WBTS vs ACW Question

From the legendary team at 2 by 3 Games comes a new grand strategy masterpiece: Gary Grigsby’s War Between the States. Taking gamers back to the American Civil War, this innovative grand strategy game allows players to experience the trials and tribulations of the role of commander-in-chief for either side. Historically accurate, detailed and finely balanced for realistic gameplay, War Between the States is also easy to play and does not take months to finish.

Moderators: Joel Billings, PyleDriver

Post Reply
Leeds
Posts: 75
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 1:39 am

WBTS vs ACW Question

Post by Leeds »

Please advise a potential buyer.....which game is better and easier to play.

Personally, I prefer WW2 Time of Wrath to Hearts of Iron as it easier to jump in to and I like hexes!

I played Forge of Freedom and liked it except for the combat which was either too simple or too unwieldy. I have bough ACW but am overwhelmed by the game board (map) and minutae.

Is WBTS a better game?

Also, and importantly as the screenshots dont show it, can one use Nato symbols in lieu of the pony sprites?

Thanks
User avatar
Erik Rutins
Posts: 39325
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA
Contact:

RE: WBTS vs ACW Question

Post by Erik Rutins »

WBTS is not a simple game, but it is probably the least overwhelming of the three excellent ACW grand strategy games we currently offer. I should note that FOF also has options to significantly reduce the complexity, though you already have and enjoy FOF so I assume you are already aware of that.

WBTS is an outstanding game and a faithful simulation of the ACW. Of the three, which each have their own strengths, I would say WBTS can be played through the fastest but is still quite immersive.

Yes, NATO symbols are definitely available as an in-game option.

Regards,

- Erik
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC


Image

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.
skshrews
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 7:32 pm

RE: WBTS vs ACW Question

Post by skshrews »

I have WBTS. I played the demo of AGEOD's ACW. I've never played FOF. I play primarily single player.

The AI in ACW wasn't particularly challenging. The battle resolution in FOF was tempting, but AAR's seemed to confirm that the AI was not particularly good on the tactical maps.

WBTS AI is reasonable, though as the Confederates it tends to "turtle"-dont't expect any Gettysburg like thrusts into the North. It also tends to parallel the historical war in that the eastern front is a slog, and most of the interesting action is in the western/coastal fronts.
SK
User avatar
Templer_12
Posts: 1707
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:29 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

RE: WBTS vs ACW Question

Post by Templer_12 »

@ Erik
ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

WBTS is not a simple game, but it is probably the least overwhelming of the three excellent ACW grand strategy games we currently offer. I should note that FOF also has options to significantly reduce the complexity, though you already have and enjoy FOF so I assume you are already aware of that.

WBTS is an outstanding game and a faithful simulation of the ACW. Of the three, which each have their own strengths, I would say WBTS can be played through the fastest but is still quite immersive.

Yes, NATO symbols are definitely available as an in-game option.

Regards,

- Erik

Well, I own all three games. You can not compare them. [:-] They are too different.
But I'm interested in your answer.
From your perspective what are the strengthening of the three games?
And also very interesting - what are weakening?

The opinion of other players would also be very welcome.
User avatar
Knavery
Posts: 286
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 2:44 pm

RE: WBTS vs ACW Question

Post by Knavery »

I'm also looking for an answer on this topic. I'm looking into buying one of the three, but overall, I'm looking for fun factor.
Windows 7 Home Premium (x64)
3.4 gigahertz AMD Phenom 965 Quad Core
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 1024Meg
4GB RAM
runyan99
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 11:59 pm

RE: WBTS vs ACW Question

Post by runyan99 »

I played ACW for a long time, and I find WBTS does a better job of simulating the war in a reasonable manner, and works better for 2 players.
User avatar
htuna
Posts: 591
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:52 am
Location: Boston, MA

RE: WBTS vs ACW Question

Post by htuna »

WBTS is not easy.. actually none of them are.. FOF is probably the easiest of the three..

I bought WBTS during the holiday sale, and could not get into it (will try again in the future)... AGEOD and FOF I enjoyed both.... FOF a lil more cause of the tactical battles.. FOF is the reason I picked up Crown of Glory during the Holiday sale! ... lol still haven't tried to play it yet.. but if it's at all like FOF, I'm sure I'll love it..

User avatar
Knavery
Posts: 286
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 2:44 pm

RE: WBTS vs ACW Question

Post by Knavery »

ORIGINAL: cmurphy625

WBTS is not easy.. actually none of them are.. FOF is probably the easiest of the three..

I bought WBTS during the holiday sale, and could not get into it (will try again in the future)... AGEOD and FOF I enjoyed both.... FOF a lil more cause of the tactical battles.. FOF is the reason I picked up Crown of Glory during the Holiday sale! ... lol still haven't tried to play it yet.. but if it's at all like FOF, I'm sure I'll love it..



I read the complete opposite in several places--that FoF is the most complex of the three and AGEOD the easiest. How is FoF with the fixed resolution?
Windows 7 Home Premium (x64)
3.4 gigahertz AMD Phenom 965 Quad Core
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 1024Meg
4GB RAM
User avatar
htuna
Posts: 591
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:52 am
Location: Boston, MA

RE: WBTS vs ACW Question

Post by htuna »

I got into FOF the quickest of the 3... AGOED took awhile to understand all the grouping of divisions and everything... WBTS.. I tried, was playing for while. but didn't seem to be clicking.. couldn't motivate my troops even though I'd build supply depots and have right Generals.. but it just wasn't fun.. you know when a game becomes like work and stops being fun, then it's not worth your time... For some people it is fun, for those people it is well worth the time..

I don't know.. the Tactical Battles in FOF, when you turn the battle in your favor, and run the NME from the field.. It's just good old plain fun for me, and worth the time!!!

Like I said, I'll probably try and get into WTBS again in the future, I bought it, might as well try to like it!
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War Between the States”