In Episode 32 of Critical Moves, Nuno leads the team through a discussion on World War II strategy games, highlighting the best, the worst, and everything in between. Al joins him with questions and commentary, offering insights into what makes these games tick, and where they sometimes miss the mark.
Hearts of Iron IV – The Grand Strategy Giant
Nuno kicks things off with Hearts of Iron IV, the undisputed king of WWII grand strategy. The game’s immense complexity is both its strength and its flaw. Nuno describes it as "a systems game first, a war game second," and while Al pushes back, questioning whether it truly captures the essence of WWII or just buries it under a mountain of spreadsheets, they agree the modding community is where HOI4 really shines. Mods like Kaiserreich or The New Order transform the game into something more narrative-driven and engaging, adding a layer of storytelling that the base game often lacks.
Company of Heroes – The Power of Presentation
Next, they discuss Company of Heroes, which still stands out as one of the best WWII RTS games ever made. Nuno praises how the game handles cover, suppression, and line of sight without overwhelming the player, and notes that while newer entries have tried to improve on the formula, CoH1 got it right the first time. The conversation shifts to the moment-to-moment gameplay, with Al and Nuno reminiscing about the chaos of tanks exploding, buildings collapsing, and units shouting. Company of Heroes manages to capture the intensity of war without losing readability, a feat most other WWII RTS games fail to achieve.
Unity of Command – Simplicity Done Right
Shifting into turn-based strategy, Unity of Command gets a lot of love. Nuno appreciates how it strips away unnecessary complexity, focusing on what truly matters: supply lines, terrain, and thinking several moves ahead. Al admits he’s never played it, leading to a discussion on how many WWII strategy games go underappreciated due to their plain visuals. Unity of Command rewards players who stick with it, offering a streamlined but engaging experience that doesn’t require excessive clicking or micromanagement.
Steel Division – Overcoming the Complexity Wall
They touch on Steel Division, explaining why it’s not as popular as it should be. The game’s stunning visuals and documentary-like feel are impressive, but its interface is overwhelming, and the learning curve can be steep. Nuno explains the importance of zoom levels, line of sight, and how even after hours of play, it can still feel like you’re just scratching the surface. Al wonders if it’s worth pushing through the complexity, and Nuno says it’s only for those who already love the genre.
Men of War – Tactical Mayhem
Men of War comes up next, and the team agrees it’s chaotic, messy, and brilliant. Nuno compares it to an interactive diorama, where everything can be destroyed, hijacked, or broken. The game’s jank, with its bugs and unpredictable AI, is part of its charm. Al acknowledges the bugs but agrees that the game captures an emergent narrative that scripted missions often fail to provide. The chaos and unpredictability create a unique experience where no two playthroughs are the same, sometimes due to the game’s systems, sometimes because the physics engine flung a grenade the wrong way.
The Emotional Side of War
Al poses a big question: Have any WWII strategy games managed to capture the emotional weight of the setting? Nuno thinks most don’t, as they tend to focus on tactics rather than the human cost of war. They both express interest in Burden of Command, a game trying to offer a different perspective by focusing more on leadership, morale, and the human side of warfare. If it succeeds, it could open the door for more grounded, emotional takes on the genre.
Conclusion
From grand strategy to tactical mayhem, this episode covers the spectrum of WWII strategy games. While there are clear favourites, the team agrees that the emotional and human aspects of WWII are often neglected in favour of mechanics. Games like Burden of Command offer hope for a new direction, one that may balance both the tactical and emotional sides of war.
Listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts or Amazon Music. Or find us on your preferred podcast service by searching Critical Moves Podcast.

Nuno kicks things off with Hearts of Iron IV, the undisputed king of WWII grand strategy. The game’s immense complexity is both its strength and its flaw. Nuno describes it as "a systems game first, a war game second," and while Al pushes back, questioning whether it truly captures the essence of WWII or just buries it under a mountain of spreadsheets, they agree the modding community is where HOI4 really shines. Mods like Kaiserreich or The New Order transform the game into something more narrative-driven and engaging, adding a layer of storytelling that the base game often lacks.

Next, they discuss Company of Heroes, which still stands out as one of the best WWII RTS games ever made. Nuno praises how the game handles cover, suppression, and line of sight without overwhelming the player, and notes that while newer entries have tried to improve on the formula, CoH1 got it right the first time. The conversation shifts to the moment-to-moment gameplay, with Al and Nuno reminiscing about the chaos of tanks exploding, buildings collapsing, and units shouting. Company of Heroes manages to capture the intensity of war without losing readability, a feat most other WWII RTS games fail to achieve.

Shifting into turn-based strategy, Unity of Command gets a lot of love. Nuno appreciates how it strips away unnecessary complexity, focusing on what truly matters: supply lines, terrain, and thinking several moves ahead. Al admits he’s never played it, leading to a discussion on how many WWII strategy games go underappreciated due to their plain visuals. Unity of Command rewards players who stick with it, offering a streamlined but engaging experience that doesn’t require excessive clicking or micromanagement.

They touch on Steel Division, explaining why it’s not as popular as it should be. The game’s stunning visuals and documentary-like feel are impressive, but its interface is overwhelming, and the learning curve can be steep. Nuno explains the importance of zoom levels, line of sight, and how even after hours of play, it can still feel like you’re just scratching the surface. Al wonders if it’s worth pushing through the complexity, and Nuno says it’s only for those who already love the genre.

Men of War comes up next, and the team agrees it’s chaotic, messy, and brilliant. Nuno compares it to an interactive diorama, where everything can be destroyed, hijacked, or broken. The game’s jank, with its bugs and unpredictable AI, is part of its charm. Al acknowledges the bugs but agrees that the game captures an emergent narrative that scripted missions often fail to provide. The chaos and unpredictability create a unique experience where no two playthroughs are the same, sometimes due to the game’s systems, sometimes because the physics engine flung a grenade the wrong way.

Al poses a big question: Have any WWII strategy games managed to capture the emotional weight of the setting? Nuno thinks most don’t, as they tend to focus on tactics rather than the human cost of war. They both express interest in Burden of Command, a game trying to offer a different perspective by focusing more on leadership, morale, and the human side of warfare. If it succeeds, it could open the door for more grounded, emotional takes on the genre.

From grand strategy to tactical mayhem, this episode covers the spectrum of WWII strategy games. While there are clear favourites, the team agrees that the emotional and human aspects of WWII are often neglected in favour of mechanics. Games like Burden of Command offer hope for a new direction, one that may balance both the tactical and emotional sides of war.
Listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts or Amazon Music. Or find us on your preferred podcast service by searching Critical Moves Podcast.