Christian Hecht wrote:
With Peninsular Campaign he surely means the two titles that cover the war on the Spanish Peninsular.
I would like to note that the Napy series improved a lot and is continuing to do so. I doubt that we have more cons then pros in it. Surely more complicated than the CW series but not lacking quality.
Embarrassed... Thanks for the correction, Christian. I'll reserve my wrong post. Well, still, Napoleon's Russian Campaign (1812) is the top for me among the five titles.
I thank WDS for keeping ACW and NW updated. I am continuing to watch for the Change Logs of NW and expect that some of these small good features will be introduced into ACW later.
Napoleonic tactics is more flexible and complicated, which needs more complicated rules. But complication itself doesn't guarantee quality, or may probably reduce both simulation and playability in some cases. I finally believe it's very hard to get a good Napoleonic Wargames with the balance of simulation and playability. ACW also have a lot of problems, but I may be more tolerant to a game with simple rules. It may be just the matter of personal taste, the balance of ACW hits my strike zone, but the balance of NW not. Beyond the comparison between the two series, I would naturally compare PC wargames with the board wargames I have played. In the topic of NW, boardgames are better choices for me and provide more reasonable picture of war in the issue of formations, cavalry, disorder, and the interaction of elements in battlefields. And I suspect part of problems in WDS are hard to solve within the range of a PBEM strict turn-based game. Well, I am not an expert, you can ignore my opinions.
Anyway, when I get more free time, I may also go back to experience Napy of new 4.X version in the future.
Good luck and have fun.
A.Ren