User Reviews (1 - 11 of 24)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

My first bad review...

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 0 / 1
Date: March 13, 2007
Author: Amazon User

I was in love with gettysburg and antietam, and waterloo came out and eagerly baought it.

The game is very good but there are several problems with it that are so big, I have to badly rate the game.

The first is cavalry iss WAY too powerful. i know at the time cavalry was powerful but a group 80 cavalrymen making a brigade go into square automaticly over and over again whilst you click line is no way accurate. its just annoying.

When you have infantry in line and 80 cavalry men make you 2000 man brigade go into square and then while you away tending to another part of the battle and you return to see enemy infantry has torn apart your infantry stuk in square, its very annoying.

The second is, sometimes infantry just dosnt fire. Your regiment just stands there, aiming the gun at the enemy but not firing or reloading while the enemy is firing at you. So, if you send a regiment behind to enemy to flank them, it wont fire and you lose. Wether this is a bug or not I dont know, it certainly wasnt in gettysburg.

There is a sequal and maybe that is different but for some reason, its not being published. but, those two above reasons are reason enough for me to not play this game again and to give it 2 stars, as it could be a great game without those 2 fundamental flaws.

Waterloo: An Excellent Game

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 10 / 10
Date: June 06, 2004
Author: Amazon User

Having found my copy of Gettysburg (The best PC game of all time) out of order, several years ago I turned to Waterloo as a substitute. I have no stopped playing it since (Even when Gettysburg worked again). The game is complex, realistic and beautifully detailed. It truly captures the spirit and style of Napoleanic warfare, a subject with which I am quite familiar. Anyone who enjoys studying Military History must buy this game, as much as a tool for learning as a fun program. One never runs out of new experiences in it, and each battle is completely unique and challanging. The well-researched units and orders of battle are superb, and make for a smooth and historically acurate gameplay. I really, truly can't stress enough how great it is. Although, to be fair, only people who like Napoleanic warfare will get into it.

Flexibility is Not an Option

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 9 / 10
Date: March 22, 2003
Author: Amazon User

Based upon the successful Gettysburg engine this game shares many of the same faults, but does have a few benefits. The good news is that Cavalry is back in. Gettysburg had miserable cavalry which dismounted to attack and basically fought as infantry. Waterloo gives back the elan of the cavalry charge and livens up an otherwise static battle line. Unless you intervene, units attacked by cavalry will form into squares and happily stay that way when infantry move in to blast them to pieces , and that's were the attention to minutiae come into play.When the AI attacks you simultaneously in two places at once you're basically going to sacrifice one or the other as the AI doesn't adequately defend your troops with the same panache it does its own. Unfortunately the vast scope of the game (at least in the Grand Campaign modes as opposed to the bland scenarios)requires the same degree of micro-management. If you don't babysit units they will be quickly overrun or annihilated. The game map doesn't help in this regard as the terrain is basically linear and quite narrow in depth. The strategic aspect of the game involves controlling SITES which give a morale boost to your army. Unfortunately this will lead to a fragmenting of your forces and require that you constantly shuffle between them. There is not much you can do about this as when the game commences the computer pre-positions your forces for you tying you to a strategy not of your liking. The British seem spread out far too thinly across the map defending useless terrain with woefully inadequate troops. Unless you consolidate them in a more cohesive fashion each sector of the line can be singled out and quickly put to peril. Once again, I don't like having strategy forced upon me I'd prefer to choose my own ground. The game does have the expected thrills although the voice overs could be more elaborate (Hoorah!For old Nosey!...)and the addition of musical themes would enhance the atmosphere greatly (a bit of fife and drum, bagpipe and the Marseillaise would set the tone quite nicely). If you liked Gettysburg you'll love this one but only those not easily unnerved will keep coming back for more.

Bore terloo!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 7 / 27
Date: September 03, 2002
Author: Amazon User

What a waste of money! If you are thinking of getting this game then wait until the price drops to about a quarter or what it is because that's all it's worth!
The good points are: There is a flashy title page with a nice little tune. There is a really nice historical account of the battle (although the writer does need to learn a little more grammar!)
Well, that's it. There are the good points! Now for the bad points...
The training scenarios are incredibly irritating. Every move you make it stopped by the "trainer" while a banner appears with information about how to move units etc. and the game automatically pauses which you have to undo manually each and every time. What a pain! In addition, at the end of each instruction you read you are told that to exit the game press the escape key. I wish it told me what to do to get my hard-earned money back!!
When you have mastered the training with lots of swearing at the computer and the notion that you have paid 40 bucks for the game so why not see it through, you get onto the battle action. What a joke! There are, I am told, 60 different uniforms in the programme. Pity we can't actually see them!
I tried to dowload screenshots from a site on the net but each time I couldn't get to see them for some technical reason. Hardly surprising having seen the game! "Is this IT?", I though when I first saw it. Terrible!
Gameplay is no fun either. I give commands only to@see that the unit hsn't moved, and if you want to move several units, sometimes you cannot find the brigade commander the units belong to.
Do I even need to mention the jumpy scrolling?
Maybe a real aficionado of the old table wargames who has never seen a computer game before might get excited over this, but for the rest of you I would recommend you to stay well clear of this.

Difficulty is a good thing

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 13 / 14
Date: April 27, 2002
Author: Amazon User

Someone who'd never played any of the games of this type (like Gettysburg, etc.) will find it very difficult to figure out which troops you're controlling at any time. The mass of little flags on the map are difficult to control, and if you're not used to 18 C army structure you might find it difficult to keep units near their commanders, which is a key to the game. Also, the game takes a lot of patience to play. It takes considerable time for pre-mechanized armies to develop and then execute your battle plans. So, in short, you might not like the game if you're someone who wouldn't like ANY of the games in the series because of the aforementioned difficulties that are par for the course.

