Scourge of War: Quatre Bras

[jomni]

Have they fixed the issue with Waterloo?

http://www.matrixgames.com/products/619/details/Scourge.of.War:.Quatre.Bras

[RyanE]

I'm sorry...what issue?

[jomni]

I'm sorry...what issue?

Broken dynamic campaign. 
Less capable headquarters on the saddle compared to Gettysburg.

[Boggit]

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.

[Hofstadter]

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

[Grim.Reaper]

Any rough idea as to when?  Days?  Weeks?  Months?  Maybe I missed it in the write-up.

[jomni]

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.

[panzerde]

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.

[Rayfer]

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?

[panzerde]

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.

[jomni]

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.

[SirAndrewD]

Quatre Bras?  Not the most interesting.   Lets go back further!  No Austerlitz? 

[Hofstadter]

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

[Philippe]

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.

[panzerde]

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.