This Vs. Civil War II?

[Aurumlamina]

For those experienced in the Civil War grand strategies, what are the pros and cons of each?

[SAS]

You control both tactical battles and strategic planing in this game, enough said

[sandman2575]

I haven't played Civil War II (or any AGEOD game) in years, but I was always frustrated by the game's clunky interface. And especially frustrated by the opaque way that battles get resolved. Often would have the experience of looking at battle results and not at all understanding how to interpret what had happened or why.

[guderian]

There was also the command structure. It was not intuitive. Every time I played it, I was totally frustrated relearning how to set commands in divisions and corps again. Other than that I loved the game. But for me it was enough to quit playing it.

[SAS]

I find I have to try TOO hard to enjoy AGEOD games

[LCcmdr]

CW2 is another great game but it is played at a greater macro level--from raising troops by zones to choosing only from a few tactics for battles. ACW2, though, is still a fun play with intense micro management. GTCW is just better, in nearly every aspect.

[Oubley]

Grand Tactician
- play out tactical battles
- a lot of moddable values
- some of the best tactical battles for civil war game in terms of watching gun fire
-feels less arcady then ultimate general civil war

Civil War II
- will actually lose battles
- simplified but better strategy interactions
- better and more intuitive logistics (can cut supplies/rail/military control)
- better commanders are more distinguished
- fewer bugs
- AI strategic movement makes a bit more sense at times, particularly retreats
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

cons:
GT>>>>
- buggy
-non bugs will drive you nuts
>>> units can't march correctly in columns, units will criss cross or do weird loops to get to places right in front of them
- very difficult to lose tactical battle, there some coded things that go on that feel very "cheaty"
- has it's own command structure issues particularly on AI side
- units can jump on transports practically anywhere in strategy map
- economy/weapons/buildings/projects aren't really synergized/optimized for the newer versions (you can mod but it feels like gutting the game at times)
-magical reinforcements
- higher level commands in tactical battles should have been more Take Command: Second Manassass like

CW2
- omg unit managment is terrible, wrong scale for the type of map, particularly '61 (later years when can form divisions/corps it isn't so bad but that first year is dreadful to managae)
- the UI works and is intuitive but is lacking (serious need of quality of life)
-so many turns, can easily be 45+ minutes if doing things slow (turns are 14-15 days so 2 turns a month)
-lacks the extra tactical immersion

what would I recommend....
both do things well, both have their drawbacks. It's hard for me to say one is superior to the other.