Matrix Games Forums

Greetings to All,
How does BAB stack up against HPS Antietam with its Bull Run scenarios?

i can't comment as i've not tried HPS Antietam either, but hopefully someone here will be able to help you make a choice, good luck

I have several of HPS civil war games, including Gettysburg, Antietam and Vicksburg. Even though there dated, I find them much better than BOB

For single-player I think BaB is better. Tiller games are much better but the AI is bad.

Well I played a smaller scenario "Blackburn's Ford" with each game as the USA... a major victory with HPS and a draw with BaB.


HPS is fine, imho, dated but ok... I have several of their games, a tried and true system where you direct each units fire and direct melees....I like how you can move whole columns plus Antietam has a HUGE number of scenarios.


However where there are 'matching' scenarios I prefer BaB (you don't pick targets the unit's themselves pick their own, units can have a 'charge' setting of never, may or must. That said, I enjoy the fire resolution when after movement 'all hell breaks' loose.)

There are 'Various' brigade stances that effect all type of things such as how fast a unit can move, how close a unit can move to the enemy (ugly red x's) ect. This can lead to both joy and frustration as much is decided by percentage chance based upon leader ratings. There are urge unit and hex focus commands also.


I like the game and find it detailed and innovative but I will add that BaB isn't for everyone, I suggest watching some you-tube videos before purchasing.

BaB is a better game system than HPS. HPS (John Tiller Games) are basically automated board games. Some people prefer the absolute control this gives them over their units. BaB add some of the capacities the computer brings to games. Uncertainty, fog of war, need to coordinate units, difficulty changing strategy once the troops are committed, etc.

Some people dislike this loss of control but it better simulates the command problems of the Civil War. Armies couldn't shift directions on the whim of a leader.

Unfortunately, First Bull Run is a rather small battle with limited replay ability. The other scenarios in the game are very small almost brigade side affairs. And, it is beginning to look like we will never see a follow up game covering a large battle.

I have both. The BaB system is better and much more realistic. The Tiller games AI is poorer.

Tiller games played head to head or via email can be a lot of fun.

HPS/JT games work very well for PBEM which is the main reason I play them more than any other. But they are more game than simulation. BaB is a much better simulation of Civil War combat but needs some work for PBEM. Especially in the area of displaying the last turn. It needs a good replay of opponents move function.

Unfortunately, BaB has only one group of interesting scenarios and they are the First Bull Run ones. And, I have played them to death. It needs a major battle and it really needs the next battle to be Gettysburg. Gettysburg would give it the breath of scenarios it needs to keep it playable for more than a few months. But I fear the best we will get is Second Bull Run and maybe Antietam. Both are interesting subject but don't make good games since the Union should win both with ease. When scenario try to cover situation where one side has 2 or 3 times the forces as the other it is hard to handicap them sufficiently to make a game.

Greetings to All,
I appreciate all your posts on BAB as compared to HPS Antietam's Bull Run scenarios.
Would definitely like a Gettysburg offering by the team.
I may still get BAB since watching all the videos and studying the published reviews make it appealing.
I have all the HPS Civil War titles and Scourge of War titles, as well as Talonsoft civil war offerings. Also Take Command Bull Run & 2nd Manassas.
Curious to try BAB's approach w/o the controlled fire segment of units.
My apologies for the spelling errors of BOB & Antitum in the initial post.
Too much wine that night celebrating the birth of my first grandchild, a boy.