As a big fan of Gettysburg, my opinion is that this is a worthy descendant. Get the 2nd patch and some of the problems notes in earlier reviews will go away. Before widespread rifle use, cavalry played a huge role in battles and are accurately represented in the game. If you're used to Gettysburg, you fast learn that you can't leave your soldiers in line formation for the duration once the battle starts. Once you learn to use cavalry, though, you quickly can torment the other side the same as they do to you.

One small problem: the background is set a little bit too dark, probably accurate for Belgium after a heavy rainfall, but I liked the terrain colors better in Gettysburg.

So: if you liked Gettysburg and want what I think is a better game (perhaps a pro-Napoleonic era bias coming through) get this. If you're new to this kind of game entirely, download the demo and see whether you like it. But note that the real game runs better, has infinitely more variety, and comes with a tutorial to allow practicing movement, formations, and use of artillery and cavalry.

The Best

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 10 / 11
Date: April 02, 2002
Author: Amazon User

This is the first, and so far the only game from this company I've ever played. Out of all my favorite games, this is my favorite. The graphics are fine, but I've seen better, but are not as bad as some of the reviews depict. The history in this game is perfect. There was obviously much research put into it. The scroll is kind of slow, but all you have to do is zoom out all the way, which makes the units and everything hard to see, but if you know where all your units are, there isn't a problem. Like another review says, the uniforms are beautiful, with varying colors. Also, the units aren't just from Britan and France. Britan's allies come from countries including Prussian units, and Dutch units. And yes, the game allows you only to play one battle, but there are 30 different scenarios, some including a calvary battle, with only calvar units, and the final phase of the Battle of Waterloo, where Britan has the high ground and must block the French from getting into Belgium. Overall, I reccomend all gamers, especially the hard-core strategy gamers.

Waterloo:Graphics worst battle

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 1 / 11
Date: March 18, 2002
Author: Amazon User

I was very disappointed about this game. The graphic were the worst I have ever seen. I have all of the Sid Meiers games and love them all. That is why I don't understand how these graphics ended up so bad. Having to try that hard to make out what a unit is on screen is just terrible!

Nicely done, but lacks replayability.

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 16 / 16
Date: March 04, 2002
Author: Amazon User

"Waterloo: Napoleon's Last Battle" (WNLB) is the third game to use Sid Meier's "Gettysburg" engine- the most successful PC wargame of all-time. Of course, any game using a 1997 game as its base is not really going to blow anyone in 2002 away with its graphics, sound, or interface. To put it bluntly WNLB looks very dated, especially the terrain graphics. The game does contain wonderfully researched and accurate uniforms of the numerous units involved in this epic battle. No plain blue and gray here, instead we get the huge spectrum of colors that made up the uniforms of Napoleonic armies. In fact, the entire game's attention to historical detail is very admirable.

But to an experienced wargamer eye-candy will always be secondary to gameplay, and it is here where WNLB shines. Sid Meier's engine has been excellently updated to demonstrate the complexities of the Napoleonic battlefield with its "rock, scissors, paper" battle between infantry, cavalry, and artillery. Cavalry is the instrament of decision, and careful use of your mounted resources is the key to victory or defeat. The AI is also very good, and in some scenarios it will crush the human player. This is real time action, so it requires a quick hand and eye, and judicial use of the clock and pause key if the action gets too chaotic. A realtime engine works wonderfully for small to medium sized scenarios, and really introduces the player to the chaos of 19th century combat. However, this engine is far less successful in the larger scenarios- the player will have very difficult time keeping track of all his units without playing at the slowest speed and using the pause button every 10 seconds or so.

WNLB suffers from a lack of replayability that hurts all war games based just on a single battle. There are only so many times one will want to keep refighting the battle of Waterloo. The game does come with numerous scenarios to help replayability. However, alot of these scenarios are large sized, and are quite unplayable due to the engine's limitations. Due to its lack of replayability and dated graphics, I can't really recommend WNLB to anyone other than die-hard wargamers and Napoleonics buffs.

Big disapointment

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 1 / 6
Date: February 27, 2002
Author: Amazon User

This game was a huge disapointment. I expected this game to be like Sid Myer's Gettysburg, which,by the way is an excelent game, but it wasn't. The graphics were horrible and the animation was very choppy. I liked the game for 1 hour then I wanted my money back. Take my advice, DON'T BUY THIS GAME !

Table wargamers take heed!

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 3 / 9
Date: January 21, 2002
Author: Amazon User

This game is not for you!

The play is extremely clunky and the unit graphics are horribly done. It would seem the designers have placed too much emphasis on cavalry as they are way overpowered and the artillery appears to be shooting BBs and may as well not even be on the battlefield. The objective points are never clear as to where the true ground is, so you may hold a solid line for hours but lose the points because your men just weren't on the right pixel.

The AI often jumbles into a solid block of mess with which the inferior graphics engine really tortures, so that you never know what the hell is yards in front of you. Even more fascinating is that the AI somehow fires volleys from this massive mess into your well formed line shattering them for some reason. You suffer incohesion but the AI can just munge corps together and even fire through them.

All in all a very disappointing game not even near some of the better quality games of Strategy First. I think I will skip the next one in this awful series - Austerlitz, and SF needs to give Breakaway Games a break away.

Review Page: 1 2 3 Next 

Actions