Dear readers I have seen the future. It is mouse shaped. Not, I hasten to add, in a rodent fashion but rather in the computer sense.

Battleground Waterloo, by Talonsoft, published by Empire Interactive, along with its stable mates Battleground Ardennes and Battleground Gettysberg, while not yet perfect, is undoubtedly the start of a whole new era in wargaming. For although computer based wargames have been around for years they have tended (with the notable exception of Fields of Glory and a few others) to be automated board games rather than appear like a wargame with figures.

For those of you who have not yet seen the series, Talonsoft have produced a 3D battlefield for the PC user which is based on a hex layout and gives the on screen impression of a wargame in miniature, played out on an enhanced version of the GeoHex terrain system available to figure gamers. The units are well illustrated representations of perfectly painted wargames figures, moved over the terrain by the computer, under the players direction. All this with the added atmosphere of period music, sound effects and video action clips (of newsreel in the W.W.II game and re-enactors in the other two) thrown in for good measure.

Having seen all three games currently on release and having played the two 19th Century ones, I can say that Waterloo is not only the latest but the best to date. The terrain is much clearer, the units more colourful and by God its even got Brits in it! Oh, and before Herr Hofschröer gets after me, rather a lot of Germans as well.

What Makes it Attractive?

So what makes it attractive. Well it does look very appealing and that's always a good start. However on it's own that is not enough. Where this program really scores is in it's flexibility and the amount of thought that has gone into the detail. Not just the visual detail, although that is very good, but the playablity as well. It is very easy to pick up the basic commands and as it runs under both Windows 95 and Windows 3.x anyone who has ever touched a PC in their life will have it sorted in no time. In fact it's so "user friendly" provided you have a PC you can teach a total computer novice how to play and be having a good game in no time.

I could be very boring and go on in great detail about what the game program does and how it goes about it but let me just say this. Think of anything you have come across in a set of table top rules or anything you would have liked to have been taken into account, but the book keeping was to much of a headache. Well, all of them are in this game. Ammunition supply, unit fatigue, detaching and recalling skirmishers, moral, leadership bonus, terrain based variable move distances, different troop quality, national characteristics, formation changes, automatic monitoring of who's moved and who's fired, you name it, its got it.

Then there's the best bit, you don't have to work any of this out yourself. Neither do you have to remember yards of written text nor worry about your opponent forgetting or bending the rules, they can't, the program won't let them.

Although you feel the effects of these features in the game, you just don't have to do anything as a player to benefit from them, you play the machine does the work.

Game Options

One of the other big gains for me is the variety within the game options. I have never been a great fan of historical board games as most of them are based on one particular battle which you fight over and over again, as is Battleground, but the computer version has some advantages.

Not only do you get twenty two different scenarios ( including ten "what ifs" like Grouchy's force turning up, no rain the day/night before, no Prussians etc.) which enable you to play different parts or all of the battle in different ways. Each can also be played as either side, so making forty four options in all. They can be played solo, against the machine, or against a human opponent. It is also possible, with a little thought, to divide up the commands and play as a team in either mode.

In addition it is possible to play at a number of levels. From doing the lot, where you are C-in-C and a Battalion commander and every thing else at the same time, to just being the top man and getting Corps and Divisional commanders in the "person" of the machine to carry out your instructions at grand tactical level. You can also sandwich yourself somewhere in between and operate your Division under the machines grand plan.

The real beauty of it all, particularly if you play solo, is that you can pick it up and put down when ever you like with nothing to put away nor stacks of counters to be scattered by the family cat.

Faults

Of course there are faults. For some strange reason the programmers forgot or could not handle the detail to do separate sprites for all the Anglo-Allied army when deployed as skirmishers so the 95th Foot and the Nassauers, for example, appear in green when in formation but look like light company figures from a British line battalion when skirmishing. Also all units in the Anglo-Allied army carry the Union Jack but I suppose this would have meant a hell of a lot more work to put in Hanoverian, Dutch, Brunswick etc. variations. Finally on the nit picking front one more visual moan. Why are the British Foot Guards wearing Bearskins? How can you go to the trouble of giving the Scots Grays the correct headgear and the Highlanders kilts and get this wrong?

What else? Well the A/I (artificial intelligence) could have been a bit tougher but there is an option to tilt the balance of the game to either side, although as far as I can see this is really only a sophisticated version of loading the dice. However as sales are not just aimed at hardened wargamers and in the full battle variants the number of things to keep track of for the human player more than make up for the occasional odd move on behalf of the computer, you still get your moneys worth.

There is also the matter of the Superskirmisher. These are irritating little swine you come across from time to time you cannot seem to get rid off. The last ones I met were a Nassau light company in the orchard outside Hougomont who manfully stood off four French battalions for several turns including melee. However this has been recognised and I understand that Talonsoft have included a fix for it and other things free on their Website.

Which is fine if you are on the Internet, or like me just know some who is, but it really should have been picked up in play testing.

Talking of Websites, I have seen screen shots of the next Napoleonic release which will be a naval game. It is fantastic. Highly detailed ships, water spouts from near misses, holes in the sails from round shot, the works, all this on individual graphics around an inch and a half long and still someone emailed in to complain there were no men on the decks!

Future?

So is this really the future of wargaming? Well Talonsoft obviously think their on a winner. Already as well as the Naval game, which I gather will be out before the end of the year, Shiloh, Antietam and Sinai (Arabs v Israel 1956 - 73) are on the way and the Website has been peppered with demands for more Napoleonics. Hopefully our fellow period players in the USA will keep up the pressure in this regard as software houses and publishers view the US as the major market.

I would not expect any of you not already owning a PC to go out and get one on the strength of these games, although with second hand armies now changing hands for the price of a PC that could eat Battleground Waterloo for breakfast and play an Oasis CD at the same time, it may not be as daft as you might think.

One thing I am convinced of is that the possibilities games like these offer is vast. If you are not good with a brush or do not have the time to paint large numbers of figures, it has many advantages. Also very few of us have the time or the facility to produce terrain of anything like the quality illustrated in the game. It certainly is a revelation to find out just what you really could have seen (or not) at Waterloo, from any given point, and how hard it is to get a clear field of fire, even without the powder smoke.

Also it provides a good historical insight into how deep the opposing armies were drawn up as they faced each other. The only thing I have seen to equal the 3D representation on the game map is the famous Siborne diorama at the National Army Museum and there we are talking serious 3D, about 420 square feet of it if my memory serves me correctly!

Campaign Wish

What would be nice is if Talonsoft or someone would produce a good campaign game for our period. These are sadly lacking in the board game area and the possibilities for hidden map movement and logistics would be really exiting, particularly if linked to some form of on screen or table top battle. One of the most disappointing areas of campaign board games is the token battle resolution that is worked into most of them, which often amounts to little more than totalling the combat factors and rolling a dice. Thereby leaving hours of map manoeuvring and strategic planing to be decided by little more than chance, with scant opportunity to influence the outcome by tactical skill.

Until that comes along we will just have to make do with the one-off battle games.

So full marks to Empire Interactive for publishing a game that can only help attract people to the hobby, through being both accessible to the average PC owner and a serious interest to the period gamer at the same time.

Here's hoping that having done the hard work to develop Waterloo, they will apply the game structure and programming routines to more Napoleonic subjects in the future. I still enjoy painting figures but boy is good to just switch off at the end of a game and not have to pack everything away!