this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2023
119 points (96.1% liked)

Games

32545 readers
2219 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I have spent about a total of ten hours playing Grant, Lee, Sherman: Civil War Generals 2 (which for my own sanity will be referred to as “CW2” from here on out), which is not nearly enough time to become an expert, but I have managed to scratch a little bit into the surface. Originally I had planned on playing Robert E. Lee: Civil War General, as that had been a game I’d spent tons of time playing as a kid. When I couldn’t get the original game on any digital storefront and my technical abilities to get it running from an abandonware website failed me, I finally went to eBay and ordered an original physical copy. When my order arrived, I was surprised to see the sequel bundled with it, and I learned with a little bit of searching that CW2 released only a year after the first game and is considered a more expanded and polished iteration. It has the same engine, same mechanics, same graphics, and even the same battle videos. What it adds are a few new unit types, UI improvements, numerous campaigns, and the ability to play each campaign as either the North or South; as opposed to the original game which only had Confederate campaigns. If you end up wanting to play these games, just skip right to CW2 as it is essentially a director’s cut or GOTY version of the original.

What is CW2 however? It is a turn based, hexmap strategy game of the US Civil War. There are historical battles presented for stand alone play, or campaigns which string together multiple battles. Unit types include infantry, skirmishers, artillery, cavalry, engineers, frigates, gunboats, and field headquarters. Most units have two formations, one for fighting and one for traveling. Catching an enemy, or being caught yourself, in a traveling formation with an attack can be devastating. All units have three important factors relating to manpower: Organization, health, and morale. Each factor is represented with a small intuitive picture in the unit’s information panel. If the soldier represented looks in good shape, the stats are good. If not, things will be rough.

This combination of charming presentation with brutal gameplay implications is found throughout the game. A unit that has broken ranks and is fleeing will have a characterful depiction on the map, and you click on them to attempt to give them orders you’ll get a snarky reply textbox.

When units meet for battle the game will a play a short video. Rather than CGI, the videos are live action clips of actual Civil War reenactments. There is something quaint about a game published by a major studio using camcorder footage to show off a battle. All of that is fun, but when you find yourself 30 turns in to a brutal slugfest over a series of bridges and your men are dead, dying, or routed, the game shows that it has bite.

Scenarios are often designed to mimic history rather than designed to give the player much of a chance of assuring a path to major victory. I played First Battle of Bull Run in command of Union forces. In real life the battle was an unexpected failure for the Union, and even with my knowledge to not be overconfident, I only managed to turn what CW2 described as a “major defeat” into a “minor defeat”. While my generalship was far from perfect, I submit that the game has no problems loading scenarios that will frustrate, in a good way, even those who are familiar with the genre. I mean look at this bloody battlefield.

In a campaign, after battles units will recover wounded troops from hospitals and receive reinforcements to their ranks. Depending on that amount of fighting a unit has seen, they will gain valuable veteran increases to their morale and organization. As an additional way to increase the fighting ability of the units, the player has the choice of dismissing under performing unit commanders in the hopes of finding someone better. When it comes to hardware, every unit type has a variety of weapons to choose from to rearm with. Be careful, especially as a Confederate player to not just grab whatever the best, most high value weapon is within reach as the more expensive weapons tend to have higher rates of fire, which translates into more expense to keep the unit supplied with ammunition. Running out of supplies will turn the finest repeating rifle into a glorified club and make the unit easy pickings.

When it comes to sound, this is a mid-1990s game. The sound effects seem to be either a member of the development team reading a line in their best attempt at a period accent, or battle noises pulled from the reenactment videos. The music is subtly addictive however. It is compressed, but I found The Battle Hymn Of The Republic tune to be a surprisingly hard earworm to shake.

The game feels like it was made by a team that was really in love with the Civil War. There is a free included program presenting the history of the war going over everything from the leaders, to the weapons, to the battles. It is all fully narrated, much like the in game dialog it is competently, but obviously done by a developer rather than a professional voice actor. To today’s eyes and ears the presentation might seem lacking compared to what can be found on Wikipedia in a few seconds, but CW2 was released four years before Wikipedia existed, making the research that went into it even more of a bonus for a game of its era.

CW2 still holds up as a surprisingly mechanically crunchy game with a presentation that is colorful and clear. Absolutely worth playing for anyone with an interest in turn based strategy wargames.

Same post saved on my blog. (There's other stuff too!)

top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Qwazpoi@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 11 months ago

Outstanding review

[–] MacedWindow@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Great review! I was going to suggest you start a blog and I'm happy to see one linked! Are you on Mastodon?

Those bloody battlefields are brutal. I don't play many strategy games but I can't remember any that leave the ground littered with corpses like that. Its chilling.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Are you on Mastodon?

Technically. I tried it before lemmy but I couldn't quite make sense of it. I was never into twitter in the first place, so it all kind of baffled me. I could always reactivate my account.

[–] cyd@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The bloodiness of the battles of the American Civil War is often remarked upon, including by contemporary commentators. So it's nice that they emphasized that in the game.

[–] MrZee@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Great post, thanks! Looking at the pictures makes me feel like I must have played a different sierra war game using the same engine back in the day. It all looks very familiar, but I’m pretty sure I never played this.

I think there is a typo for you to fix; it sounds like the following should say to not just grab the best weapon:

Be careful, especially as a Confederate player to grab whatever the best, most high value weapon is within reach as the more expensive weapons tend to have higher rates of fire, which translates into more expense to keep the unit supplied with ammunition. Running out of supplies will turn the finest repeating rifle into a glorified club and make the unit easy pickings.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

You’re right. Players shouldn’t be buying equipment they can’t afford to supply. Changed the typo.

[–] cashews_best_nut@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

I played Civil War 1. It reminded me of early Total War games.

[–] Scrof@sopuli.xyz 4 points 11 months ago

Thanks for a good read.

[–] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

You just unlocked some memories. My dad used to play this all the time when we got our first PC. I was too young and wasn't interested in it then, but damn if you haven't piqued my interest in digging it up.

[–] redhorsejacket@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Thanks for the read. I have fond memories of playing the Sid Meier civil war games that I think came out a few years after this series. However, from your description and my memories, the games seem to share a lot of DNA. I also recall the Ultimate General Civil War game from a few years back. The mention of unit customization down to what equipment they field and who their commanders are reminds me of similar features in that game. Thanks for the write up! I love reading about this era of PC gaming.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Impressions Games is the name of the studio that made the Civil War Generals games. If you like old Sid Meier games, I’d put Impressions studios games in a similar ballpark.

[–] redhorsejacket@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Really? Fascinating. I know of Impressions from their work in the city building genre. I hesitate to even guess how many hours I've put into Caesar 3 over the years. Seems they branched out far more than I anticipated.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I mean they didn’t really do 4X aside from Lords Of The Realm and Lords Of Magic games, but the city builders and strategy games do have, how do I put it, a similar wavelength was Sid Meier games.

[–] CurlyWurlies4All@slrpnk.net 2 points 11 months ago

Gold star content. I don't know why but this reminded me of my experience playing Sudden Strike for the first time.