Matrix Games Forums

Hi All,

I have been thinking about getting either Battlefront or BII and I am not sure which game is best overall? Battlefront has had mixed reviews and BII has lots of different senerios.

For those that have played both, what would you recommend if you could only get afford to get one of the games?
thanks.

Battlefront is on a bit different scale than Battles in Italy, but if you think you'd like BII you'd also like Battlefront. Battlefront is also the future of the SSG land combat series, so you're likely to see more happening here than with BII in the future. Really you can't go wrong with either choice though and BII could be seen as a good way to step up to Battlefront - it does have quite a few bonus scenarios at Run5 too.

Yeah in terms of right now at this moment, id go with BII. Although i love BF there are only currently a handfull of scenarios that may leave you wanting more. BII has been out for a couple of years and has enough scenarios to keep anyone busy for a good year or two.
 
BF will be the clear winner once there are some more scenarios available. So if you can, buy both [:D]

I am facing the same dilemma as mashkis: I have Battles in Normandy and Korsun Pocket and liked them a fair bit --- tho' the gameplay seems pretty same-same by the time of BiN. I'm intrigued by Battlefront, and during its developmnent I was very attentive, as I am very interested in gaming at this more Operational scale. But I too have reservations based on issues raised in the Forum.

I'd be very grateful hear some more opinions or comments on BiI vs BF.

If I can offer some advice:

I myself have played BiN, BiI and now BF. Whilst BiN is a great game, BiL has become my favorite game of the series release. It has an addictive twist to it, requiring a good knowledge of the game mecahnics to make it fullfilling in terms of a stratergy game. It has also a wealth of support through well established Customer Senarios, to keep the interest high as a purchase.

On the day of release, I purchased BF, downloaded the game, installed it, opened it and did a quick U turn!, this was something very different than BiI. Opening quickly the Manual which comes with the download, it was clear to see that this game was a more (I will use a saying from somone on the CoW Forum) "A Beer and Pretzels" game. You need to read the manual, read the AAR or reviews from gamers to understand what is in front of you. There is much to learn, new ways of supply, new direct action, defensive fire, front lines, recon units etc.

Once I understood the basics of game play and principals, BF became my most favorite of all SSG release's, although I still love playing BiI, BF gives me much more, much more scope to create a plan that works, or fails!.

IMHO, purchase BF, read the manual, play a bit against the AI, then start a PBEM game, this game will give you immense satisfaction once you understand it's mechanics.

Already there is 2 customer senarios 1. A tutorial by JSS 2. Operation Crusader by Brubaker, both brilliant ! and already enhancing the game. Many more customer senarios are in works also.

The downside (Sorry SSG) is the AI is not much of a challenge.

GEN

One thing to keep in mind is that there are many, many more scenarios for BII. Plus the AI in BII is very, very hard.

Agreed.

2 small senarios and two long ones with your purchase is not ideal, but the scope for add ons is enourmous.....

I think personally I prefer BiI and the scenarios that come with it (or even KP and BiN). BF is good, but it's taking some getting used to.

ORIGINAL: Whytfyjrd

I am facing the same dilemma as mashkis: I have Battles in Normandy and Korsun Pocket and liked them a fair bit --- tho' the gameplay seems pretty same-same by the time of BiN. I'm intrigued by Battlefront, and during its developmnent I was very attentive, as I am very interested in gaming at this more Operational scale. But I too have reservations based on issues raised in the Forum.

I'd be very grateful hear some more opinions or comments on BiI vs BF.

If you liked Korsun pocket I highly recommend the expansion scenario Across the Dnepr. It covers almost the exact map area and time period as the classic board game Panzergruppe Guderian.

There are also a number of free scenarios for BII available on the SSG website, one of which, Typhoon, is a natural extension of the Across the Dnepr scenario.

@ HansBolter: Thanks for the info. I actually have Dnepr, but I hadn't opened the box. I'll finally give it a go, based on the PGG comparison.
 
To the others: thanks for your thoughts too. In particular, Gen_Alexandra, your citing of the specfic aspects of what is different about BF were exactly what I'm looking for.
 
The Decisive Battles series (BiN, BiI, KP,AtD) is a fine game system. When I said the gameplay seemed "same-same," I meant that after playing BiN and KP the prospect of buying BiI made me think, "Do I want more pushing around of regiments, tracking Divisional integrity, figuring AT vs Armor bonuses, allocating Air/Aryty assets, assessing supply, and such?" And my first reaction was, "well, I know lots about the history of these battles, and there's a certain lack of 'novelty' in the situations due to knowledge of OOBs, etc."  Some people really like "historical verity", but I'd rather play with less foreknowledge of enemiy's OOB and intentions.
 
Thus my interest in BF: partly because the scale gives a player much greater scope for decision making with a wider variation of unit types and capabilities, and I presumed that there'd be lots of scenarios where players' (if they play scenarios "cold") tactical/operational choices are not so clear-cut. However, the similar "graphic look" of the two game systems gave me much pause at first: was the "template" of the DB series merely scaled down to the Battalion level, with some minor tweaks for the different asset capabilities?
 
I'll start reading and looking for those BF AARs and look for scenario releases.
 

ORIGINAL: Whytfyjrd
and I presumed that there'd be lots of scenarios where players' (if they play scenarios "cold") tactical/operational choices are not so clear-cut.  

This is the case. Read my mini review in a nearby thread.

I played A LOT of BiN and loved it...then played BiI and loved it a bit less (just personal reasons, I know Normandy very well..etc). Very excited about BF although destabilized at the begining by the new rules and all...I trust Matrix and the community of players will improve the game thru patches and new scenarios.
To answer your questions Battle in Italy is indeed a great game but has less future than BF. If you havent played either I would definitly get used to BF now because its life "expectancy" will be much longer. There are few battles now but give it a few weeks and they will start popping up like mushrooms (wishful thinking[:)]), I'm already reading salivating posts about Spanish Civil War battles for instance, the possibilities are endless.