Look
As FTA! and Blood Games, this one isn’t exactly a feast for the senses. The layout is single-column, headings are put into the sidebar, and the psychedelically filtered photos that are used as illustrations (coloured in the PDF, b/w in the book) are maybe unusual, but certainly not pretty.
You should furthermore expect some questionable layout decisions, as in the chapter with the plane stats, where the actual stats are always on the right side on the left page and vice versa, what turned browsing and comparing stats into a head-aching activity for me.

Presentation and organization
First the good news: The game has an index, and the sidebar navigation in the PDF version is highly detailed. Moreover, there isn’t any flavour text wasting space. No matter which page you open, you’ll only find stuff that at least has some use for the actual game.
Thereafter, things go downhill. Interrelated information is often spread over the book without direct reference (e.g., plane prices are only found in the company rules, while their stats are in another chapter and lack the price on this place), Generally, the text is a bit addlepated, hanging chapter after chapter without a recognizable continuous thread, and being didactically unfavourable. (E.g., p.64 explains when skill checks are needed and how Edges affect them, while only much later on p.76 in another chapter is actually explained how skill checks are done.) Everyone who wants to GM IHW:WB and hasn’t experience with the underlying StarCluster system should bring some frustration tolerance with him as he learns the game.
The only exception is the well presented and well explained air combat system, which is also equipped with well exemplifying illustrations and certainly had the most care put into, but more on that later.


Because the rules are so scattered, I abstain from going through the book chapter by chapter, and instead go through it sorted by rules complexes.

Company rules, Staff characters and Contract generator
Game prep begins immediately with the creation of the Staff characters, which lead the departments of the merc company, negotiate the contracts and otherwise manage the business. They are played additionally to the actual characters which go into the action and therefore “In Harms Way”.
Staff characters simply consist of some chosen skills, two skill packages depending on the department(s) that they run, and the personality Traits – no attributes, no lifepath, just a fistful of stats. The GM also plays a Staff character – the Operations Chief, who stands on top of the company.
Total resources of the company are either rolled or chosen by the GM, and thereafter the battle for the budget of each department can start. (At this point it should be noted that all financial resources, regardless of if they are equipment, company budget or PC wealth, are expressed in abstract points and levels – a sensible decision for a system that deals at the same time with thermo sleeping bags and MiGs.)
Regarding the battle for the budgets, it is simply role-played. There’s a fistful of advice, but apart from the traditionally ruled social skills, there isn’t any support for it by the system.

A cool part of the game is the Contract generator – here’s determined how many contracts are available to the company, who the patron is, what the overall goal of the half-year contract is, in which area of conflict the mercs have to act, and also how well-paid the contract is. Consultations about the contract(s) to chose, as well as negotiation about sweeteners, like a local base or nominal enlistment into the army (so that in an emergency the mercs are treated as POWs rather than as criminals) are role-played by the Staff characters.
It’s a neat toy, and the only fault I find with it is the lack of a sub-generator to also create individual missions within a half-year contract.

Character creation
Character creation begins point-based, with two sub-accounts for attributes (Strength, Coordination, Agility, Endurance and Charisma) and other stuff (wealth, Luck resource and IQ (which also determines the Intelligence attribute). You can work with this one, although the shift of Intelligence attribute to the other stuff and its odd determination is a bit strange.
What should be elaborated here is the Luck resource. Depending on how much you sacrifice Wealth and Intelligence, you have 0-3 points of Luck. They have to last over a whole half-year contract, and whenever one is spent, the player has the right to narrate freely for a minute. The only restriction is that no one can be directly hurt or killed by Luck usage (although the enemy can be maneuvered into a bad position), and the GM retains a right to veto in case of extreme abuse. All in all, a nice change of pace from the usual “re-roll your botch” ass-saving points.

