Hearts Iron 2 and Gary Grigsby's world at war

[Gargantua]

Exactly.

I like the faster pace, with the ODD pause, which you can setup in your events controls (IE for historical events your choice/splash-screen comes up and pauses until you decide).

I start the first month at the lowest speed, and spend about a half our setting everything I want up, like supplies etc. Other than that I like to move at a month every 3 to 5 minutes, depending on the campaign I’m playing.  That way you’re not waiting around for NOTHING to happen, and you get that action/desperate reaction you need to feel like you’re fighting an actual opponent.

UNLESS I really want to get into the political side, coup the united states, and have the Confederate U.S. as my axis ally.

This gets alot easier too, if you step away from a major power, and just play as a small one, like Finland, and do everything you can to stay alive/in-power/win.

There’s nothing like beating the Germans to Moscow, after annexing Norway, and Sweden.  Or liberating the tertiary lithuanian states…

[Tall Paul]

Guys,

––I think you are ALL CORRECT in as much as what you’re saying.
––IL, yes, Gary Grigsby’s World at War is a game that takes a long time to play. But it says right on the box that it is a game for “GROGNARDS”, people who literally love all of the details and command capabilities. I’ve played the “PACIFIC WAR” and “War in the South Pacific” versions and loved them. They definately take more than a single evenings play, though. But it says that right on the box,…so if it’s not your cup of tea, that’s great,…but don’t call them cr*p just because they’re longer games than YOU like. Just say the games are too LONG for your interest. But IL,…you really should play and learn the game thoroughly before completely condemning it.
----And you other guys shouldn’t throw mud around so easily. I respect all of you involved in this verbal disagreement and I’m a little disapointed in the “name-calling” going on.

“Tall Paul”

[Imperious Leader]

.you really should play and learn the game thoroughly before completely condemning it.

I condemn it for the same reasons everybody else stated. It takes a long time to play and the complexity is much greater than AA. THe OP was asking if these games are like AA and they are nothing of the sort. So to guide him in his decision you would say don’t buy it, which is correct unless you got loads of time on your hands……some don’t.

[Tall Paul]

@PanzerTank:

Hi Guys
I have had these two game sitting on my shelf for a while now ( have had the games a couple years ) and I was wondering if anybody here has or currently plays them? They do look somewhat overwhelming. I dont know if anybody here has done any reviews for the games
Thanks

––IL, I don’t think he compared them to A&A. Nor did you simply say,…for me, these games take way too long. You basically just said they were cr*p!
----IL, I would AGREE WITH YOU COMPLETELY that these games take a long time!

“Tall Paul”

[Imperious Leader]

Nor did you simply say,…for me, these games take way too long.

I would AGREE WITH YOU COMPLETELY that these games take a long time!

1. It’s not a good game if you don’t have time to invest playing it.

2. Some people don’t have multiple days to deal with a GAME

3. You confuse the time it takes to play a game with complexity.

4. just spend countless hours just making one move. Got it.

Right based on these quotes: I SAID NOTHING ABOUT THE GAME TAKING TOO LONG.

Actually, i just played a game in 30 seconds. Loaded it, and then exited the game. It’s just like Axis and Allies!

I agree with “tall Paul” 100% as usual.

What do you all think?

“Imperious Leader”

[Gargantua]

@Imperious:

Nor did you simply say,…for me, these games take way too long.

I would AGREE WITH YOU COMPLETELY that these games take a long time!

1. It’s not a good game if you don’t have time to invest playing it.

2. Some people don’t have multiple days to deal with a GAME

3. You confuse the time it takes to play a game with complexity.

4. just spend countless hours just making one move. Got it.

Right based on these quotes: I SAID NOTHING ABOUT THE GAME TAKING TOO LONG.

Actually, i just played a game in 30 seconds. Loaded it, and then exited the game. It’s just like Axis and Allies!

I agree with “tall Paul” 100% as usual.

What do you all think?

“Imperious Leader”

part 2, Tall Paul is a decent guy, so watch the crossfire…

[Imperious Leader]

Personally I think this is another one of your “I can never admit when I’m wrong” episodes.

And part 2, Tall Paul is a decent guy, so watch the crossfire…

Personally, i think you just posted about 25 times more than [usual about the best save I can muster].

[Gargantua]

Personally, I hope you enjoy every single one of the [posts edited by GG].

[Imperious Leader]

Those posts would not have been edited, only yours.

[Derek]

IL what is your assessment of ‘a world at war’?
Pretending that I have the time to play it

[Imperious Leader]

It is the easiest one of the bunch to play. But try Strategic Command. It is alot more like AA and they also have a ww1 version.

[lozmoid]

I have Gary Grigsby’s World At War and found it a but too unintuitive. I also have Hearts Of Iron 1 and 2 (Doomsday) and as much as I love A&A, I think HOI2 is the best WWII game I have EVER played, seriously. It’s that good.

[Gargantua]

@Lozmoid:

I have Gary Grigsby’s World At War and found it a but too unintuitive. I also have Hearts Of Iron 1 and 2 (Doomsday) and as much as I love A&A, I think HOI2 is the best WWII game I have EVER played, seriously. It’s that good.

IL likes those “unintuitive” versions.  :)

But I’m with you Lozmoid!

