This is a review of Napoleon in Russia by Talonsoft. As the title suggests it covers the Battle of Borodino 7th September 1812, at which Napoleon gained a marginal victory but couldn't win the campaign. The game was played on my 166 Pentium with 24meg RAM. Whilst this machine is not the top of the range it is a decently powered one, despite this the game takes some time. This is an important point, this battle is not an ACW battle with less than 50,000 a side; it a gigantic struggle between two massive armies and a turn can take a very long time to play.
The review is based on the full historical battle, as played by me twice - once as the French and once as the Russians. I played the "Kutusov Turns to Fight", which is the historical set up but allowing full use of the reserve, although the computer still doesn't seem to use them. I used full fog of war, which meant that I couldn't see the units until in sight and couldn't see their details until much closer. I do not use the balancing factor of more or less casualties as I do not feel this is historical.
As in all Talonsoft's game the look and feel of the game is superb. In fact I would say that this is the pick of the bunch. The graphics are excellent and the terrain looks very realistic. The video clips are of good quality as are the sound effects. So that is the cosmetics over with, how does the game play?
Each turn is equal to 15 minutes, not 20 as in the ACW games, and comprises of 5 phases. The sequence is Movement, Defensive Fire, Offensive Fire, Cavalry Charge, and finally Melee. Things to note within this sequence are that artillery may only unlimber within the defensive fire phase presumably an easy way to stop them moving and firing in the same move, although they may limber in the movement phase which seems to go against the rule book. This does seem rather odd I think that manoeuvre changes should take place within the movement phase, but this is a minor quibble. A very important point is that before the movement phase the computer works out all the morale and disorders for all your units. This is the only time when morale is checked, and I believe is a major fault as it fails to convey the sense of Napoleonic warfare. In the game (in fact in all the games) melee combat occurs on all occasions, whereas in reality very few charges, indeed surprisingly few, actually hit the enemy. Either the defender would run away or the attacker would waver. The sequence employed means that firepower will never stop a unit going in (unless destroyed), this is very unrealistic and does not convey the correct feel.
I have also found that the computer is not a very good opponent. In all the Talonsoft games I have played, all except Ardennes, I have never lost a battle and only once had only a minor victory. This means that I have won very convincingly as both sides against the other. The computer is not good enough to play an experienced gamer, although novices may have different views. As the attacker, the computer seems to like nothing better than to send out skirmishers and then call them back. This means that it never manages to mount strong attacks. So, for example on the French left flank the computer was unable to take Borodino until I decided to withdraw to see what would happen! The French never managed to take any other victory locations at all. As the defender, the computer just stands there and waits for you. Whilst attacking Utitsa as the French, I quietly destroyed the defenders therein whilst 16 battalions stood 3 hexes away and waited their turn. I do not joke here - all I did was march my guns to each unit and then destroy them. This was easy to do as they neither advanced nor retreated but died to a man. I think this is taking the doggedness of the Russians too far. These are just two examples of the ease of victory. As the French I took all victory locations and as the Russians I lost none, (I retook Borodino). As mentioned above I do not use the advantage bar as I do not believe that this is useful; it would be far better to have a better opponent than one who rolls more 6s!
One personal dig from me is the way that the units are not identified by corps. It fine having divisional information but not if two divisions with the same designation are fighting next to each other. This would have been easy to show and would take a lot of searching through order of battles out. Concerning the Russian army, Talonsoft seems to have missed that the Russian brigades were numbered consecutively and were a permanent organisation. So for example there was only one 12th Brigade and the same units were always in that brigade. This is only a quibble but as it is my pet subject it does annoy me, sorry!
In case one is thinking that I am criticising the game too much, I do actually like it. You have plenty of detail and an excellent range of scenarios including many interesting what ifs. You also get scenarios covering the French assault on the Shevardino redoubt on the preceding afternoon, and a what-if on the French retreat through the battlefield. The game is a complete package and will keep players happy for a long time. The smaller scenarios look very interesting and will play a lot quicker, so will probably be more fun. Alas, I am one of those people who always play the whole game straight away and never bother with the learning curve. A note on speed, as mentioned earlier I turn the video clips and sounds off as the computer always reads these first before going on to calculate the effects. I also go to 2D normal view before getting the enemy to fire, this again speeds the system up no end. You may think I am a speed freak but it's no fun waiting whilst the computer fires 40 batteries and 60 battalions or skirmishers at you in 3D, it takes ages! Of course doing this does lose some of the excellent atmosphere, but you takes your choices.
As a final note, the company is not making any more of these style of games after Prelude to Waterloo which is now out so we may have time to play some of the older ones too. An interesting note to this is that Talonsoft have many patches on the Internet that allow one to upgrade games up to the present rules and to remedy any bugs.
I hope that you have found this review useful and even more hopefully, interesting. The game is good and I would still say that it is worth buying, especially if you can get a good price.
More Computer Game Reviews
Back to Table of Contents -- Lone Warrior #121
Back to Lone Warrior List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Magazine List
© Copyright 1998 by Solo Wargamers Association.
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com