The rest of the stats creation process happens on the base of a randomless lifepath. It starts with the family background, and the background skills that are delivered by it.
The next question is whether or not to visit a college. A college visit gives fewer skills than the professional career, but it is needed to become an officer, and it offers access to certain non-military skills.
The final phase is the professional career, and the big question of it is: “In which force, sir, have you served your country?” Only military careers are available (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines), and the specialist schools that can be visited every few year (e.g. Alpine, Bomber Pilot, Delta Force, Medic) bring a massive boost on militarily relevant skills. They also give access to Edges, which give universal boni to all checks where they apply. (E.g., “Nap-on-earth” helps with every action done in very low altitude flight, whether it is bombing ground targets, spotting enemy planes or flying risky maneuvers.) However, it should be noted that the free supplement “Civvies” adds civilian careers, for instance for mercs with police background rather than military background, or for local civilians who fight with and support the mercenary company in its contract.
While increasing age adds more and more skills, beginning with the age of 34 attribute points are lost, and after the first years in the military specialist schools can only be visited seldom, so that the advantage of high age erodes more and more.
(The lifepath is also used for improving characters. The PC is just in a fitting merc career, and he gains one skill point after every “action” (6 months).)

Finally, the character gets an Avocation, a hobby that the PC performs and that gives him a few points for more fluff-y skills, as well as Traits: Facets of his personality that can be used as a resource to improve rolls - if there can be constructed a link between the action and the used Trait.

Only fixed are Honor and Practicality: Two opposed stats that always add up to 20 and start at 10 each. If there is a conflict between these two and if the PC decides to follow either one, the used stat increases by 1, while the other decreases by the same amount. Some gamers should know this principle from other games as Pendragon or Unsung (however, unlike in these two, there is no roll to determine the action that the PC undertakes – he’s in full control of the player in such conflicts).
Honor works as a bonus on honorable actions, for leadership and in dealing with important people, while Practicality helps with dubious action, following orders and dealing with shady people.
This one leaves me a bit puzzled. In the former IHW installments, where the subject was to lead the officer of an actual army to renown and glory, I can see the reasoning behind this mechanic; in a game about mercs (who should be less involved with the consideration between honor and necessary evils), it looks a bit tacked on.

Basic rules
As base mechanic, IHW:WB makes use of the d% underroll. When a die roll is successful, the roll is also directly the Quality of Success. (It should be noted that the freely available StarCluster rules include ways to change the base mechanic and the accompanying modifiers against something else, e.g. a pool system.)
Attribute checks are made with attribute*multiplier; the multiplier depends on the difficulty of the action. Skill checks are a bit more complicated: 40 + 5*skills + 5*(each 2 points that the allocated attribute is above 7). Who’s untrained in a skill only uses his pure attribute rating.
I’m certain that there are good stochastic reasons for this complex calculation, but it’s still a bit unwieldy. At least the character sheet offers dedicated space to write down directly the percent chance, limiting the calculation to a one-time affair before the game itself starts.

While I’m at the topic of skills, it should be noted that the game follows the spirit of Traveller and TSoY in this regard: Many broad, overlapping skills, of which only a fistful are actually chosen that portray the character best. From the long-drawn-out skill table in the book only a part is needed for each character.
It’s explicitly advised to confront the characters with problems rather than rolls, so they can find there own way to solve it with their resources. A fence could so be overcome by a traditional use of Climbing, or by a Vega-style “jump at the wall across of the fence and push off to the other side” stunt using Dash, or by a simple high jump using Gymnastics.
Unfortunately, this philosophy gets thwarted in some subsystems, where checks against fixed stats are demanded. The only help here is to either handle them more fluidly and ignore their fixedness, or to accept the break from the rest of the game.

Finally, in conjunction with the basic rules, Notice should be noted. Notice is needed to climb up in rank and so to gain more income and of course more command. It’s mostly awarded for successes in battle, as capturing enemy officers or successfully solved missions. Failure can also result in loss of Notice.
Furthermore it can be gained by small and other things, as pro-active cleverness and eager acquittal (e.g. pro-actively securing planes on the strip when a storm rolls in), by the solution of smaller problems, or by the good old toadying (to which an own paragraph is devoted, and what also is a good way to earn Practicality as well as the grudge of fellow soldiers).
This one left me a bit disappointed. It is an interesting idea, and I’m always in favour of system-wise support of other goals than plain survival, but unfortunately it’s a bit wishy-washy ruled and depends a lot on GM decisions, making it poorly fitting for the “competitive play” that the blurb promises. As an incentive for more risky behaviour and less turtle-play however, I’ll let it count.

