Brother against brother

[JudgeDredd]

Only JD would buy a $50 DVD set to watch in order to convince him to spend $50 on a game!   

There's some logic in my madness - I could buy the game and have it sit there doing nothing with my other games (and my ACW II game) or...the series might get me hankering for more ACW goodness.  >:D

I have heard about the Ken Burns series and have honestly wanted to buy it for ages but put it off enough to keep forgetting to buy it. This game got my juices flowing again for some ACW.

I honestly don't know if I'll buy this one...but the series might at least get me to play the CW II game I have and never touched.

[Toonces]

Well you know the saying, you've got to spend money to spend money.   :P

Or something like that.

[JudgeDredd]

Hey surf boy - how was the water? 

[ERutins]

Can I ask Gil whilst you are checking here - do you know if the manual is the same in type (hard backed hard bound) as the War in the West manual?

The physical manual in this case is a full color 200 page printed manual on good stock, sized as most of our manuals are to fix (barely) in the game box.  This is not the hardbound type (only WIF and WITW are) but softcover that fits  in the box.

Regards,

- Erik

[ERutins]

Ok, I'm not trying to bash this game as Gil has put a lot of work into it. I made my peace with the price and that has been discussed. I had assumed that it came with a number of different battles. I'm sure you guys probably know but I didn't... that it only comes with first Manassas, Wilson's Creek and Williamsburg?

First Manassas and Williamsburg are actually pretty huge battles and Wilson's Creek is a lot of fun.  Have you had a look at the in-game maps we've posted?  I guess I'm of the type that battles which are interesting which I haven't already played 10 times are actually more interesting to me than doing Antietam or Gettysburg again (though those would be fun too).

Also, you missed Mill Springs, which also includes the "what if" additional battlefield of Beech Grove.

[bbmike]

JD, watching the Ken Burns Civil War series WILL make you want to play Civil War games. Well, at least it does for me.  8)

[mikeck]

Ok, I'm not trying to bash this game as Gil has put a lot of work into it. I made my peace with the price and that has been discussed. I had assumed that it came with a number of different battles. I'm sure you guys probably know but I didn't... that it only comes with first Manassas, Wilson's Creek and Williamsburg?

First Manassas and Williamsburg are actually pretty huge battles and Wilson's Creek is a lot of fun.  Have you had a look at the in-game maps we've posted?  I guess I'm of the type that battles which are interesting which I haven't already played 10 times are actually more interesting to me than doing Antietam or Gettysburg again (though those would be fun too).

Also, you missed Mill Springs, which also includes the "what if" additional battlefield of Beech Grove.

Erik,

The maps look great. My point was just that if you are only going to have a few battles, why not battles that were a bit more impactful and bigger. Gil actually answered by explaining that the intention was to use only early 1861-2 battles. I'm on board with Wilson creek but why not shiloh or 2nd manassas. Both were bigger battles with more organization but were still early (spring-summer 1862). But that was the choice and I understand what Gil was saying

I just couldnt imagine "Scourge of War: Belmont". It was a battle but not one I would imagine many want to wargame. I could be wrong. I hope this game sells like hot cakes and we get more

[JudgeDredd]

Personally I think it's a cool idea to have a road map which covers the battles from start to finish. Kind of your own journey.

Also - it's a nice idea to have some of the more obscure or lesser battles. At least from a person who isn't overly knowledgeable - I understand people who know about the war in detail might see some as "not worthy" for want of a better phrase.

[panzerde]

Also - it's a nice idea to have some of the more obscure or lesser battles. At least from a person who isn't overly knowledgeable - I understand people who know about the war in detail might see some as "not worthy" for want of a better phrase.

I really enjoy playing less well known battles, and even quite small and historically indecisive engagements. Aside from having played battles like Gettysburg and Antietam to death, some of the smaller battles, where the commanders were very constrained in number and types of troops, can be very challenging and tactically interesting.

I really like playing 1st Manassas. I even recently read a book about it, because I found it so interesting. Neither side really knew what they were doing yet and it makes for some interesting situations.

I've been trying to hold off on buying this because there are a couple of other games I want to pick up, and the price tag gives me pause. Still, I'll almost certainly pick it up soon.

[mikeck]

I really wish someone besides tiller would do some of the western battles: Shiloh, Chickamauga and Chatanooga in particular. Oh well. Don't get me wrong, I like to play smaller obscure battles too...just not exclusively. But then I'm not the one making the game. To each their own

JD...if you are now just starting to get interested in the ACW, I recommend Shelby Footed 3 volumn narrative. T about 3000 pages all told but it is a great read and truly a "narrative" instead of a "1st Regiment went here and 3rd division went there"

[panzerde]

It occurred to me that this is very much the sort of game I want to encourage Matrix/Slitherine to make, so I ought to vote with my wallet. Purchased and installing now.

The engine looks like it might be quite nice for Napoleonics, too.

[panzerde]

The game has crashed twice on me so far. Other than that, the game system seems interesting and easy to play. I was pretty much crushing the CSA in the tutorial before it crashed, so I'm dialing up the difficulty a bit.

There's a lot of interesting depth here. I need to play some more before I really know what I'm talking about, though.

[mikeck]

The game has crashed twice on me so far. Other than that, the game system seems interesting and easy to play. I was pretty much crushing the CSA in the tutorial before it crashed, so I'm dialing up the difficulty a bit.

There's a lot of interesting depth here. I need to play some more before I really know what I'm talking about, though.

I downloaded the manual a few days ago. I'm about 75 pages through the 200 pages. I don't think you should be concerned about depth. There is plenty going on both apparent and under the hood

[-budd-]

I'm interested but i'm on the fence right now. I'd like to see how much meat is on the bone. A big thing for me is if the AI responds differently when you use a different plan. Whats the unit count in the larger scenario's. So far i've only seen the tutorial scenario, looking forward to seeing other scenario AAR's and youtube vids. The scale is where i like it, and the maps look great.

[JudgeDredd]

Also - it's a nice idea to have some of the more obscure or lesser battles. At least from a person who isn't overly knowledgeable - I understand people who know about the war in detail might see some as "not worthy" for want of a better phrase.

.....
Still, I'll almost certainly pick it up soon.

.....
Purchased and installing now.
.....

lol - just over 2 hours later. I think we have a challenger to me ladies and gentlemen  :))