Have they fixed the issue with Waterloo?
http://www.matrixgames.com/products/619/details/Scourge.of.War:.Quatre.Bras
I'm sorry...what issue?
Quote from: RyanE on May 02, 2016, 09:15:05 AM
I'm sorry...what issue?
Broken dynamic campaign.
Less capable headquarters on the saddle compared to Gettysburg.
I don't think too much has changed since the initial release - one or two patches, IIRC, but that's about it. I don't recollect it fixing any campaigns AFAIK.
So excited for this, hopefully they release a patch to update the base game. Though i dont think they will ever be able to fix headquarters in the saddle, it just doesnt work with the engine
Any rough idea as to when? Days? Weeks? Months? Maybe I missed it in the write-up.
Quote from: Boggit on May 02, 2016, 03:23:18 PM
I don't think too much has changed since the initial release - one or two patches, IIRC, but that's about it. I don't recollect it fixing any campaigns AFAIK.
Yeah that's what I figured. But another historical setting is more than welcome. That's what the game does best anyway.
Quote from: Hofstadter on May 02, 2016, 04:18:12 PM
So excited for this, hopefully they release a patch to update the base game. Though i dont think they will ever be able to fix headquarters in the saddle, it just doesnt work with the engine
HITS works quite well in the Civil War games, as evidenced by the large group that's played HITS games multiplayer for years. It isn't the engine, it's the attempt to make an ACW engine fit the Napoleonic Era without sufficient changes. The changes they did make resulted in some very, very weird formation antics.
It's really unfortunate; I really liked all of the ACW games and played them a lot. Waterloo has promise, but it seems like they're more focused on content than actually making the engine work. I understand that the content makes money and the engine fixes don't, generally, but I think that things are now to the point where I probably won't buy the content unless I see some serious fixes to the engine. I tried to play the game a couple of weekends ago and it just wasn't fun. The ACW games were at least always fun.
I enjoy SOW Gettysburg but not playing the 'in the saddle' mode. So how is Waterloo outside of the 'in the saddle' mode of play? As good as Gettysburg?
I don't often play HITS myself, but it certainly was playable in Gettysburg. Waterloo is not as good as Gettysburg in any mode IMO, and that's not due to typical Napoleonic grog complaining. Maneuvering troops in nearly impossible, not because of the different commander personalities but just because formations will spin on their centers as the waffle between threats.
Now aside from that, the game just isn't a reasonable simulation of Napoleonic tactics. It's ACW armies dressed up in Napoleonic uniforms, acting like ACW armies. Except when they act like tops, or a circus act or something.
I really, really want this game to mature and be good, but it has a ways to go.
Quote from: Rayfer on May 02, 2016, 08:28:04 PM
I enjoy SOW Gettysburg but not playing the 'in the saddle' mode. So how is Waterloo outside of the 'in the saddle' mode of play? As good as Gettysburg?
Basically the same experience outside the saddle.
They tried to do Napoleonic tactics but I'm not an expert to say if it is done well.
Quatre Bras? Not the most interesting. Lets go back further! No Austerlitz?
Quote from: SirAndrewD on May 02, 2016, 11:20:09 PM
Quatre Bras? Not the most interesting. Lets go back further! No Austerlitz?
To be fair an expansion for the waterloo campaign makes more thematic sense. But then I have an irky feeling they just want to keep their OOB :P
Does a Quatre Bras expansion mean they'll do the battles of Ligny and Wavre?
If you have all four battles of the campaign in place, you can link them, and that's when things start to get interesting.
Quote from: Philippe on May 03, 2016, 09:26:01 AM
Does a Quatre Bras expansion mean they'll do the battles of Ligny and Wavre?
If you have all four battles of the campaign in place, you can link them, and that's when things start to get interesting.
Agreed. I think that would be more interesting than the current campaign system. Kudos to them for attempting a dynamic campaign system, but I don't think it's as interesting as linked historical battles would be.
Quote from: panzerde on May 03, 2016, 09:44:59 AM
Quote from: Philippe on May 03, 2016, 09:26:01 AM
Does a Quatre Bras expansion mean they'll do the battles of Ligny and Wavre?
If you have all four battles of the campaign in place, you can link them, and that's when things start to get interesting.
Agreed. I think that would be more interesting than the current campaign system. Kudos to them for attempting a dynamic campaign system, but I don't think it's as interesting as linked historical battles would be.
I think it is just the Quatre Bras action. I saw this off a press release and there is no indication of any other battles, and the pics were all French troops, some with British in the background.
"June 1815. Quatre Bras, a small village with no more than four houses located in Belgium. This peaceful place will assume a key role in determining Europe's fate.
With the launch of Waterloo last year, the Scourge of War series explored the most iconic battle of European history.