Combat
Combat is structured in one-minute turns, in which only the deciding shots and actions are handled by the die rolls and the rest consists of desperate misses, whiffing, shift of position and similar stuff that doesn’t directly change the relative standing of the enemies.
Initiative for everyone by d%, attack roll, Quality of Success is directly base damage, hitpoints (which are calculated from physical attributes)… No big surprises here.
A notable speciality is the trade rule: Directly after the initiative roll, you can take penalties or bonuses on initiative, attack chance and/or attack quality, if you take compensating changes to one or two other things so that all changes add up to zero. (For instance, you could impair your initiative by 20 and take a bonus of +10 to each attack chance and attack quality, reflecting a more meticulous but later shot.)
It should also be noted how defence is handled. You simply have a Cover stat ranging from 0 to 100, which results from actual cover and probably also from use of some skills. The attack roll has to lay over the cover and still under its usual chance. (There’s also a rules option to include Cover as a possibility in the trade above.)
There are also some minor complications for special cases as grenades or automatic fire, but basically, the combat system is rather unspectacular. There are systems that are faster and more tactical, but also way worse systems, and the trade rule makes IHW:WB at least to one of the few games where interesting stuff can be done with the initiative roll.

Air combat and vehicle combat
About time to take a look at the heart piece of IHW:WB, which turns out to be the best designed and most meticulously crafted part of it: Air combat. Here we find two scales: BVR (Beyond Visual Recognition) and Dogfight.
BVR combat stretches usually across several kilometres, and it is handled quite curtly and untactically. Make your perception check to spot the target, take it into aim with your sensors, and then roll for the targeting system of your missile. Should the targeting system be successful, the only thing to rescue the target is a successful detection of the incoming missile, combined with a risky maneuver to either change the angle and therefore force a new targeting system check, or to get out of the radar field of the enemy. Unimportant NPCs are already out of the game if they get hit by a missile; PCs and more important NPCs get a damage roll granted (which still has good chances to force them from the sky, or at least to make it a good idea to abstain ASAP from all further damage).
Here isn’t much tactics to be found, but the many save-or-die rolls manage to evoke thrill and nervousness, as missiles are traded between the parties.

Dogfights happen in visual range of sight, and as in the time of the Red Baron, the goal is to aim at the enemy from 6 o’clock, to stay hot on his trail and to force him with some dosage of hot lead permanently from the sky. Here positioning becomes vital, and I’d recommend using a grid map.
The base of dogfighting is the Energy resource, which depends on the current speed of the plane and is depleted by performing maneuvers. To make keeping track easier, it is recommended to use tokens as poker chips – a good technique, and I’m always favourable inclined to the use of tactile elements in role-playing.
Similarly is dealt with altitude – other tokens are used for it, one for each 1.000km height. Altitude serves as Potential Energy, which can be turned into Energy by diving. This also allows elegantly to store unused Energy – just perform a maneuver that involves a climb (like the good old Immelmann), and the altitude you gain is turned into Potential Energy.

Both participants write down their maneuvers (or their sequence of maneuvers), disclose them simultaneously, make a roll of needed (as indicated by the maneuvers) and see then where they are at the end of their move. If one or both have the enemy during or at the end of the maneuver in their field of fire, shots can be traded, with modifiers for angle and distance – to shoot at someone from 6 o’clock and mere 100 metres is just plain easier than doing the same thing against a plane that zooms by a half mile across in a 90° angle.
If one plane can get behind the other, it has the “Advantage”, and the way that maneuvers are announced changes. The spruce in front has to declare and perform his maneuver first. Thereafter, the pilot behind has to make a perception check to correctly recognize the maneuver in time, and than he has to decide if he wants to repeat it to keep his advantage, or if he decrees it as too risky. If he tries to keep up, he has to perform the same maneuver (and suffer the consequences if he fails).

The air combat system gets rounded out by a three page cheat-sheet, which summarizes all maneuvers, modifiers and so on.

To evaluate it: The air combat subsystem _rocks_! The Dogfight system is rich in tactics, and air combat as a whole manages to evoke the feeling of a real air combat. BVR is simple, impersonal missile-trading with a lot of prayer, fear and lack of influence. In the beginning stage of the dogfight, it’s all about out-guessing and surprising the enemy with unexpected maneuvers to counter these which are expected from him. As soon as one dogfighter has the advantage, it all turns into a dare-fest, where the followed goes to his limits and beyond by performing more and more difficult and risky maneuvers, as this is the only way to get rid of the deadly threat from behind, but still has to watch out that he doesn’t break his own neck by betting too high.
At all these, the transparent percent system is a serious help, as it clearly presents the chances of success and makes it easier to weigh the different courses of action and options.

