From: Mike Peterson Subject: Re: COMP: Battleground Waterloo I have been off the list for the last few months, so forgive me if there has already been a discussion of the _Battleground Waterloo_ game from Talonsoft. If it is not old news, then I hope that the list will be interested in these comments. One of my first (1976) wargames was SPI's Wellington's Victory, which I think is one of the most elegantly designed and most visually attractive boardgames ever produced. I've always been fascinated by this battle, and I probably would have bought _Bground Waterloo_ even if I hadn't been familiar with Talonsoft's gaming system. Two weeks, many hours, and $70 Cdn. later, I can say that _Bground Waterloo_ compares favourably to the old SPI classic, and was worth the money. Like _Wellington's Victory_, _Bground Waterloo_ allows you to fight the battle on the same micro-scale, with provisions even for detached squadrons and skirmish companies. For those who dislike counter pushing, this amount of detail may seem prohibitive, and I do find on occasion that my hand gets weary of working the mouse, even with the smaller scenarios. Nevertheless the game is darn addictive, and has resulted in numerous late nights and bleary-eyed mornings. As with most computer games, the AI leaves something to be desired. In the La Hay Sainte scenario, the computer did a worse job than DErlon and Ney, pushing columns at me in dribs and drabs, thus allowing me to concentrate my fire on successive juicy targets. At several points some curaissier units got into my first lines, but were unsupported and thus easily driven back. The only nervous moment came when two large columns of French infantry moved to within a hex of La Haye Sainte, and then inexplicably went into square (I had moved up the Heavy Brigade on the other side of the farm, but they were not within charge range) rather than finishing off my few exhausted Rifles in LHS. This was especially curious seeing as La Haye Sainte is a victory point hex. A human player would have tried harder for it, especially on the last turn. In the Plancenoit scenario the computer is doing a better job at defence against my very aggressive Prussian attack. The French are falling back in good order, consistently refusing their flanks and hitting me hard with cavalry whenever possible. Even so there are moments when the AI is plain dumb. Instead of hitting a battery in the flank, some French lancers went at a regiment of Landwehr in square and were annihilated. On the whole, though, I feel that I am working for this victory as the Prussians, even though the computer seems as indifferent to victory hexes on the defence as it does on the attack. On the whole the game does a good job of giving you the feel of Napoleonic warfare. Skirmishers are annoying but not formidable, artillery is murderously effective up close but not at longer ranges, and cavalry, while it can be devastating, is pretty much a one-shot weapon. In the La Haye Sainte scenario I inadvertantly recreated the death ride of the Scots Greys, cutting up two depleted French regiments but riding so far forward that they were exposed to a lot of fire. The few survivors were so exhausted as to be useless for the rest of the fight. The armies seem well modelled in quality and morale, and the draining effect of fatigue means that even elite units will break if pushed too far. For solitaire gaming, _Battleground Wargaming_ is enjoyable while not rigorously challenging. It does however allow PBEM, so if anyone on the list is interested, consider my glove thrown ! Finally, while some veteran grognards may scoff at me for saying this, I love multimedia bells and whistles, and _Bground Waterloo_ has them in abundance! Played in 3D mode, the game is visually exquisite if your computer has the horses to run it. The mapboard is richly detailed and coloured, the villages and terrain features are crisp, and the uniforms of the various units are beautifully done. The 3D unit icons change to allow for all Napoleonic formations, including squares, and the little mobs of broken troops are especially satisfying. The sound effects are dramatic (I like the voices shouting "Vive L'empereur" in the melee phase). Video clips (taken, I presume, at the big Waterloo renenactment last year)are available as an option (fun, but I turned them off after the first game) and best of all, there is a full soundtrack of French, English, and Prussian military marches which can be played as background music. At certain key moments, I have found that the skirl of pipes has been absolutely electrifying! I would be interested to hear what other consimmers have to say about this game, and delighted to accept PBEM challenges. Mike Peterson Toronto, ON "I never shot at officers. Officers to me always seemed harmless personages. I only shot at privates, as they were the ones shooting back at me." Sam Watkins, CSA From: John Desch Subject: Re: COMP: Battleground Waterloo Mike reports: >On the whole the game does a good job of giving you the feel of Napoleonic >warfare. Skirmishers are annoying but not formidable, artillery is >murderously effective up close but not at longer ranges, and cavalry, while >it can be devastating, is pretty much a one-shot weapon. Nice report Mike. I agree with the bulk of your observations and enjoy the game immensely. I did find the skirmishers to be more than an annoyance, however. In broken ground you can gang up on a 50 man detachment with much as stacking will allow (1000 men?) and still lose mightily. It is fun to ride them down in the open with a cavalry charge, though. The AI, as expected, sucks. I usually play the game on manual for both sides and find it to be tough for the French to win. The Prussians are usually managed well enough by a reinforced VI Corps, but there is just too much Allied cavalry to make a huge breakthrough, IMO. A tactic that has worked well enough in the past for me is to stack a battery of artillery with a light battalion, intersperse them with cavalry squadrons and attack across cavalry-friendly terrain (which is remarkably sparse on this battlefield). This presents the defender with a dilemma: should he form square to repel the cavalry or risk staying in line to fend off the infantry? I believe that good quality infantry in line has a good chance of withstanding a cavalry charge, but average troops will have to go into square (if it's not too late). Light infantry are capable of generating endless skirmishers, so you can screen you main body from the worst effects of enemy fire and press on. The best solution is to rotate light brigades in and out of the line regularly so that they don't get too fatigued. Maintaining reserves is important in this game, as there is little opportunity to recover fatigue in one short day. John T. Desch jtd4@cornell.edu (607)255-5014 From: Mike Peterson Subject: Re: COMP: Battleground Waterloo >At 12:14 PM 9/26/96 -0400, Mike Campbell gave us an informative write-up on >Battleground Waterloo: Mike Peterson, actually. Thanks for your kinds comments, John. >Thanks for the review Mike. I have a couple of questions: Does the game >play in "real-time" or does it have a turn sequence structure. Turn structure, as follows: Side A Command Phase (computer tells you which units have routed, rallied, resupplied, recovered fatigue, or arrived as reinforcements) Side A Movement Phase Side B Defensive Phase (defenders fire as well as unlimber batteries and change formation) Side A Offensive Fire Phase Side A Cavalry Charge Phase (undisordered cavalry units phasing enemy units can move within one hex prior to melee) Side A Melee Phase (units can engage adjacent enemy units in melee) >Second question: you mentioned that the game allows you to fight the battle on > amicro-scale, but do you *have* fight the game on that scale? Can you move >units larger than battalions "all at once". Yes. Prior to starting a scenario, you can designate certain of your commands (brigades, divisions, corps and armies) to be played by the AI. Options are limited to attack or defend. I haven't tried it much because I like to "micro-manage", but it is somewhat similar to the old SSG ACW games, where you basically told the computer what to do and the computer managed your army for you. >Final question (think I know the answer): Is this game better (in your >judgment) than the computer game on the Waterloo campaign called "Fields of >Glory"? Well, I have FOG and I have a soft spot for it, though I've only played a few battles with it and it no longer graces my HD. FOG was a groundbreaking effort, and I think it did a lot to prepare the way for the Talonsoft games. Unfortunately it is real-time, so you have to be fast with the mouse (sort of a Napoleonic version of Command and Conquer) and the AI is so dumb that the AI in BW looks brilliant by comparison. Some people have written that FOG, BW, and the other Talonsoft games will threaten miniatures games. I think the contrary is true. Once people see these games, I suspect they will _want_ to take up miniatures. Mike Peterson Toronto, ON "By God, sir, I've lost my leg." Uxbridge. "By God, sir, so you have." Wellington. From: Daniel Duldig Subject: Re: COMP: Battleground Waterloo To: Multiple recipients of list CONSIM-L Fully support Mike's comments on battleground Waterloo, tremendous fun, and the AI is not too bad. One peeve is that routed units, particularly large infantry formations can be very tough to destroy even with cavalry. I have the experience of sending Old Guard battalion (400) against a routed British unit of 700 and had the Guard thrown back! Merde :( Similarly charging large routed formations with cavalry squadrons can be qutie risky which seems to be not in eeping with history. One of the main uses of cavalry was to dismember routed fleeing units. Any comments? Daniel dduldig@werple.mira.net.au