Waterloo Reviews

Crashed my CPU 10/10

Se vc gosta é sabe ingles

no manual unplayable

I first played Waterloo on my trusty Amiga 500 in 1989 not long after its initial release, so was delighted when I heard it was finally being revived on STEAM. Part of the "Battlescapes" series of military games by Dr Peter Turcan - the others being Napoleonic encounters Borodino and Austerlitz, plus American Civil War clash Gettysburg - Waterloo features the smallest map of the lot. The idea of the series, which made the games highly original and innovative at the time, is that we play only a single person (the Commander In Chief) and have no knowledge of how the battle is unfolding around us except by either moving the Headquarters or relying on information supplied by messenger riders. Of course, due to time delays this intelligence may be incorrect and most likely out of date with the ever changing situation - exactly the same problems faced by the real-life commanders in the days before radio communication. Such an approach made the games equally thrilling and frustrating to play, providing a fantastic challenge as we tried to second-guess the enemy without knowing what was happening over the horizon. The game is played on a 3D map with our position always at the bottom of the screen. Using the mouse pointer we can click on various objects, be they locations or military units, to collect vital information on the subject. This gives us a direction and range and the state and formation of units. Therefore we are informed when they are disordered or routing as well as whether Infantry divisions are in line, column or square. We are also given the names of any commanders present. (Incidentally, attempting to ascertain such information from enemy units is not possible and we are only told what type of unit they are, plus if there are enemy commanders with them too!) Very soon messenger riders flood the map and these horsemen are treated as units themselves, allowing them to become lost, caught up in routs or killed. Orders can only be given to Corps commanders, who in turn send commands to their subordinates, and all this takes time so forward planning is key. Often dangerous situations developing on the battlefield can be dealt with by the local commanders themselves and they are very flexible when working within their order framework. Thus micro-management is not necessary. As each commander has a different skill rating, though, we soon realise which ones are better at handling the stress of battle. Unlike the messenger riders, unit commanders will never be killed. The units themselves are shown as coloured blocks led by a colonel. As they fight their way across the landscape we see them change formation and we soon recognise at a glance what they are doing. Likewise Artillery is unlimbered to fire - there is an option to see the puffs of smoke if so desired, which makes things easier to see what the guns are aiming at - and Cavalry changes from a block to oblique when charging. Unit blocks become smaller as casualties are taken so it is easy to see which are suffering punishment. Routing units become disordered before rallying and any which leave the edge of the map are considered lost and will not return. Some may rally several times and return to the fight, especially the better quality troops. Infantry units are rated as either Militia, Line, Light or Guard. Cavalry are Light or Heavy and Militia or Guard - sadly there is no greater definition for types such as Dragoons, Lancers or Cuirassiers etc - while Artillery is classed as Foot or Horse. Players must be prepared for a lot of typing, for EVERY order given is input via the keyboard. Fortunately the parser is very flexible and certain things such as names and locations can be shortened for convenience. Each order input generates a messenger rider who will attempt to carry it to the relevant recipient. The orders system is the most important part of the game and must be fully understood if the battle is going to be won. They vary in complexity and length. Simple orders include movement instructions and requests, perhaps for battle reports. Others are much longer and complicated. Issuing the forming of attack or defence lines require several commanders and locations to be named, and perhaps even a flank for good measure, although even these become second nature with practice and experience. Orders can be given to "All Corps" which multiplies the same instruction to every senior commander in the army. A time of day can be specified as well, which is especially useful if we wish several Corps to co-operate together. We are only allowed 8 orders per turn, in which case the time progresses by 15 minutes and the map is redrawn for the next turn. As movement is limited per turn, we should remember that orders must be dispatched in time to be of benefit. A commander half a mile a way will (hopefully) receive instructions earlier than one who is several from the Headquarters. When information is received it is time dated so we can see how long the message has taken to arrive. Is it out of date or still relevant? This adds to the strategic feeling of the game and fans of Napoleonic wargaming will be in their element. I really enjoyed playing Waterloo on the Amiga 500 all those decades ago and am still delighted with the PC version on STEAM today. However, there are problems. One is that the battle abruptly ends at 9.30 PM without exception and the result immediately given. This is all well and good historically but what if we wish to continue the fight? Furthermore, this ensures that giving orders after 8.30 PM or so can be virtually useless as they will not be able to take effect before the time limit expires! Extensive playing of the game has seen some unrealistic developments take place. It is possible to move the Headquarters far behind the enemy lines and even right next to enemy units without being attacked, yet in fairness perhaps this was due to lack of memory available when the game was originally designed. A major quibble for me is that while the Amiga version had a key prompt to dismiss information from the screen, this is sadly missing from the PC port. Thus lots of text is shown for several seconds before permanently vanishing so much of it is likely to be missed. This is especially noticeable during the battle assessment when there are facts and figures about casualty rates and army statistics etc and it simply cannot be fully digested in the mere seconds allowed before the data changes to the next screen. There is only the single scenario available but it can be played as either Napoleon or the Duke of Wellington. Prussian units appear on the edge of the battlefield around 4 PM and 6 PM respectively and these are controlled only by the AI. As in the actual real-life battle, Wellington is not able to give orders to his Prussian allies! Waterloo, good as it is, is one of those games which is now crying out for a remaster or remake. Had it been designed today we would have had several scenarios included - Quatre Bras, Ligny and Wavre would all have been playable - and maybe even some "what if" situations like the timely arrival of Marshal Grouchy's Corps upon the field. The game is a great price at less than £4 and even better during the regular STEAM sales, so I would highly recommend players give it a try, especially if they wish to play something a little different to the standard wargame fare!

If you know this game from nearly 30 years ago and want to get your hit of nostalgia, go for it. I had no technical troubles whatsoever. Keep in mind though that you need some form of map, the manual etc. to fully experience to game (just google it. If you never played this game, only go for it if you a die hard grognard. You will need offline material for planning, you don't know how your generals interpret orders or if they received them and when, you never get detailed reports. It is a simulation of army command as far as it was possible to program with the technology around 1990.