Erik Rutins
Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000 From: Vermont, USA Status: offline
|
Well, this is just my opinion. I enjoy AACW and FOF, but I'm a pretty busy guy, so time is at a premium. It takes me quite a while to get through a full turn in AACW, with the payoff being the incredible detail down to the operational level. I have not yet been able to find the time to finish a full campaign in AACW, though I got quite a ways in and had a lot of fun. It takes less time for me to do a turn in FOF, though when I choose to fight a detailed battle that does take time and is a separate system to learn (but incredibly rewarding). I have finished a few full FOF campaigns vs. AI and in PBEM. For both AACW and FOF I felt the tutorials were necessary and the manuals mandatory in really learning how to play. WBTS on the other hand I found easy to learn even in beta before a manual was written. Mastering it takes more work, but I can see myself playing through 2-3 WBTS full campaigns in the time it takes me to do one FOF full campaign, yet the strategic results seem as realistic as both FOF and AACW. I have to say I also love the leader system 2 by 3 game up with for this game, I personally think that this is one area they really "nailed". I think for gamers with limted time and less tolerance for a learning curve, WBTS should get a very long look, but ultimately I think every ACW gamer really should try all three games. I will be happy with the collection of the three of them for years and years to come. Regards, - Erik
_____________________________
|