Below is (for what it's worth) my comparison composition on the two biggest games released for the bicentenial of the War of 1812. I will be posting this to both games' folders on Consimworld, as well as Boardgamegeek.
The best way to preface this column is to give a light background for myself as a gamer. I grew up casually playing board games, and discovered wargaming in my teenage years. I never really had any opponents, so I would "tinker" with these designs from time to time, playing only the occasional opposed match with my brother. My love of military history made these games most enjoyable. Alas, as I approached adulthood the hobby slipped away. About two years ago, I dusted off my copy of Victory Games' "The Civil War," learned how to use Vassal, called up my brother to give it a "real shot"...and the rest is history. Since then wargaming has been my sole major hobby. Still, I remain a lighter gamer compared to some others, purchasing only a few titles per year at most. This has to do with "real life" as much as it has to do with my desire to focus on a game and give it the attention it deserves.
Although my main focus of interest lies in the U.S. Civil War era, the War of 1812 has always intrigued me. So, last fall I purchased "Amateurs to Arms," followed by "Mr. <PERSON>'s War" this spring. I have played 3 or 4 full games of ATA, and about 2 games of MMW, and have tinkered a bit with both titles solitaire. Both games offer very different takes on what I consider to be a rather under-appreciated subject in wargaming - the War of 1812. Following is a comparison of the major aspects of both titles, from my perspective. I realize that this has been done before (on BGG), but I promised both designers that I would offer my alternative "review" once I have played both games to completion. So, here is another take!
Components:
ATA definitely has the edge in this area. The map is probably the most beautiful paper map I have seen for a wargame, and the counters are very colorful and detailed. The map DOES take some getting used to. The area movement combined with point to point (the wilderness trail) has thrown some new players off, and one really has to focus in on the map to see rivers and roads, to move units appropriately. 52
Units can also get crowded in smaller areas. But as a conversion from a historical map to a gameplay device, it is very well done. The texture and eye candy are unmatched. The various charts used with the game are functional pretty as well. The player aids and rule book are of the glossy variety, which some don't like, but I am fine with.
MMW offers a paper map as well, and while this one doesn't have the same quality as the other offering, it has its own merits. MMW's map is also easy on the eyes, colorful, and very functional. Crowding is less an issue due to the ample space between point to point spaces on the map. The counters are simpler but very nicely done. Player aids are fewer but hey, this is a simpler game. A mounted map has just been released for this title, which I have not seen. However, I know of the quality of GMT's mounted maps, and I am sure this one is no exception and is going to be an excellent add-on for this game.
Both games are CDG (card driven game) titles. I think MMW has the edge in card quality when it comes to physical details. The cards in ATA are a bit more like poker cards, being lighter and a bit more flimsy...although, this does make them easier to shuffle. But as MMW decks are yearly-based, this isn't too much an issue and if you are sleeving your cards, it won't matter anyway. Conversely, the art work on ATA cards wins over MMW - some of the most beautifully-deisgned cards I have seen in a wargame. Yet, MMW cards are nice on the eyes too, and the more simplistic approach has its merits.
Rules:
MMW wins out in this area, and that is mainly due to the organizational style of GMT vs. Clash of Arms. MMW rules are easier to look up, due to the index and the breakdown, whereas ATA prefers a more conversational, paragrphed approach. Both games are not that hard to learn after the first play, yet MMW's rules certainly make things a bit easier. I found myself only asking one or two questions throughout my first play of MMW. In ATA, I got hung up on a few things (namely, battles in a space with a fort). 993