seems many of us here weren't wrong

From the first clash at Manassas to the epic confrontation between Lee and Grant, the Brother Against Brother series will bring new levels of historical detail and realism to the battles of the Civil War. This regimental-level game, created by the developers of the award-winning Forge of Freedom, builds on that game’s acclaimed tactical engine, adding scrupulously researched orders of battle, high-quality map graphics, command and control rules reflecting the numerous challenges faced by army commanders, and plenty other features. Beginning with The Drawing of The Sword – which recreates the pivotal opening battles at Manassas , Wilson ’s Creek, Mill Springs and Williamsburg – Brother Against Brother lets you refight the Civil War from start to finish.

Moderators: Gil R., ericbabe

Post Reply
User avatar
zakblood
Posts: 22652
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:19 am

seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by zakblood »

Code: Select all

https://www.wargamer.com/articles/civil-war-games/

just nice to see others still agree tbh

Windows 11 Pro 64-bit (10.0, Build 22000) (22000.co_release.210604-1628)
User avatar
Yogi the Great
Posts: 1949
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:28 pm
Location: Wisconsin

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by Yogi the Great »

ORIGINAL: zakblood

Code: Select all

https://www.wargamer.com/articles/civil-war-games/

just nice to see others still agree tbh

Yes sir always knew it was one of the best
Hooked Since AH Gettysburg
bazjak
Posts: 264
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 4:44 am
Location: Wales UK

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by bazjak »

Then why the lack of any movement for months in this forum?
This is an old artical as can be seen by the date of the first letter - FRI DEC 28, 2018 9:13 PM
And still nothing on these forums
Im going to sound like an old record thats stuck and keeps plying the same thing over and over
The main thing that put me off (and still does ) is the lack of a decent tutorial
I know zakblood dosnt like me going on about it but i am as sure as can be that is the reason this game never took off
User avatar
Yogi the Great
Posts: 1949
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:28 pm
Location: Wisconsin

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by Yogi the Great »

ORIGINAL: bazjak

Then why the lack of any movement for months in this forum?
This is an old artical as can be seen by the date of the first letter - FRI DEC 28, 2018 9:13 PM
And still nothing on these forums
Im going to sound like an old record thats stuck and keeps plying the same thing over and over
The main thing that put me off (and still does ) is the lack of a decent tutorial
I know zakblood dosnt like me going on about it but i am as sure as can be that is the reason this game never took off

Was sure this would come up again - there were a few things that would have helped like a good tutorial.

I believe some significant health issues have made it not possible for the developer to continue at this time.

Tutorial needed ok, but that does not mean it is not an excellent game. If the effort is made to learn the game you are well rewarded.

But enough of this we have all gone over the same arguments many times and have not resolved them and I doubt we would now. I think all Zakblood wanted to do is to just recognize that the game is seen as a good one with many innovations in coverage of the civil war. The sad part for people like me is that it is not looking like the series we wanted so badly will go on. But a great series with improvements and sure a tutorial it would have been one of the best Civil War series of all time.
Hooked Since AH Gettysburg
User avatar
zakblood
Posts: 22652
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:19 am

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by zakblood »

tutorial, yes agreed
a better manual maybe
a better editor, well yes
a follow on and more battles etc, oh yes a dream,...

but saying and agreeing with all this, imo and some of us from the beta and alpha testing days,

still there are few that come even close to this game
Windows 11 Pro 64-bit (10.0, Build 22000) (22000.co_release.210604-1628)
User avatar
Richard III
Posts: 710
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 5:16 pm

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by Richard III »

Using the Buy Now tab above takes you to a dead link and a 404 error....sad I really liked this game.
“History would be a wonderful thing – if it were only true.”

¯ Leo Tolstoy
User avatar
Talon_XBMCX
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 1:42 am

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by Talon_XBMCX »

ORIGINAL: Richard III

Using the Buy Now tab above takes you to a dead link and a 404 error....sad I really liked this game.

I think it's just a broken link. Its still available in the store https://www.matrixgames.com/game/brothe ... st-brother

It's a hidden gem to be sure.
nicwb
Posts: 518
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 10:31 am

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by nicwb »

Was sure this would come up again - there were a few things that would have helped like a good tutorial.

I believe some significant health issues have made it not possible for the developer to continue at this time.

Tutorial needed ok, but that does not mean it is not an excellent game. If the effort is made to learn the game you are well rewarded.

But enough of this we have all gone over the same arguments many times and have not resolved them and I doubt we would now. I think all Zakblood wanted to do is to just recognize that the game is seen as a good one with many innovations in coverage of the civil war. The sad part for people like me is that it is not looking like the series we wanted so badly will go on. But a great series with improvements and sure a tutorial it would have been one of the best Civil War series of all time.

