FOF vs AACW

[Johnus]

I expected to prefer AACW; I love BOA; I could not get into COG. Yet I prefer FOF over AACW hands down.

Why ??

FOF is by far the more finished product. This was true, even before FOF was patched and re-patched extensively since it was released last December. But it is especially true now. FOF now plays very historically. AACW is in a teething stage and there are important kinks that need to be worked out. The American Civil War was a huge and long struggle and I do not believe that small developers can adequately playtest detailed simulations of same without the wargamming public's input. AACW will be patched and improved and repatched and reimproved I am sure. But for now, FOF is a more accurate simulation with respect to historical results. (I am relying for the most part on AAR's and forum postings with respect to the historical accuracy of AACW results.)

I did not expect I would, but at least for now, I feel that the FOF system and engine is more appropriate for the conflict. And it is more enjoyable. I find the AACW system unconfortable, at this scale. You make detailed plans, hit the turn button and bam, you get battle results, all without even seeing your units move. This could, and probably will be, improved upon, but for now it is an inferior system to FOF. I understand and appreciate that myriad factors are computed to obtain AACW combat results, but, unless I am able to plan with respect to same, and see my units at least move to the scene of the conflict, I am not able to really appreciate the detail of these factors. The AACW map is exquisite, but I am sometimes at a loss as to where a battle has taken place, the battle results having listed a county without even showing the map. FOF shows you what is happening, shows the armies moving, the site of the battle and, finally, even lets you fight same if you want.

Asked in the abstract, I would probably respond that I would prefer to concentrate on a purely strategic game, without being distracted by detailed battles. But in practice, I simply love the FOF system. It seems to happen every time I play. Just when I am about to call it a day, having had my full of strategy, I am presented with a detailed battle. The detailed battles reflect the strategic situation, are historically acceptable, as far as a simulation is concerned, are a challenge and are great fun.

The non-military (economic, etc.) portions of each game are very different. FOF is much more detailed, AACW much more basic. FOF allows you, via preferences, to hand over much of same to the AI if you like. Both games have significant learning curves.

I look ahead to enjoying AACW as the game improves. AGEOD is a great company and they seem to contantly improve their products, witness the 12 or so patches so far for BOA. I will buy every game they issue (you should also see my Matrix collection.) But for now the bulk of my civil war wargaming time will be spent with FOF.

[LarryP]

Johnnie; Very well written! I agree with quite a bit relating to the comparisons. AACW is pretty enough but I find it hard to do a lot of things. Worse is after I do them I am not sure they got done. Then most are not reversible. For instance, merging Corps cannot be undone without a major hassle. I merge a lot of troops to get those red-letter points to decrease but to reverse a bad decision is really a pain. However I love the ToolTips that are everywhere. I am addicted to ToolTips as they offer so much help at the spot where they are needed.

I personally like the map better in AACW as I can zoom in and out, BUT, like you said the places are not labeled well.

I still sometimes have trouble moving armies in FOF. I think I have them set to move to a location and when the turn is playing out, some do and some don't. I just figured that I am stupid and nobody else has this problem. I felt too embarassed to ask about this after reading the manual over and over about this and doing it tons of times.

There is one item that cannot be beat, and that is the constant support that Matrix gives. BOA and AACW gets support too, but it's not the same as here.

Good post Johnnie!

[Curious]

It's all a matter of each person's individual (subjective) likes and dislikes -- as it should be.  Glad you're happy with FoF.
 
CB

[Gil R.]

LarryP,
If a unit/force fails to move, check the Unit History and it will say why. No one seems to know this -- apparently, because it doesn't seem to be in the manual.

[LarryP]

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

LarryP,
If a unit/force fails to move, check the Unit History and it will say why. No one seems to know this -- apparently, because it doesn't seem to be in the manual.

Great! I will try that and maybe find out why. Thank you.

[Walloc]

To add to Gil.
You gota check the top container involved in the move. So if its a army moving u gota check the army units history. Wont help to check a division inside the army.

Hope it helps,

Rasmus

[ChuckK]

I seem to play AACW for a few days straight, then FOF for a few days in a row.  I haven't settled on just playing one game.  There are things I really like and dislike about both games but they are both so obviously labors of love from their developers that I can overlook the minor annoyances. 
 
Bravo to Western Civilizations and AGEOD!!   

[ericbabe]

ORIGINAL: Gil R.
If a unit/force fails to move, check the Unit History and it will say why. No one seems to know this -- apparently, because it doesn't seem to be in the manual.