Scourge of War: Waterloo has been considered one of the best tactical wargames set in the Napoleonic period, mainly because it simulates with surprising accuracy all of the key variables that were decisive on those battlefields. Property of the historical weapons such as range or reliability, formations including line, square and close order and meticulous recreation of the map are only some examples of what this award-winning engine is capable of.
Scourge of War: Quatre Bras extends this experience and brings a new epic battle to the series. In the 5 scenarios of Quatre Bras, players are able to control their troops in a historical 5-mile x 5-mile battlefield map and to experience an extensively researched and precise order of battle. The game puts players at the top of the chain of command but also allows them to play at a lower rank. They will also have to deal with orders coming from their superiors while finding an effective way to maneuver their own units.
Thanks to in-depth research, the game includes historical unit names, weapons, leaders and formations: the Armée du Nord commanded by Marshall Ney is ready to face Wellington's Anglo-Allied Army. The goal of the French is clear: if they manage to take control of the crossroads, they will prevent the Prussians from meeting the British Army at Waterloo.
There is no room for a runner-up in this race against time!"I agree with Philippe and Panzerde - a linked campaign to all four battles would be very interesting. At the moment the closest you can get to that is John Tiller's Campaign Waterloo.
If this is a content-update patch to pay for future support, I'm in, particularly as I assume, perhaps not the best idea, that this will be expansion-pack priced.
Obviously, the linked-campaign would be preferable, but, given their commitment to the weird campaign system, do they have the courage to walk quietly away?
For people who have played gettysburg, what makes it better than waterloo, why does hits work in there but not waterloo
Quote from: Hofstadter on May 03, 2016, 09:25:01 PM
For people who have played gettysburg, what makes it better than waterloo, why does hits work in there but not waterloo
Because civil war battles are just line battles with minimal cavalry action. Troop formation is just line and column.
Napoleonics have more fancy formations, more cavalry variety. Though they are in the game, unit behaviour still feels more civil war than Napoleonic.
HITS: They fundamentally changed something on the tactical map interface. As far as I can remember, they enabled direct clicking like RTS and removed the more refined orders that you can send by Courier because of this. But you can't give fine tuned / chained orders with the clicking action. It spoils the HITS immersion.
Example:
In Gettysburg: write courier order to move to coordinate x y and form a line, etc.
In Waterloo: open map and click on coordinate (not write a letter). Then have AI do his own stuff or you "take command". Because sending another letter to form a line after they reach their objective takes too much time. Having to Take Command breaks the HITS experience.
Here's the tread which I participated in:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3912090
Quote from: Boggit on May 03, 2016, 05:57:39 PM
I agree with Philippe and Panzerde - a linked campaign to all four battles would be very interesting. At the moment the closest you can get to that is John Tiller's Campaign Waterloo.
As far as i know, only the old Fields of Glory had it.
I always liked the battle at Quatre Bras.
In Tiller's Waterloo you can play the whole campaign from the moment the French cross the border. Napoleon can swing to west and isn't forced to march straight up the Brussels road.
Here's a very small detail from when the French approach the Sambre at the start of the campaign.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FPnwltVS.jpg&hash=ce8a1dba61453b0ed4aec05eca2e9514688e3884)
Quote from: Anguille on May 04, 2016, 01:10:22 AM
Quote from: Boggit on May 03, 2016, 05:57:39 PM
I agree with Philippe and Panzerde - a linked campaign to all four battles would be very interesting. At the moment the closest you can get to that is John Tiller's Campaign Waterloo.
As far as i know, only the old Fields of Glory had it.
I always liked the battle at Quatre Bras.
Yes, Tiller's Battleground, an oldie but goldie I pickup again a few months back, as the Quatre Bras / Ligny battles with various scenarios. Forgot how much Battleground Napoleonics is.
Quote from: Hancock on May 04, 2016, 09:11:29 AM
Quote from: Anguille on May 04, 2016, 01:10:22 AM
Quote from: Boggit on May 03, 2016, 05:57:39 PM
I agree with Philippe and Panzerde - a linked campaign to all four battles would be very interesting. At the moment the closest you can get to that is John Tiller's Campaign Waterloo.
As far as i know, only the old Fields of Glory had it.
I always liked the battle at Quatre Bras.
Yes, Tiller's Battleground, an oldie but goldie I pickup again a few months back, as the Quatre Bras / Ligny battles with various scenarios. Forgot how much Battleground Napoleonics is.
Actually i think i have it too, completely forgot about that...should launch it again if i do (or order it) :)
@Philippe...thanks for the nice screenshot.
