Heresy, but Solitaire is best.

[Talen]

Absolutely no one is going to accept this but...I have now played the game a number of times, on various difficulty settings, as Allies and as Axis. And the way that is most enjoyable for me is - solitaire, playing both sides. All units can be named, you can have a Mediterranean game and a Scandinavian game if you want, and a game is never ruined because of ridiculous things like the AI failing to put troops into French coastal cities.

But then, I was never interested so much in 'winning' as in investigating what happened and why in WWII, and seeing if alternative approaches would have yielded major different results. In short, I find the process more interesting and fun that the final victory.

Also, with Fog of War turned on you will be surprised at how often you don't remember where all the enemy (of that turn) units are. The game is great fun against the AI, too, but most fun when playing something smarter. If you don't have time for other human opponents, try playing against yourself. It is most instructive as to the great variety of different problems each side had. If you do I would suggest Axis slight advantage as the most realistic and best balance.

[Spechtmeise]

This is...unacceptacle!
Seriously, I will try this out, thanks for the hint.

[vypuero]

I did this a lot when I was testing - playing hotseat vs. myself. Unfortunately, I am too predictable to myself!

[lesthesarge]

Sorry Talen, I've been floggin the notion that true wargaming satisfaction is usually gained from just not letting the AI join in and play the game as both sides for ages

If a game is not able to play hotseat mode, (so that the player can be both sides) I usually won't buy it regardless of how well loved it is in the marketplace.

Those that can't play good turn based designs in the absence of an AI opponent are really just lacking in serious interest.