Scourge of War: Waterloo! announced

[jomni]

The strategic layer of the campaign does not have the same depth as the tactical battles do, but we wanted to focus on having good core gameplay for it, without all the bells and whistles. Focussing on one thing and doing it right. The main part of the development was still very much on the tactical level. The campaign is there for people who like to give more meaning to their skirmishes and it does that very well. Tactical battles is where Scourge of War still shines though.

I should also note that I used the default sprite ratio during the stream, if you want, you can have a lot more sprites appear there :)

Not really descriptive of the actual mechanics.  Is it just a mechanism to link skirmishes with persistent casualties and VPs?

[Surtur]

Let me try and explain it a bit more.

In the strategic layer, you can manage your army and move them from town to town in real time. If two opposing armies meet, a battle is generated based on the troops that were meeting.

In a typical campaign game, you will be splitting your forces to cover more ground and leave garrisons in "objective cities" and therefore you are constantly balancing between covering as much ground as possible (thereby potentially isolating enemy groups) and having a strong local superiority to break through the enemy lines.

[fabius]

Let me try and explain it a bit more.

In the strategic layer, you can manage your army and move them from town to town in real time. If two opposing armies meet, a battle is generated based on the troops that were meeting.

In a typical campaign game, you will be splitting your forces to cover more ground and leave garrisons in "objective cities" and therefore you are constantly balancing between covering as much ground as possible (thereby potentially isolating enemy groups) and having a strong local superiority to break through the enemy lines.

Sounds ok to me. I just like having some wider context to tactical battles.  :)

[Philippe]

How does the game engine treat column formation?

I haven't scoured the screenshots in detail, but I did come across a disturbing image of a group of what may have been Dutch battalions lined up in what looked like march order behind their flags.

Column formation was the default formation for continental armies.

A Napoleonic column is not a synonym for march order. 

A 600-man battalion of six companies in line would stand three men deep and two hundred men wide.  The same unit in column formation would stand eighteen men deep and thirty-three men wide, with the companies in line one behind the other.  The same unit in march order would probably be about four men wide but one hundred and fifty men or more deep, and wouldn't really be in any kind of functional combat formation.

These three arrangements have very different footprints, combat and maneuver characteristics.

What this boils down to is that a battalion in column was essentially a battalion in a short and thick line formation. It is not a bunch of men drawn up in two long thin columns behind a flag.

This has important implications for how you move your units around on the battlefield, and is probably the most significant characteristic of infantry in Napoleonic warfare (the other is how they used the clouds of skirmishers).

[Nefaro]

Let me try and explain it a bit more.

In the strategic layer, you can manage your army and move them from town to town in real time. If two opposing armies meet, a battle is generated based on the troops that were meeting.

In a typical campaign game, you will be splitting your forces to cover more ground and leave garrisons in "objective cities" and therefore you are constantly balancing between covering as much ground as possible (thereby potentially isolating enemy groups) and having a strong local superiority to break through the enemy lines.

Sounds ok to me. I just like having some wider context to tactical battles.  :)

Yeah, sounds good enough.  Doesn't need to be fancy at the moment.  I'm just happy there's something to tie non-historical battles together.  O0

[jomni]

Let me try and explain it a bit more.

In the strategic layer, you can manage your army and move them from town to town in real time. If two opposing armies meet, a battle is generated based on the troops that were meeting.

In a typical campaign game, you will be splitting your forces to cover more ground and leave garrisons in "objective cities" and therefore you are constantly balancing between covering as much ground as possible (thereby potentially isolating enemy groups) and having a strong local superiority to break through the enemy lines.

That's great to hear. 

[jomni]

How does the game engine treat column formation?

I haven't scoured the screenshots in detail, but I did come across a disturbing image of a group of what may have been Dutch battalions lined up in what looked like march order behind their flags.

Column formation was the default formation for continental armies.

A Napoleonic column is not a synonym for march order. 

A 600-man battalion of six companies in line would stand three men deep and two hundred men wide.  The same unit in column formation would stand eighteen men deep and thirty-three men wide, with the companies in line one behind the other.  The same unit in march order would probably be about four men wide but one hundred and fifty men or more deep, and wouldn't really be in any kind of functional combat formation.

These three arrangements have very different footprints, combat and maneuver characteristics.

What this boils down to is that a battalion in column was essentially a battalion in a short and thick line formation. It is not a bunch of men drawn up in two long thin columns behind a flag.

This has important implications for how you move your units around on the battlefield, and is probably the most significant characteristic of infantry in Napoleonic warfare (the other is how they used the clouds of skirmishers).

Wait, what's the verdict on Histwar2: Napoleon?  I just have experience on Histwar1: Les Grognards  which is quite "love it, hate it".

[Nefaro]

I've said it numerous times, but I don't think it always catches:

The men displayed in SOW's units are at a 1-to-5 ratio on default settings. 

Yes, it is scaled by default.  As you can see in the preview vid, there is a huge amount of units and battlefield to be displayed, so it makes sense from a performance standpoint.  Especially since every unit is being managed by it's own AI of varying personality types. 


I have absolutely no issue with scaling in wargames.  Nearly all of them have it, so it's not unusual.  *shrug*

[Asid]

Scourge of War - The Waterloo Diaries Part 1

Published on 22 May 2015

In this first chapter of the "Waterloo Diaries", the producer of Scourge of War: Waterloo shares some key elements about the game (scope, main features). Footage comes from the game directly, without any post-editing.

Scourge of War - The Waterloo Diaries Part 2

Published on 28 May 2015

In this second chapter of the "Waterloo Diaries", the producer of Scourge of War: Waterloo talks about the formation system and the way to maintain coherency within an army. Delivering orders and make them executed could be more complicated than what you expect!

[Rayfer]

Nice short videos Asid, thanks for posting...I'm looking forward to this one. I hope they don't repeat what they did in the original Gettysburg release with the scenarios locked, forcing you to play them in a specific order to unlock them. This was fixed by a mod, I would hope they would just do away with it in this release.

[Surtur]

Some scenarios are unlocked from the start, some are not (because of carry over requirements). There are quite a couple you can just jump in though.

[RyanE]

What the heck is the point of locking scenarios?  I have a few games do this and it does nothing but cause an uproar and forces the dev to backtrack or let a mod fix it.  Why can't we play the games we buy the way we want?

[Rayfer]

What the heck is the point of locking scenarios?  I have a few games do this and it does nothing but cause an uproar and forces the dev to backtrack or let a mod fix it.  Why can't we play the games we buy the way we want?

Amen brother....!  Or just offer both options.....locked and unlocked as an option.

[Anguille]

This is going to be cool....

[ArizonaTank]

I am looking forward to this....and will buy.  But from the videos, it looks like the biggest "suspension of disbelief" killer for me is still in the system: when two lines of friendly troops create a "cross" because they can't coordinate where to stand.  Here is hoping they fix this someday....