Quote from: Hancock on May 04, 2016, 09:11:29 AM
Quote from: Anguille on May 04, 2016, 01:10:22 AM
Quote from: Boggit on May 03, 2016, 05:57:39 PM
I agree with Philippe and Panzerde - a linked campaign to all four battles would be very interesting. At the moment the closest you can get to that is John Tiller's Campaign Waterloo.
As far as i know, only the old Fields of Glory had it.
I always liked the battle at Quatre Bras.
Yes, Tiller's Battleground, an oldie but goldie I pickup again a few months back, as the Quatre Bras / Ligny battles with various scenarios. Forgot how much Battleground Napoleonics is.
Just to be clear, that screenshot is from the HPS/JTS Waterloo, not Battleground.
Quote from: Philippe on May 04, 2016, 09:35:58 AM
Just to be clear, that screenshot is from the HPS/JTS Waterloo, not Battleground.
Good clarification, definitely different game systems. And my previous should have said I forgot how much fun the Battleground system is for the suite of Napoleonics. I played them many years ago and, after reading Cornwell's book on Waterloo ("Waterloo: the story of Four Days, Three Armies and Three Battles") I got the urge and bought the package.
Tiller's Waterloo is an epic game that, as Doug will tell you, can lead to fights that bear no resemblance to the events of June 1815, but are delightful nonetheless.
The game lacks an adequate morale system above the level of the battalion and this can results in horrifically unhistoric casualty totals, but it is still the best game on the topic available.
Quote from: Cyrano on May 04, 2016, 02:37:29 PM
Tiller's Waterloo is an epic game that, as Doug will tell you, can lead to fights that bear no resemblance to the events of June 1815, but are delightful nonetheless.
The game lacks an adequate morale system above the level of the battalion and this can results in horrifically unhistoric casualty totals, but it is still the best game on the topic available.
Definitely the case. We've had great fun with a full campaign game. We need to pick it back up once we both get clear of current game-interrupting events.
The Tiller games also have an ammunition supply sytem that doesn't seem to have anything to do with what went on in Napoleonic times and is quite inadequate when it comes to artillery ammunition, no logistical system to speak of (no food, fodder, tents, and brandy, and no supply centers or forward depots and no side effects from being cold, tired, and hungry), a weird fatigue system that doesn't seem to be about fatigue, and a very poor representation of tactical formations (infantry march columns should not be the same formation as tactical maneuver columns and cavalry formations seem to be absent).
But it's the only game in town, and doesn't work too badly when you don't try to get operational with it, which the system admittedly wasn't designed to do.
While the HQ In The Saddle system for SOW is an interesting concept, I never ended up using it much. Orders and interface for it were still too fidgety, even after some updating.
I just play it like an RTS, albeit with courier delays, fog of war, and such turned on. It still trumps the command systems in other games without the need for the HitS courier message headache.
Quote from: Philippe on May 04, 2016, 03:47:51 PM
The Tiller games also have an ammunition supply sytem that doesn't seem to have anything to do with what went on in Napoleonic times and is quite inadequate when it comes to artillery ammunition, no logistical system to speak of (no food, fodder, tents, and brandy, and no supply centers or forward depots and no side effects from being cold, tired, and hungry), a weird fatigue system that doesn't seem to be about fatigue, and a very poor representation of tactical formations (infantry march columns should not be the same formation as tactical maneuver columns and cavalry formations seem to be absent).
But it's the only game in town, and doesn't work too badly when you don't try to get operational with it, which the system admittedly wasn't designed to do.
Re: Ammunition, I'll stipulate so far as to observe it's a pure abstraction. It acknowledges that units did get "Low" on ammo and then could resupply, little else. Also, the rules about points for wagons drives me insane. Between the teams of designers that work on those games (and it is more than one), there's one that's passionately committed to the wagons against all reason and protest (including my own!)
Re: Logistics: Glad it's not there. It would have been a bolt on to a system that was never designed to support it. That's game that Tiller's isn't.
Re: Fatigue: I'm mugwump. I see what it's trying to emulate and it's important for night manuever, but I understand those who have raised the concerns.
Re: Formation: I wish he'd given it a miss entirely because of your correct observations about the awkward way it's implemented. NLB is just fine without them and, at the level you're notionally playing, formation would have been far too many levels down.
And your last remark is something I've argued about elsewhere for a long time, viz., people want to ladle all this chrome onto the system (I'm looking at YOU VPs for wagons) and it just makes an elegant system start to creak.
Still love it.
All of the above said, would be very interested in a MP game if we can coordinate. Let's talk.
For who want try the multiplayer we have a steam group http://steamcommunity.com/groups/sowwaterloo to collect players and organize matches. We reached the new records last week, 9 players in game and 60.000 men in the fields. We verified that if all the players have a decent connection and decent fps you can play also with big numbers without fastidious lag