+1 I really liked the gameplay style plus the fact the game focused on a couple of the lesser known but no less important early Civil war engagements. It is sad that events seemed to have conspired to stop future development.
tevans
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 5:26 pm

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by tevans »

One of the reasons I think the game didn't take off was the battle selection. Put Gettysburg in the game and it sells. We got Bull Run and some lesser known battles. This game should have had the more well known battles included at release. A map editor and OOB editor wouldn't have hurt either. Look at all the scenarios for games like TOAW IV and CMO. They could have done the same thing with a Napoleonic game too. Release a game with the more well known battles and the tools so that users could create their own. That would sell.
nicwb
Posts: 518
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 10:31 am

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by nicwb »

I know but there are dozens of "Gettysburg" games out there (or at least it feels like it). I am also not sure of how the game system would have coped with "Gettysburg" -individual scenarios of portions of the battle yes but the whole battle? Hopefully I am wrong on this latter.
bobarossa
Posts: 263
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: Columbus, Ohio USA

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by bobarossa »

I loved Forge of Freedom and wan't to get their next game but the scenario selection completely turned me off. I can't imagine a main scenario I would have liked less than First Bull Run. They really needed to have a main scenario that would draw players to buy the game. There's at least a dozen major battles other than Gettysburg (way too much to bite off on first try) that I would have happily bought the game for.
kennonlightfoot
Posts: 1695
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 7:51 pm
Contact:

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by kennonlightfoot »

BoB is probably the best tactical CW game in existence. But it used an unfamiliar interface and needed some critical enhancements (mainly in the Replay part). So it failed to get enough customers other than a small hard core groups. Now it's an orphan game with no ongoing development or support. For us hard core followers there just so much play you can get out of a small battle like 1st Mananas.

I had high hopes that I could get those in the ACWGC to be interested in the game since they were the most likely customer base. But they seem to be stuck in the JT style games dating from the 90's and wouldn't take to the change. I wrote my own game hoping that a "free" game that expanded the detail of JT board game on a computer would draw some interest. None.

Now, for me BoB won't even work for PBEM so I have given up on it too.
Kennon
bazjak
Posts: 264
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 4:44 am
Location: Wales UK

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by bazjak »

Im going to be shouted down yet again i expect but i dont care
One word
TUTORIAL (the lack of )
surfcandy
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:44 am

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by surfcandy »

A sale (now) would help get people into it.
Rake
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 3:53 pm
Location: The blue waters of the Chesapeake Bay to
Contact:

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by Rake »

ORIGINAL: kennonlightfoot

I had high hopes that I could get those in the ACWGC to be interested in the game since they were the most likely customer base. But they seem to be stuck in the JT style games dating from the 90's and wouldn't take to the change. I wrote my own game hoping that a "free" game that expanded the detail of JT board game on a computer would draw some interest. None.

Now, for me BoB won't even work for PBEM so I have given up on it too.

I purchased this recently just to see what the buzz was about. Although I've been interested in ACW all my life, my wargaming interests had mainly been in WW II, and more recently, Cold War. I've since joined the ACWGC and am having a great time with the JTS games, but this one really seems far more realistic and enjoyable.

While I haven't yet played a lot, the game does not seem all that difficult to learn. I also don't think the manual lacks for coverage of most topics. A tutorial would certainly have helped, but I learned much from the Youtube video of the Hancock flank attack at Wmsburg.

I'm sad to see that this game likely has no future. There is certainly nothing else like it in the market and its potential was boundless. A shame to see it hanging, withering on the vine....[:(]
User avatar
zakblood
Posts: 22652
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:19 am

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by zakblood »

im very glad and happy to hear you also found it easy to pick up and play and yes also agree it's a shame we haven't had a update / follow on etc, as i'd love more of the same or a new engine, as still i've yet to find anything anywhere near as good, as yes i've looked at more than a few with Grand Tactician The Civil War (1861-1865) being one of the latest to look the part, but fall over on a really poor AI upto yet, and wrong format for me as i'm still no fan of RTS, no matter how it's appears, will maybe still grab once out of EA, but only if the AI gets good enough to be worth the effort for single player
Windows 11 Pro 64-bit (10.0, Build 22000) (22000.co_release.210604-1628)
Alan Sharif
Posts: 1108
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2001 8:00 am
Location: UK.
Contact:

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by Alan Sharif »

Just posting to confirm you most certainly were not wrong. I brought the game in the Xmas sale 2019, mainly as it was very inexpensive. Messed about with it a bit, then ignored it. I have done this with a fair few games, spending most free time on my favourites. Lockdown has given me the opportunity to invest time in these neglected games, and just yesterday I got around to playing this title. It is absolutely fantastic, and it is tragic we are unlikely to see another. A Napoleonic version would also have been very welcome. So, you were right.
A Sharif
User avatar
zakblood
Posts: 22652
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:19 am

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by zakblood »

A Napoleonic version or a follow on with more battles would have been great, not heard anything from either for a while now, so hope and pray both them and there families and friends are well, as that's more important to me, and what ever happens with the series is second place.
Windows 11 Pro 64-bit (10.0, Build 22000) (22000.co_release.210604-1628)
Alan Sharif
Posts: 1108
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2001 8:00 am
Location: UK.
Contact:

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by Alan Sharif »

Let's hope so. Fingers crossed ( as we say in the UK).
A Sharif
User avatar
Tanaka
Posts: 4559
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 3:42 am
Location: USA

RE: seems many of us here weren't wrong

Post by Tanaka »

ORIGINAL: bobarossa

I loved Forge of Freedom and wan't to get their next game but the scenario selection completely turned me off. I can't imagine a main scenario I would have liked less than First Bull Run. They really needed to have a main scenario that would draw players to buy the game. There's at least a dozen major battles other than Gettysburg (way too much to bite off on first try) that I would have happily bought the game for.

Just picked this up on the holiday sale after all of these years and am going to try and figure it out if I can get it working ok on a modern rig. Same thing here. Like you I loved FOF back then but never picked this one up because of the few scenarios. In my opinion if they had done a FOF2 with this engine and battles that would have been a much better seller...Grand Tactician is too real time and Total War like for me so now my hopes are on Strategic Command making a Civil War game...
Image
Post Reply

Return to “Brother against Brother: The Drawing of the Sword”