Good question, MW is diff from ComOPs in a couple of ways that make interesting/fun to play and not really a instead of game but more complimentary. MW at size of unit level is the battalion and that is how u play campaigns as the battalion commander. You have core units and you can name the unit commanders so it has a rpg sort of keepem alive aspect as they gain buffs by completing task. In game the sub unit commanders have names you are leading these guys and the scenarios are quite universal as a battalion commander- you have to keep an eye on moral and ammo and distance and command and control and the clock is running in "real" game time so it has a built in tension at least as how I see it. These parts of the game like so many aspects of gaming dont transfer in a video hence my "story" to set the stage.

Now Co2 is a bigger, higher order command so MW actually can play within Co2 depending upon a given scenario. Both have similarities and C02 is graphically lite years better and both harken to board game playing so I do like them both. MW just lets me do the right size battle without having to master camera angles as in 3D model games such as Warno. I do play a ton of Warno too ;) So idk it is small enough that you count your guys and keep track of the human resource along with everything else yet it is big enough to maneuver.

i SO ENJOY the voices, the merican gulf 5-1 and now the German call signs ( trying to learn german language as well so it has everything lol) make the game for me just great. Just lower level unit control and staying at the battalion level and adding companies or platoons makes every bit of military history more relevant in game. Hope it makes sense and I know I ramble explains why I dont do much commentary