you wrote.

[Dr. Foo]

ORIGINAL: jjax

I actually like the phased turns and could never understand why so many people did not like them. For better or worst, It added an extra dimension of strategy that took some time to understand.

I liked them as well, at first I was clueless and carelessly attacking and burning turns then I learned how get more combat rounds per turn and once you get it, it's easy to do but still difficult to master.

Having multiple combat rounds in FiTE is critical to achieving any sort of Axis success.

[Lützow]

WitE vs FitE = depth vs breadth. Less counters but more complexity.