However, there are a few sour notes:
1.) Scaling: Maneuvers work with 1.000 metre hops, while the gunnery ranges use 100 metre steps. The only solutions with a grid map are to use a huge map, to alter the gunnery ranges or to use a small trick (micro- and macro maps, as well as Pirates!-style centre shifting worked reasonably well when I tested the system in solo-play).
2.) Maneuvers: There are just damn many of them, and the summary on the cheat-sheet isn’t always clear on their effect. You just either have to put a good dose of work into learning the details, or you have to accept frequent consultation of the complete maneuver descriptions. This flaw will probably diminish over the course of some sessions, but it’s here.

Finally, there are some smaller subsystems for aviation, as rules for bombarding ground targets, surface-to-air attacks, radar stations, punch-outs or plane maintenance.

Vehicle combat is based on dogfighting, neglecting all maneuvers which are based on the third dimension, dealing a bit different with some smaller bits and generally being a bit less fondly treated than aviation combat. It’s clearly visible where the emphasis was put on. In some way, IHW:WB is the exact opposite of Savage Worlds – they didn’t take vehicle combat and tacked on everything necessary for air combat, they took air combat and fined it down until ground vehicles could also fit into it.

Appendices
The biggest part of it are the plane stats, with much emphasis put on combat planes which are affordable for mercenary companies and third-world countries. A bit less emphasis is put on helicopters, transport planes and first-world combat planes.
Ground vehicles finally receive no individual models at all, just generic representatives as “pick-up” or “light tank”.
Also, there are counters for all plane models, but not for a single ground vehicle or even for a common infantryman.

An own chapter is devoted to statting up NPCs. Unimportant NPCs just receive a template as “terrorist” and are good to go; more important ones use rolled stats or the normal lifepath for PCs.
I’m especially fond of the “Random NPC Mission” table, which gives an NPC – surprise, surprise – a random mission or agenda he’s more or less secretly following. This is an excellent starting point and source for improvised adventures, subplots, complications and sudden plot twists, and it should also serve good purposes in all other contemporary games.

There are also some optional rules, such as Plot Points (a hybrid between re-roll points and fan-mail for other game participants) or More Grittiness (reducing the hitpoints of all entities). Everything looks usable, but there’s nothing to write at home about.

A sample organization is also included, together with a beginner adventure. Due to available space it remains a bit vague and terse, but it delivers everything needed as maps or NPC stats, and it offers a clearly defined mission without a pre-defined plot, rather than a story to re-tell it to players with a “here we are now, entertain us” attitude.
I have only to criticize that the adventure doesn’t manage to play to the big strength of IHW:WB, the air combat system. Rather, the focus is on less supported SpecOps, while the air combat part is purely optional and looks hastily tacked on.

It should also be noted that there’s no dedicated chapter for play advice, as well as any explanation along the lines of “what is role-playing?” or “what’s the goal of this game?” Here and there smaller bits of advice are found, but all in all it seems like IHW:WB was written for experienced gamers who have already found their own style and are ready to make the game their own.


Conclusion
IHW:WB is based on a rather unspectacular system with some quirks and some interesting ideas, but overall you could also replace it with GURPS, Fuzion or [your favourite “realistic” generic system]. It has some unique ideas as the personality Traits or the Troupe Play with the Staff characters, but these ideas are only loosely connected to the system and could be easily stolen and integrated into a system of your choice.
One advantage is certainly that the creator is easily to get through to by e-mail or private message on several forums, what especially lessens the problems from the bad presentation, but can’t eliminate them.
Eventually, I can neither especially recommend the game, nor can I feel the obligation to warn anyone from buying it – it’s just average.

The question which should make or break the game is the following one: Do you want to play a contemporary military campaign with a lot of focus on air combat? The air combat system is the greatest part of the whole game, and (in addition to the saved workload by the already game-ready processed planes) it would be the best reason to use it and to put into it the work to struggle through its bad presentation.
Alternatively, you could just buy the PDF and rip off the universally usable game aids as the company rules or the contract random table for use in a merc campaign in the system of your choice and look for the smaller ideas to steal them for your game (as the personaility Traits or the Random NPC Mission table). Everyone has to know if this would be worth the 12US$.

Excellent review, Skyrock! Great attention to detail, and a solid, well written review. Thanks!

-clash

Thanks for your praise, Clash Glad that you've enjoyed reading it.

Quote from: CuteTabitha

Seriously, stop your being losers!

