If someone regards the graphics of PG1 as outdated, then what to do you think about the graphics in PG3D? In my opinion straight horrible. For me, the PG1 ones are fine, Pacific General looks slightly worse (especially for inactive hexes like rough etc.).
One big advantage of PG1 is the huge campaign branching tree. Furthermore map developers were less sloppy than e.g. for Pacific General (San Francisco scenario follows Hawaii 44, but starts earlier, so you can take the N1K2 to that scenario in the campaign mode when it doesn't exist yet, or all these Japanese airstrips in the US mainland). In the PG1 Windows version, you could even have the strategic map open all the time and also an info window which showed you the stats over which you moved the mouse, e.g. showed suppression and attack and defense values so it was easy to decide if one should move one's units next to it and attack.
Ubisoft likely won't sell the IP (they launched Panzer General Online).
Strijkbout: Be prepared to have your 5 star elite infantry being slaughtered by greenhorn recruits just grabbed from their mothers bosom.
For <2 stars experience it's usually a pretty gamble, for more it depends on entrenchment and who shoots first (at least from my experience, it gets more reliable). The predictions seem to be an average, e.g. bridging engineer vs bridging engineer is a 4-4 (or was it 6-6), but that never seems to apply because the unit which shoots first cripples the other so much that it can't inflict much damage.