[Imperious Leader]

I just like the ones that are like AA. Call them what you like.

[kdfsjljklgjfg]

@Imperious:

Axis and Allies is a light wargame, it’s plays quick easy compared to HOI. The OP was asking if Hearts of Iron was essentially similar in play ( this is how i took it).

He didn’t even mention A&A. He just asked if HoI was good.

Go ahead and advise the OP to waste his money on it thinking it’s like AA.

He said that he already has it, not “should I get it?” It seemed more like you just kinda took a chance to bash it.

@Imperious:

1. It’s not a good game if you don’t have time to invest playing it.

So then by your logic if you’re very busy all the time, then Angry Birds is the best game ever made and every other game is terrible and not worth spending cash on, because if you don’t have time, it’s not good.

4. just spend countless hours just making one move. Got it.

That kinda tells me that you don’t understand how the game works. Left click stack of units, right click target. Move is done. What takes time is PLANNING your moves, and watching them unfold. Anticipating your military needs months before the front actually requires them, trying to force pockets and avoid encirclements, changing your strategies as they go on, etc.

I like you, IL, but you just kinda seemed like you jumped on a chance to bash a game you personally don’t like.

HoI3 actually lets you dumb down the game even further than A&A if you so choose. You could potentially automate every single part of the game and just name an objective for your HQ’s. Then it’s really only as complicated as you want it to be.

[Gargantua]

Kdf,

Let’s just say that some people missed the “dumb down” feature.

Even though it was right in their face…

[Imperious Leader]

He didn’t even mention A&A. He just asked if HoI was good.

He didn’t have too. He posted it here on the AA forums right?

Quote
Go ahead and advise the OP to waste his money on it thinking it’s like AA.

He said that he already has it, not “should I get it?” It seemed more like you just kinda took a chance to bash it.

It is possible to have an opinion that it sucks right?

Quote from: Imperious Leader on February 12, 2013, 07:57:31 pm
1. It’s not a good game if you don’t have time to invest playing it.

So then by your logic if you’re very busy all the time, then Angry Birds is the best game ever made and every other game is terrible and not worth spending cash on, because if you don’t have time, it’s not good.

That would be you’re logic. I don’t have ALL DAY to be playing that game, some people do. There is nothing wrong with disliking the fact that you need to invest 15 hours to finish the campaign.

That kinda tells me that you don’t understand how the game works. Left click stack of units, right click target. Move is done. What takes time is PLANNING your moves, and watching them unfold. Anticipating your military needs months before the front actually requires them, trying to force pockets and avoid encirclements, changing your strategies as they go on, etc.

HoI3 actually lets you dumb down the game even further than A&A if you so choose. You could potentially automate every single part of the game and just name an objective for your HQ’s. Then it’s really only as complicated as you want it to be.

I want to control everything in the game and still have it the same complexity as AA and finish in 3-4 hours tops. Where do i toggle that?

[BJCard]

@Imperious:

He didn’t even mention A&A. He just asked if HoI was good.

He didn’t have too. He posted it here on the AA forums right?

Quote
Go ahead and advise the OP to waste his money on it thinking it’s like AA.

He said that he already has it, not “should I get it?” It seemed more like you just kinda took a chance to bash it.

It is possible to have an opinion that it sucks right?

Quote from: Imperious Leader on February 12, 2013, 07:57:31 pm
1. It’s not a good game if you don’t have time to invest playing it.

So then by your logic if you’re very busy all the time, then Angry Birds is the best game ever made and every other game is terrible and not worth spending cash on, because if you don’t have time, it’s not good.

That would be you’re logic. I don’t have ALL DAY to be playing that game, some people do. There is nothing wrong with disliking the fact that you need to invest 15 hours to finish the campaign.

That kinda tells me that you don’t understand how the game works. Left click stack of units, right click target. Move is done. What takes time is PLANNING your moves, and watching them unfold. Anticipating your military needs months before the front actually requires them, trying to force pockets and avoid encirclements, changing your strategies as they go on, etc.

HoI3 actually lets you dumb down the game even further than A&A if you so choose. You could potentially automate every single part of the game and just name an objective for your HQ’s. Then it’s really only as complicated as you want it to be.

I want to control everything in the game and still have it the same complexity as AA and finish in 3-4 hours tops. Where do i toggle that?

IL, there are few PC based strategy games you can complete in 3-4 hours.  The best that I can come up with is Civilization V on an extra small map.  Honestly I can’t think of any game with the complexity you are asking for that can be played in such a short period of time.

HoI3, while amazing, does take several 3-4 hour gaming sessions to complete- depending on what your goals are.  There are smaller scenarios, such as barbarossa, overlord, etc.  Also, in HoI3, if you automate nothing, then it will take a very long time to complete.  I usually automate static fronts so they respond to invasions-  such as automating the German forces in France & Norway while I concentrate on invading Russia.

[Imperious Leader]

IL, there are few PC based strategy games you can complete in 3-4 hours.

Not true at all. I did suggest Strategic Command which lets you finish in like 2 hours. That’s what i recommended to the OP before.

[BJCard]

Well IL, I did say few games, not no games.  Without having played strategic command, it does look a lot like a simplified hearts of iron game.  Having said that, it doesn’t look like I would be able to play strategic command in 3-4 hours- looks more complex than that.