FOF does the "inertia" problem right!

[Scona]

This game has the whole issue of battlefield "inertia" simulated correctly. Actually getting your troops to move where you want and when you want is never a sure thing; its either bad weather or muddled generals that undo all those creative operational schemes you carefully thought up. This makes it the best current game on the Civil War, which itself was an exercise in getting amateur armies to learn how to operate and win in a live fire setting. Other games don't do this command problem nearly as well; one aar (of a game which shall not be mentioned to avoid giving offense to other users or designers) actually had a Union cavalry raid outside of Vicksburg in October 1861 [X(]; something which should be impossible in real life as nobody could have concieved of that tactic at that point in time, or organized the logistics to support it.

[ericbabe]

Thank you for the kind words.  You "get" exactly what we were trying to do with the C&C rules.  Sometimes they aren't quite a strict as I would like, sometimes they are a little too stringent, but on the whole I've been pretty happy with how they've worked out.

[Anthropoid]

I very much agree with this, and I think it applies to the way the strategic level is setup as well. I've been touting the game among my Civilization buddies in hopes that your more nuanced approach to realistic military simulation might start to spread.
 
One slight caveat, some of the TOAWIII scenarios do a fairly good job with the 'inertia' issue, though at an operational level.

[ericbabe]

Thanks, Anthropoid.  I'd like to see our approach spread too.  I think our games will appeal to Civilization fans who like the broad array of choices that Civilization offers, but who wish that the Civ scenarios had more historical immersion and military detail.