WAW vs WIE

[David Hansen]

I've put many hours into the WIE title. WAW has a much larger footprint...but for an Axis player...is this just as "good" as WIE? Be interested in comments from those who have experience with both titles...plus/minus of each. TXS.

BTW-I see the TRP mod by Lothos is not for single...correct?

[Bo Rearguard]

I suppose it depends on your level of interest in Japan's War. There is a lot more naval and amphibious combat when playing as Japan. However, at start Japan's primary land front in China is a slog due to poor terrain, partisans and supply. You could put Japan on AI control but that makes winning the game a tougher proposition since Japan doesn't match the Allies in resources. You also have to decide how much effort you want to put into saving Mussolini's possessions in East Africa. Overall, the European half of the map can feel more constricted when you're used to the WIE map since everything is at a different scale in WAW.

No I don't think an AI has been written yet for the TRP mod.

[nnason]

I prefer WIE over WAW for the following reasons, which may or may not apply due to individual preferences.
1. WIE does a great job in the simulation of Blitzkrieg. The changes in the hex size and the date methodology make WAW Barbarossa into a slog.
2. While the naval rules in WIE are "OK" for the Atlantic war, the same rules for the Pacific are wanting.
3. WAW is too big and takes too much time for my liking. "World in Flames" and Grigsby's "War in the Pacific" might be better choices for monster games.


I love the work done on the Strategic Command series and have all the games but WIE is my favorite.