Page 1 of 1

Is this "classic" version better then the newer version?

Posted: Sat May 02, 2026 3:14 pm
by Alpha77
I was watching "Lets Play" series from the new version of WW1 but for some reason it seems I liked thie classic version more. Esp when it comes to looks (or perhaps the lets play guy used some other graphics then the original for his new version).
What are the main 5 differences from classic to the new version? Thanks... :idea: :?:

Re: Is this "classic" version better then the newer version?

Posted: Mon May 04, 2026 8:54 am
by BillRunacre
There are so many differences it is hard to know where to begin, or how to even list them all.

Most are not visual, although the switch to hexes should be immediately apparent, the changes are mainly aspects that will only be noticed through playing, e.g. de-select a unit after moving/attacking with it, and if it has not yet used all its movement or attacks, you will be able to return to it and continue moving/attacking with it.

Changes within the game engine, and to the features within it, enable so much more versatility and detail that while they do not make the game more complicated for the player, they do provide much more depth and realism to the game.

Cut off units are also more susceptible to suffering losses from desertion, fought over resources will decrease in strength over time, units will now retreat...

There's still a lot to be enjoyed with Classic, so if you like it, play it. Then if you reach the point where you're looking for something else, consider the newer versions.

Re: Is this "classic" version better then the newer version?

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2026 8:44 am
by Alpha77
BillRunacre wrote: Mon May 04, 2026 8:54 am There's still a lot to be enjoyed with Classic, so if you like it, play it. Then if you reach the point where you're looking for something else, consider the newer versions.
Yes even if just for curiosity - how they compare - I will buy a new version (i just wait for a sale on GOG or Matrix shops :mrgreen: ) to compare it. I also bought another classic at GOG, WW2 and for the price this is also good. But i guess the classic WW1 is the most refined classic as it has more features then the classic ww2 (like the better "battle planner" at bottom of screen or more statistics etc) :idea:

Q: Seems this classic WW2 from GOG has 3 seperate "DLCs"? Patton, Pacific and War and Weapons or so?
Or which one of those is the "base game" :shock: :?:

Can you also link or post a timeline of the games releases? I would bet that WW1 is the latest and best one (from classic series) right? I know the latest 2 new ones are korea and civil war but older then this i dont know timeline :(

Re: Is this "classic" version better then the newer version?

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2026 11:05 am
by BillRunacre
Alpha77 wrote: Fri Nov 06, 2026 8:44 am
Q: Seems this classic WW2 from GOG has 3 seperate "DLCs"? Patton, Pacific and War and Weapons or so?
Or which one of those is the "base game" :shock: :?:

Can you also link or post a timeline of the games releases? I would bet that WW1 is the latest and best one (from classic series) right? I know the latest 2 new ones are korea and civil war but older then this i dont know timeline :(
All three of those listed were expanions to the original SC2: Blitzkrieg game. I don't think anyone used the term DLC back then. :D

I remember Pacific was 2008 and WWI was 2011. Patton and Weapons and Warfare were probably 2006 or 2007.