AGEOD Forums

Convince my guys

Looking at the two which is better and why?

Thanks

The two games take a very different approach to modeling the ACW. I'm happy to have both.

Yeah it's really impossible to rate the two side by side. They are totally different concepts: FoF is best thought of as a tactical CW battle game, with a strategic game tacked on to give the battles some context.

AACW is pure strategy.

I don't think many people here will get into the which is better debate, although I do have my preferance.

I don't think Ageod's forum is the right place for that. Maybe Wargamer.com might be better suited.

It just has the potential to get nasty, and Ageod is to civil a forum to start petty little arguements.
Some of the FoF team posts here too, so they would get dragged in, which I'm sure they don't want to do.


Sorry to not take the bait.

I find jimwinsor's comment to be excellent. For many, it is simply a matter of gaming tastes; for others, it is satisfying to own both.

I will follow tc237's recommendation and example and not express my totally valueless opinion here.

They are different games which offer unique models portraying the Civil War. That said they are the BEST games out there...period. The rest is up to personal preference...what i love about AACW i can't find in FOF. What i love about FOF i can't find in AACW...so i have both and i'm content .

comp.sys.ibm.games.war-historical has a bit of debate on this subject.

If your ISP does not provide the newsgroup, use Google Groups to get at it.

Hell Patrol wrote:They are different games which offer unique models portraying the Civil War. That said they are the BEST games out there...period. The rest is up to personal preference...what i love about AACW i can't find in FOF. What i love about FOF i can't find in AACW...so i have both and i'm content .

I'd say the best AND ONLY games out there of the Civil War at a strategic level...

Hell Patrol wrote:They are different games which offer unique models portraying the Civil War. That said they are the BEST games out there...period. The rest is up to personal preference...what i love about AACW i can't find in FOF. What i love about FOF i can't find in AACW...so i have both and i'm content .

Excellent! I was going to say just about the same. The two are different, very different, but what's lacking in one the other has. Both companies are excellent too. Also the purchase\download ways of both companies are the best. A serial number and you are set to do whatever and whenever.

I'm thrilled to have both. As someone said, the tactical battle engine in FoF is the reason I play that one, and the recent (and upcoming) updates are continuing to make it even better.

AACW, meanwhile, is simply a superb, complex-yet-elegant strategic model of all of the important aspects of the conflict. Playing it just gives me a warm feeling about the art, research, and design decisions that have gone into the game.

It's amazing that the two games have come out so close together. Other genres have to wait a decade for two good systems to come along.

LarryP wrote:Excellent! I was going to say just about the same. The two are different, very different, but what's lacking in one the other has. Both companies are excellent too. Also the purchase\download ways of both companies are the best. A serial number and you are set to do whatever and whenever.

Well, about the purchase / download system, I hope they don't use STEAM, becasue I bought a game recently through that system and I don't like that, to start playing, I need to be connected to the internet to log onto Steam.

John_C wrote:Well, about the purchase / download system, I hope they don't use STEAM, becasue I bought a game recently through that system and I don't like that, to start playing, I need to be connected to the internet to log onto Steam.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1432812
Check out the above link. It's to a thread I started that addresses Steam.

In other words, both our (Matrix) and AGEOD's download systems are about as far from Steam as you can get.

ERutins wrote:In other words, both our (Matrix) and AGEOD's download systems are about as far from Steam as you can get.

Erik, you just blew your cover. But, it's true. Matrix and AGEOD, each in its own way, have it right and do a great job.

ERutins wrote:In other words, both our (Matrix) and AGEOD's download systems are about as far from Steam as you can get.

My oh my, they are on the opposite ends of the downloading spectrum. So is your customer support.

pasternakski wrote:Erik, you just blew your cover. But, it's true. Matrix and AGEOD, each in its own way, have it right and do a great job.

I had cover?

ERutins wrote:I had cover?

Well, I wasn't telling anybody...

I've got both and to quote Mater from Disney's Cars, "I'm as happy as a tornado in a trailer park!"

Geez, can anyone think of any another decent strategic takes on the Civil War besides Hunter's ACW which was released about a decade ago? I can't but may be I missed something.

Buy both, support the genre. apy:

John_C wrote:Well, about the purchase / download system, I hope they don't use STEAM, becasue I bought a game recently through that system and I don't like that, to start playing, I need to be connected to the internet to log onto Steam.

You only need a connection to download the game or a patch...that's it.

Hell Patrol wrote:You only need a connection to download the game or a patch...that's it.

Good, because I hate to think that with the STEAM game I bought I won't be able to play if one day I lack my internet connection for some reason, as it is required to initiate the game each time ! leure:

FOF and AACW are both quality games, though both take a different approach. I am happy I own them both.

I would recommend you support the hobby and buy both games. We are blessed to have two strong ACW titles after years and years of nothing. Both of these developers need to be able to continue to prosper so they can deliver more games in the future.

As a side note, I think Gary Grigsby is developing yet a third strategic ACW game for Matrix. If it comes out this year, I will buy that too, and consider myself triply blessed in 2007.

I liked BoA, so I am anxiously waiting for the cd-rom version of ACW to come out. I haven't played FoF or CoG so I couldn't even make an attempt to compare the two game systems. That being said, competition is healthy, and TWO Civil War games on the market are better than none!!! And of course both games will be better because of it...in the end, the consumer is the winner!!!

I played CoG and I was disappointed by it. This is a flavor game, not badly designed , but unhistorical. ( Ottomans in Sweden , Spain army stronger than France's one, etc...)
The tactical engine is a sum of many complex settings for troops, terrain, weather and more but in battle you don't see how these settings applied, so despite a significative time spent by designers to simulate the things at best, the player is confused , frustrated.

So you are in situation to have bought a spendid car you know it is working well but you don't know why and how.

I don't buy a game for that and it's not for me a good gaming experience...

Both are great games. I would recommend both. Both have super great support from the Dev's.

I bought and play both.

I play and enjoy both. AACW is a bit more polished at this point, but I expect the upcoming patch for FOF will improve that game.

I think both games are fun to play, people might want to see what's in for themselves ... everybody has his own taste.

In fact this question is very valid - but you can only answer it after a year ... which one are you still playing and which one not. Or perhaps both are played ...

Or pehaps there will be other games by then...

For what its worth my first reaction was how polished and impressive the ACW map is compared to the one in FoF. Also the fact FoF has no proper tutorial and a 200+ page manual was sufficient to put me off before I had even got started.

Stoneage wrote:For what its worth my first reaction was how polished and impressive the ACW map is compared to the one in FoF. Also the fact FoF has no proper tutorial and a 200+ page manual was sufficient to put me off before I had even got started.

ditto. that manual...

Nah, give 'em credit for including a nice 200 page hardcopy manual in FOF. I've been reading it during my lunch breaks at work, it's fine.