User Reviews (1 - 11 of 11)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

another failure

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 1 / 15
Date: December 24, 1999
Author: Amazon User

clumsy interface and a game sequence with opportunity fire of course it doesnt work nice sound and pretty graphics despicable computer opponent like 15 years ago computer does move straight forward some people sue microsoft maybe they should think about talonsoft

Close, but not there yet!

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 11 / 25
Date: February 26, 2000
Author: Amazon User

The main flaw in East Front II is one it shares with many other computer WW II strategy games - a distinct bias towards the Axis and away from the United States' Soviet ally. Now whether this is some sort of Cold War hangover, a lack of familiarity on the part of designers with the Soviet contribution to victory in WW II, or simply that some people view the Axis equipment as 'sexier', I couldn't say.

What I will say is that [after several hundred hours playing] everything from the manual, to the selection of units, to apparently the combat algorithms, favors the Axis to some degree. With respect to this last assertion, continued experimentation shows that (in the game) Axis armored cars with a front armor of 14.5mm in the open typically shrug off any Soviet ordnance up to 76.2 mm at any range (a virtual impossibility in reality), whereas a Soviet T-26 tank with a front armor of 25mm under cover has about a 50 percent chance of getting destroyed by Axis MG fire at a 2-hex range; this appears to be, at best, faulty research]. The penultimate, ideologically neutral tactical computer game on the WW II East Front is, unfortunately, yet to appear.

It should be noted that this particular flaw is shared by far less board games, perhaps because a commitment on paper is more easily challenged than one based on pixels, and perhaps because the boardgaming press has always been far more influenced by solid journalism based on facts and research, and less by whizz-bang and advertising dollars.

Review (c) 2000 by Ray Crawford

Be Warned: Best Suited For The Hardcore Wargamer

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 6 / 6
Date: April 20, 2001
Author: Amazon User

The other reviewers are more articulate than I, so why am I bothering? Mostly because if you're reading this review, then you're probably interested in buying EF 2 and maybe already know something about it except the most important thing: will YOU enjoy EF 2? I think EF 2 is the sort of historical military game that usually only hardcore wargamers love: detailed unit statistics, complicated supply and movement restrictions, and so on. If you're not a veteran, this EF 2 is not likely to be as enjoyable. For one thing, it is sloooooow: waiting for the AI to make its moves can seem interminable. I find the drama greatly reduced (in comparison to games like Steel Panthers and Combat Mission) but far more distracting is the predictability of the AI with its inflexible attacks. You can learn to love EF 2 (I did) but it was work: ask yourself why you're playing...

Squad Leader/Panzerblitz boardgame in e-form

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 8 / 10
Date: January 20, 2000
Author: Amazon User

Warning, this review will only be useful to veteran wargamers and mil-geeks.

EF2 is designed by one of the founding fathers of the classic Avalon Hill "hexagons and hundreds of cardboard counters" boardgame Squad Leader, but actually more closely resembles the Panzerblitz game from the same company... i.e. platoon, not squad level units.

I always loved those games as a kid, and a PC version solves the two main problems-- finding opponents and all the time it takes to set up. The artwork is really great and quite clear.

However, I'd like to see more of a breakaway from the turn-based boardgame paradigm. Also, even with fog of war rules on, you still know far too much about the condition of your opponent's units.

As a game, it is fun, but as a simulation it could be substantially improved. Sequential, turn-based movement is the worst problem. Just as artillery strikes are "lagged" in the game, you should have to issue your movement orders in advance and then watch your poor troops try to carry them out in real time, as the enemy simultaneously does the same. Your ability to alter these orders in any given turn (based on what you've bumped into) should be limited and based on your experience, nationality, degree of unit mechanization, etc.

Solid value - some cunning rebuttals

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 5 / 5
Date: October 09, 2000
Author: Amazon User

East Front 2 is excellent value, the vast array of scenarios and campaigns alone is sure to keep enthusiasts busy for months. The addition of scenario, map and Order of Battle editors make the possiblities limitless (I haven't had to use these much, as there is an abundance of additional user and designer created scenarios on the web). The Gamespot reviewer states there is no save available during campaign scenarios - this is not true! The game state is saved automatically whenever you exit - you can resume the scenario in play at your liesure. Much has been made of the inclusion of supply - the rule is sound and represents command and control as much as the ammunition state (the manual does state this). It also accounts rather handily for a number of other variables that can effect a units firepower . That aside - the very absence of re-supply for units in tactical battle is the main reason for your troops conserving ammunition when there are no clear directions coming from above. Overall this package is only surpassed in value by the compilation that includes it (i.e. Europe in Flames).

A good simulation in the classic style

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 1 / 1
Date: February 19, 2000
Author: Amazon User

I wargame, alot, just ask my wife. TalonSoft's EFII is well worth the time and effort to learn. Thats right, effort. Like any well designed game there is a definite learning curve to mastering both the tactics particular to and the interface of the game. The interface is kind of clunky at times until you get used to it. The tactics are true to life (at least for a sim.) with the exception of the supply rules which just don't make sense for anything other than the largest scenarios. That being said, the game is awesome in its design and scope. Lots of beautifully done options are available so there is lots of replayability. Best of all, you don't choke to death on charts and tables like in TAHGC products unless you want to delve into the well done beefy manual. A great game for history or simulation buffs. Bravo Talonsoft!

