I was directed to this series of games after complaining on another message board about the appalling lack of realism in WWII tactical games (Blitzkrieg) that I find in stores. Last week, the CMBB/CMAK combination arrived, and I have loved playing them! The painstaking attention to every aspect of detail is simply unbelievable. So far I have thoroughly enjoyed every historical battle that I have played, and I have not even started playing operations and quick battles.
What really annoyed me about other games was the grossly innacurate scales used. Artillery fired on map at ranges of about 100 yards, there were no time lags for orders, and trying to control everything in real time ruined the fun for me. The "clickfest" arcade-like nature of these games also turned me off. What can I say, I've always been mature for my age (I'm 27 and I've read that the average age here is ~ 35). I think that the paused orders phase, followed by one minute movies, together with the entire "we go" concept are simply ingenious. The CM series developers have really done a good job of undoing the Gordian knot that is the dilemma of having one person simulate a WWII battle at the tactical level.
On a sidenote, as a realism nut, I would like to know if the ideal goal for the developers is for the player to simulate the battlefield tactical CO and only him, or rather the combined wisdom of all officers on the map. From what I gather, it usually does not seem like you are literally playing one man (the CO), though it is possible in some all-tank battles. Perhaps the next generation of realistic WWII tactical games will let one literally see everything through the CO's eyes while receiving reports and issuing orders based on all of this information with the help of command staff. I think that this sort of thing, combined with the current CM series way of doing things, would be the holy grail of realistic WWII tactical games (as you, the player, being but individual, are in fact simulating one and only one individual), though the player's view of the battlefield may be a bit limited, unless you allow camera manipulation as you do now and rationalize that it is a combination of what the CO can see from his command post, the reports that he receives, and his superior visualization skills. I do accept that simulating a small number of officers is fine in the sense that they're all trained in the same school of military thought and know each other and are under the same hig-ranking officers, but still, the way I see it, the ultimate goal should be "one player simulates one man" since strictly speaking, the small number of officers on the field were different people with somewhat different personalities, intelligences, etc.
I'd like to know what others here think.