Gil: we added this in our first patch, that is why it's not in the manual.

[LarryP]

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

ORIGINAL: Gil R.
If a unit/force fails to move, check the Unit History and it will say why. No one seems to know this -- apparently, because it doesn't seem to be in the manual.

Gil: we added this in our first patch, that is why it's not in the manual.

I'm glad that you are doing at least a PDF file update with the new changes. I am a manual oriented kind of game player. I read the instructions when I buy things too, kind of weird huh... ?! [8|]

[Johnus]

LarryP:

I read manuals and instructions also. It is most likely a symptom of a serious mental deficiency. Or maybe I am afraid that if I don't first find out how it works, I'll break it. My kids on the other hand just hit buttons until the device in question works. They are voracious readers but will not give a manual a second look. You might say they think manual is an hispanic first name.

[LarryP]

ORIGINAL: Johnnie

LarryP:

You might say they think manual is an hispanic first name.

ROFLMBO = Rolling On Floor Laughing My Butt Off. That's EManual... electronic manual or hispanic name. Good one Johnnie!

I loved the days when I would buy new software and piles of great manuals would accompany the disks. Now it's PDF or HTML junk. I get a disk which I think is a driver installation and it's just an HTML file. This last mouse installation was that way from Logitech. It was Plug & Play and the CD was trying to sell me stuff, plus an online HTML manual.

[Texashawk]

Ah, for the days when you could measure the worth of a game by how heavy the box.
 
Sigh...

[Gray_Lensman]

 
Say what you want, there is one major advantage to e-documents, they are much easily searched. However, generally, they are not updated any more often then printed manuals, which is rather disappointing, considering they are electronic and not printed. To WCS' credit however, I am rather pleased that they are taking the time to rework the CoG e-manual, and hopefully the FoF e-manual.

[Hard Sarge]

ORIGINAL: LarryP

ORIGINAL: Johnnie

LarryP:

You might say they think manual is an hispanic first name.

ROFLMBO = Rolling On Floor Laughing My Butt Off. That's EManual... electronic manual or hispanic name. Good one Johnnie!

I loved the days when I would buy new software and piles of great manuals would accompany the disks. Now it's PDF or HTML junk. I get a disk which I think is a driver installation and it's just an HTML file. This last mouse installation was that way from Logitech. It was Plug & Play and the CD was trying to sell me stuff, plus an online HTML manual.

Hey, I work with him, he a good dude

[Alan_Bernardo]

ORIGINAL: ChuckK

I seem to play AACW for a few days straight, then FOF for a few days in a row.  I haven't settled on just playing one game.  There are things I really like and dislike about both games but they are both so obviously labors of love from their developers that I can overlook the minor annoyances. 

Bravo to Western Civilizations and AGEOD!!   

I've been playing more of ACW than FoF simply because that's what I've been doing. Both games are pretty good, though it is a bit silly to ask such a question on a FoF board. Still, it's obvious that both games either are pretty good or else wargamers are more civil than other types of gamers, or both.


Alan

[Erik Rutins]

Well, thank you for the compliment and for the well-written post. We recommend that every ACW wargamer own both as you never know which will match your mood on a given day. They are both different and both excellent games.

[LarryP]

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

Hey, I work with him, he a good dude

I know a hispanic woman that had twin boys... she named them HoseA and HoseB. [:D]

[LarryP]

ORIGINAL: Texashawk

Ah, for the days when you could measure the worth of a game by how heavy the box.

Sigh...

I remember the first time I picked up a software box and it was so light, I thought it was empty. It had just one CD and a registration card. Rip off! That was at the beginning of no more paper docs.

Had it not been for the rattling inside I would have put the box back on the shelf.

[Johnus]

Larry P:

Did you take advantage of the FOF manual cum cd deal ?? I don't know if it's still available; but it includes a real, live, thick manual of over 190 well-printed pages. It is actually heavy. Print is a little small but nothing is perfect.

[LarryP]

ORIGINAL: Johnnie

Larry P:

Did you take advantage of the FOF manual cum cd deal ?? I don't know if it's still available; but it includes a real, live, thick manual of over 190 well-printed pages. It is actually heavy. Print is a little small but nothing is perfect.

Oh yeah. When Matrix offered the manual, 2 CD's, and the box for $9.95 I jumped on it. The manual is excellent, but it's sad that so much now is missing due to all the changes since printing.