[/SIZE][/COLOR][/FONT]

What is this supposed to mean, Tabitha?

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceWhat is this supposed to mean, Tabitha?

Obviously someone is more interested in hot pink than wild blue.

Quote from: GrimGentObviously someone is more interested in hot pink than wild blue.

Hehe! True! I responded to this before I saw the flood of pink throughout the rest of the site.

-clash

There was a person going by "Tabbycat" that used to hang all over Luftwaffe 1946. I wonder if there's any connection...naw, probably not.:cool:

Quote from: SkyrockThanks for your praise, Clash Glad that you've enjoyed reading it.

I thought your review was very thorough. I winced at a couple of spots, but I think you've very fairly presented our baby to the PAL (Public At Large).:cool:

Quote from: CmdrPowersI thought your review was very thorough. I winced at a couple of spots, but I think you've very fairly presented our baby to the PAL (Public At Large).:cool:

Thanks

But why did you wince? If it's language-wise, I'm clearly not a native speaker, and unfortunately I coulnd't get ahold of such a proofreader in time. I'd appreciate some concrete pointers in this regard, as this one is going to be spread a bit further.
If it's because of another reason, I'd still like to hear them. If I couldn't take some criticism, I wouldn't have been able to stay on this forum for so long

Quote from: GrimGentObviously someone is more interested in hot pink than wild blue.

Someone should point him or her to Doc Rotwangs blog, although I can't definitively tell if his pink is more hot or more tepid.

Quote from: SkyrockThanks

But why did you wince? If it's language-wise, I'm clearly not a native speaker, and unfortunately I coulnd't get ahold of such a proofreader in time. I'd appreciate some concrete pointers in this regard, as this one is going to be spread a bit further.
If it's because of another reason, I'd still like to hear them. If I couldn't take some criticism, I wouldn't have been able to stay on this forum for so long

Nah, I winced because I'm the co-author. Some of your telling points struck home, Skyrock!:D

Quote from: CmdrPowersNah, I winced because I'm the co-author. Some of your telling points struck home, Skyrock!:D

CmdrPowers is Michael Scott, my co-author on Wild Blue.

-clash

Sorry, I haven't checked your profile, so I hadn't guessed that you are Michael Scott. (And somehow I managed to misread "our baby" as "your baby" and to relate "baby" on the review rather than the game.)

Quote from: CmdrPowersSome of your telling points struck home, Skyrock!:D

Blame Clash, he's already known that I rather don the iron gauntlets than the kid gloves when it comes to dissecting and analyzing games

Quote from: SkyrockSorry, I haven't checked your profile, so I hadn't guessed that you are Michael Scott. (And somehow I managed to misread "our baby" as "your baby" and to relate "baby" on the review rather than the game.)

Blame Clash, he's already known that I rather don the iron gauntlets than the kid gloves when it comes to dissecting and analyzing games

If I didn't want that, I wouldn't have sent it to him.

-clash

Ah! I remember now a point I was to make! In the review, Skyrock said:

"This one leaves me a bit puzzled. In the former IHW installments, where the subject was to lead the officer of an actual army to renown and glory, I can see the reasoning behind this mechanic; in a game about mercs (who should be less involved with the consideration between honor and necessary evils), it looks a bit tacked on."

Actually, I considered removing it from the game, but one of my alpha players brought up a very neat point. He said mercs actually need to be MORE concerned with Honor and Practicality than people in national service because there is no support structure, no tradition, no social reinforcement of honor in a mercenary company. It is exactly this point that causes the merc to get a bad name. In the short term, it's practical to slaughter prisoners. It's practical to kill suspected terrorists without trial. It's practical to do whatever it takes to get the job done. It's only in the long term that honor pays off.

-clash

Mercenaries do not (usually) have a long tradition or custom to fall back on. They have each other- the "Band of Brothers" thing. While national units can talk about the "Honor of the Regiment", Mercs compete for bonuses.

On the other hand, if a mercenary company can last long enough, it will have its own traditions. And, if the merc outfit is a 'descendant' of a regular military outfit (ala Jerry Pournelle's Falkenburg's 42nd stories), they have their old traditions to draw upon.

I'm sure there are plenty of mercenaries who just fight for money, but I believe that the good ones fight for the pure adrenalin thrill and for their fellow mercs.

Yeah, that's my long-winded way of saying that I agree with you, clash!:)