How Strategic Command American Civil War succeeds as a strategic and operational game

[stockwellpete]

I bought this game when it first came out as I had really enjoyed the WW1 (a really great game) and WW2 games in this series. I didn't get on with it then and I still feel the same way now after returning to the game in the last week or so. I basically agree with the people who say that this system works very well for representing large scale conflicts like WW1 and WW2, but not so well for the ACW. The eastern seaboard between Washington and Richmond plays more like a WW1 era game, whereas the western regions do feel more like the ACW. I do think it would be better to have something like "Grand Tactician" (which has many other problems of its own) where you alternate between the strategic map and the various battle maps. I don't think this system would be suitable for Napoleonics either. Maybe a hypothetical Cold War strategy game would work very well? One other thing is that the map appears to be populated with giant toilet bowls. I think a better representation of fortifications would be quite easy to do. Not for me this game.

[Platoonist]

One other thing is that the map appears to be populated with giant toilet bowls. I think a better representation of fortifications would be quite easy to do.

To my eyes the 3-D fort art always resembled an old-fashioned bathroom sink or the bottom basin of a urinal. But then I never use the 3-D icons as I find them more difficult to read at a glance than the NATO type.

Sumter.jpg (37.29 KiB) Viewed 1157 times