Matrix Games Forums

What are the postive and negative differences between the two games. Is this game fun to play? Thanks

They are two differnt types of games:
Commanders; Napolean at war is a Turn based stratigy game, like a much more involved Chess game.

Total War: Empires is a Real time stratagy game, with a two modes, the Real time staratagy battels and a grand stratagy/politcal mode.

ORIGINAL: xriz

They are two differnt types of games:
Commanders; Napolean at war is a Turn based stratigy game, like a much more involved Chess game.

Total War: Empires is a Real time stratagy game, with a two modes, the Real time staratagy battels and a grand stratagy/politcal mode.

He asked about Empire on Arms, not E:TW.

Empire in Arms is grand strategic turn-based; more complex but more realistic than CNAW. You're left with the old realism/fun quandary.

Commander series is a trade-off that offer both playability and realism at the same time. Many games are great in one of these areas at the expense of lacking in the other.

That is mainly also why Commander series is not only released in retail PC but is also ported into handheld consoles. I have not played Empires in Arms myself so just speaking about wargames in general and sticking to just explaining the Commander series place in this niche.

FWIW Empire I bought Empire in Arms. The game is just too much trouble to play just deploying your units to start the game can take hours. There is not even a default deployment best I can tell to get the thing started quickly. I have not bought Commander Napoleon yet. But my guess they would have had to go way, out of their way, to make it as unplayable as Empires in Arms.