Very entertaining and addictive

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 0 / 1
Date: April 26, 2005
Author: Amazon User

I was happy that my old copy of East Front II works on my laptop running MS XP. This game has good sound and graphics related to the time it was released plus campaigns and scenarios that are right out of real life military history. If you can find a copy of Talansoft's West Front, I recommend that as well.

The best tactical level WWII simulation ever

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 27 / 27
Date: November 06, 2000
Author: Amazon User

East Front 2 is not perfect, but it is simply the best tactical level World War II simulation ever made. Really. It follows in the tradition of the Panzer Blitz/Leader board games (and to a lesser extent the Squad Leader games) but adds a tremendous wealth of details and realistic game features. The game includes 600 different types of units, everything from 8 different models of PzKpfw IIIs to Polish wz.06 mountain guns, to Finnish Jaeger engineer platoons. The game also features historical information, specs and photos of each unit type.

Having played and enjoyed the game thoroughly I was distressed to read Ray Crawford's notes above about a faulty and/or biased game algorithm and decided to test his observations myself. I found that they were wrong. He maintained that German MG units had about a 50% chance of destroying Soviet T-26 tanks at a 2 hex range. Actually, MG units can't even fire on armored units at 2 hexes, the game won't permit it. At 1 hex, T-26 tanks were destroyed only 6 times out of 84 attempts or about 7% of the time. This may strike people as strange though "Machineguns destroying tanks with 25mm or armor?!" but remember that that's the maximum armor thickness and not the average. Tanks and armored cars are always more thinly armored along the sides and rear. And that defensive rating each unit is assigned also reflects things like the size of the tank, its silhouette, speed, how well the armor is sloped etc., etc. From my observations I noticed that Soviet MG units can also destroy German armored vehicles: PzKpfw Is, IIAs, and PSW 222 armored cars. Crawford also wrote that all Soviet guns under 76.2mm typically had no effect against German armored cars at any range. Again, my observations didn't bear this out. Soviet 45mm guns knocked out PSW 222 armored cars 11% of the time (out of 65 attempts) at 3 hexes, their maximum range against armored targets. They were also effective against light and medium tanks (the latter at short range though). Overall, my results were in line with expectations based on the game's combat system and I didn't find any bias in the game mechanics.

It's true that in the game German infantry is much more powerful than Soviet infantry, but that was the historical reality anyway. For every German soldier who died on the Eastern front, 6 Russian ones died. Russian armored units, on the other hand, are extremely powerful in the game. The T-34 M40s are really tough to stop with just PzKpfw IIIs and early IVs to say nothing of the super heavy IS IIs and IIIs that show up in the later scenarios. The game designers seem do have done an thorough job and the unit characteristics seem reasonable and realistic.

Having said that, the game isn't perfect. The spotting rules don't seem accurate. Infantry moving through woods are typically spotted from over 1 km away. I don't like the way units are 'blind' when scouting in unfamiliar territory and can't spot enemy units until the end of the turn. Sometimes you end up blundering into a large enemy force out in the open or even finish your movement next to them and are given no chance to react. The simulations during movement and combat run too slowly as well and the AI isn't all that great. The computer will sometimes vacate a victory objective to advance and engage the enemy, and it generally acts too predictably. But in a game this complex, it's not terrible and the scenarios are generally interesting and somewhat challenging.

So in spite of these shortcomings East Front II is a really wicked game. I find that the most successful tactics are the most realistic ones. You end up basing your plans on the maps, weather conditions, supply situation etc, and end up fighting for the best tactical position instead of just slugging it out mindlessly. The infantry assaults work best when done in a true to life fashion: artillery bombardment, smoke, infantry advancing with MG support and a final close assault when the enemy is disrupted or 'pinned down'. The game also has a virtually unlimited replay value. It comes with over 130 ready-made scenarios plus some in depth campaign scenarios. You can generate your own scenarios in minutes with the scenario generator or carefully design your own. And then there are the on-line and play by e-mail options. After playing EFII for more than a year I still feel like I've only scratched the surface of its full potential.

So, summing up I give the game 4 and a half stars (rounded up to five). Having played war games since I was a kid I'd have to say that EFII is the best one out there in its category. If you love detail, realism, the chance to plan and execute well thought out attacks, you'll love this game.

East Front II

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 1 / 5
Date: February 19, 2000
Author: Amazon User

Absolutely fantastic! The only thing Talonsoft ommitted was the smell of burning gasoline, and i am sure they could probably create that too.

Everyone has an opinion

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 1 / 3
Date: January 06, 2000
Author: Amazon User

Unlike the previous customer review, I enjoy the game. It is best played by e-email against a human opponent. The AI does need some work. But I think the game delivers what you could expect from this type of game. I love Talonsoft games.

Review Page: 1 2 Next 

Actions