Quote Originally Posted by Quietus
It cost half that of RTW but no campaign or replayability? I reckon only two factions and not a lot of unit variety. And the graphics look MTW-ish.

On the scale of 1 to 5 how would you guys rate this game?
I rate it a 4/5. It is narrow in scope, but executes well in that scope. Graphically it is using 2D images on the 3D map. Replay is limited because it is a single battle--just like the Sid Meier's Antietam and Gettysburg, or the Waterloo game. However, in addition to the scenarios there is "open play". And open play is interesting because you never know what you will face or from what direction. You might get an absolute walkover, or something completely impossible, or something in between--just like real life.

RTW fails in both the strategic and tactical level. They didn't execute well at either and there is little challenge vs. either. RTW is like playing checkers with an ornate chessboard, a beautiful setting with so much lost potential. Most players (including myself) won't be able to beat a CWBR scenario on the normal play level the first time out. Contrast that with RTW.