Which EAW title should I try first?

[FM WarB]

I am thinking of trying an EAW game. I'm most familiar with the American revolution. The company tactical systems looks interesting, as far as I can tell.

[rahamy]

Really depends on which war interests you the most. I personally like FIW the best as I'm very partial to the 1758 campaign and the balance between the forces some of those actions have. 1776 is good too though, and there's a ton of extra scenarios created for it.

This is my favorite series behind the Napoleonics...and the engine will be getting a boost as well, soon. So a worth while venture I think.

[FM WarB]

Yes, I notice that 1776 has the most new or revised scenarios of the three titles. Also some pdt and oob file changes based on gameplay experience. I've perused some oobs. Are there any oob file and pdt file editing guides out there, such as can be found for Napoleonic games?
The newer pdt files, with different musketry and artillery effects sound good. The oob files with "militia" depicted as low rated infantry make sense.
The Last of the Mohicans does seem a better movie to make a wargame from than The Patriot.

[rahamy]

The new PDT & OOB files you refer to apply only to 1812 7 FIW at this time, though the next update to 1776 will also be getting some of that.

There's no guides at this point, but a lot of what applies to the Nap series also applies here. Not exactly 1:1, but you should be able to naviagte through it.

[AlAmos]

The French and Indian War would be my pick, too. Although all three games have the same engine at this point, that game (being the latest one) has more scenarios designed to exploit the new engine upgrades that came out with FIW.

Plus, I put together a bunch of the FIW scenarios. hehehe....

[FM WarB]

I decided to order them both. FIW for frontier action and sieges and 1776 for the setpiece battles I'm most familiar with.
Somme oob perusal shows only four levels of command, unlike the five possible in Nap games. Are five possible with these games too?

[rahamy]

No, only the four...remember, this is a smaller scale than the Nap engine and is not designed to represent armies of the same size.

[FM WarB]

True Rich, and there are no Corps. Still might have been use for one more command level.

[Gary McClellan]

Honestly, nesting that many command levels is too powerful anyway.

*shrugs*

[FM WarB]

For these armies, that have no corps, and the multi batalion regiment is a rarity, I agree. A fifth command level might be useful for anyone flirting with the idea of making a Napoleonic battle scenario using this game system, however.
I look forward to Guilford Courthouse, a battle I am familiar with, and seeing how the campaigns in both games are set up. Reading Fred Anderson's Cricible of War is getting me fired up for the F&I War.

[Gary McClellan]

Well, to me, the bigger issue is that the more layers you nest the command structure, the closer you get to "autoreordering" (assuming the player is careful with his leaders and units), and even the Napoleonic Armies weren't that efficient.

[FM WarB]

Auto reordering happens if command ratings are set high. Even if one must "roll a six" to fail command check, the more times you roll, the better the chance of rolling that six. Thats if command is set at 5,4,3,2,2 if there are five levels. If there are four levels and top commander is a 4, one can expect undisordering to be much slower, but as EAW has 5, not 15 minute turns, one might expect it to be slower, in terms of number of gameturns required.

[rahamy]

Leaders pass down a bonus, so if the top leader passes its command check it gives subordinate leaders a +1 and so on. So, as Gary said, the longer the command chain - assuming command checks are being passed - the greater the chance of reordering.

[FM WarB]

Assuming command checks are being passed. That's my point, the more oft you roll, hoping not to get a six (or five, if command levels are set lower than in my example) the better the chance you will get that unwanted roll.

[AlAmos]

There are ways around the four tier command structure to represent larger armies. :D

[FM WarB]

I look forward to perusing your oobs and scenarios, Al.

[Jim Hall]

Sir
Dont bother its like mud wrestling

[Sgt_Rock]

I prefer 1776. Perhaps because the battles are more famous than the others.

Its my favorite because of the battles included.