Matrix Games Forums

Hi, I can't wait to play this game. I followed it's prgress with expectation. I almost had a chance to play test it but it was during a period both my machine and internet connection failed. By the time I was ready the opening was closed. (sigh) Still it is something I have been waiting for. I think they did a fine job and just what they always said they were doing.

I think it will be a great game. Granted, Im still partial to SMG and SMA, but Ill probably go ahead and pick this one up too.

I still want a Revolutionary War game like this, that would be sweet.

Hi!

When it comes to games, I really try to be a straight shooter. I've been burned by so many games it ain't funny. So when I comment on a game, I do so because I want people to know whether spending their hard earned cash is worth it or not.

Obviously, being a part of the MMG team tells you a lot about what I think about this game. But that doesn't mean to say this game is for everybody.

If, for example, you cannot live without micromanaging every aspect of the game (and I like doing that too.. depending on the game), then you really need to think hard about buying this game. Only at the lowest level (Brigade) will mircomanaging pay off, as it should because you are directing and responsible for your regiments. As soon as you start climbing the chain-of-command, you have to "assume" the rank, and play as you would command. So at the Division level, you have to learn how to make brigades work, and stay out of the regimental stuff, leaving that to the commander to take care of. When you move to the Army Commander level, well jeez, that is mind blowing. Here you need to let your Division Commanders take care of the fighting and concentrate on maneuvering your divisions and giving them the proper stance (defend, attack, probe or hold) and then let them fight the battle. That doesn't mean you can't intervene at critical areas, but if you start mircromanaging too much, you lose the big picture and you get your butt kicked.

So this game really requires a change in the way you are used to playing wargames, and it is tough. The yanks are easier to handle than the rebs as they have five divisions while the rebs have two large armies. And to be quite honest with you, I still lose more games than I win.

And there are some scenarios that are just really difficult, even on the normal setting. The first scenario, a brigade scenario called Evans, is the setting for the opening of the battle. It is also one of the hardest scenarios to win. Guys come on the board and say, hey, what am I doing wrong, I've lost 5 times in a row? All I can say is, when I first started playing this game, I lost a lot more than 5 times in a row. I still have not been able to hit the magic 400 level on that scenario!!!

Now sometimes, and these are few and far between for me after wargaming for upteen years, a game can be too tough. And after struggling with Evans I asked the MMG guys if they thought that maybe this game was too tough for the average joe. They told me that they programmed the AI to fight and that I would just have to learn how to fight back. At first I thought that was a mistake, but when I look back at my experience I realize they were right. Here is a game with an awesome AI. The AI will react to you, it is not hard coded. So each and every time you play the game, or even a scenario, the battle will play out differently. Quite frankly, there can be no better way to ensure replayability.

Now the game has a number of quirks. Open play especially can be a bit frustrating. But if you put in the time, you can work around these things and have a really enjoyable experience. I know this game is far from perfect, but I also know that Adam and Norb are dedicated to seeing that the game improves with each iteration. Open play, which will one day, I believe, serve as the heart of multiplayer, needs a lot of work, especially when you play at the lower levels. I recommend playing the Army Commander right now in open play and move your way up from small to medium and finally large battles.

It takes something pretty special to stir this gamers old blood, but in CWBR, each time I spool up this game, I get a sense of anticipation that I haven't felt in a long time.

Ray (alias Lava)

Hi, I have not seen it but just going by the name. Any scenario from First Bull Run with the title "Evans" should be impossible to win. (Unless "Stonewall "shows up )
(All things being historic)
I believe Evans faced 18,000 Union troops with only 3 or 4 rgts and had to hold while the remainder of the Confederate Army moved over.

Got a copy based on Ray's comments and it's a great game. If you like gaming ACW, you should get this.

Regards,

- Erik

Hi Erik. Now I am jealous.

Yeah I'm getting creamed on that Evans scenario. I've moved everywhere I can think of, done every type of setup, delay, withdraw, sneak, lol. I end up wayyyy in the negative, but, I must be doing something right, each time it lasts a little longer and more of the rebel forces show up, but, they get slaughtered and we all end up retreating.

Something I am finding just a little bit strange:

I am back to back with my rebel forces with union forces that are fighting another rebel force behind me. Now THAT I find a little bit strange, that a union line of troups would run behind me right up to my back and fight what's in front of them instead of what's behind them.

Something seems a little out of cohesion there. And it's not just my troups alone, I'm seeing this across the map, weird like this with units bypassing other units and setting up a line to face other units while their backs are up against the enemy. lol