Before I buy I have a few concerns.
Posted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 3:26 pm
First let me say what a thrill to see a new Gettysburg game offered. I have been a humble student of the battle for over thirty years and have always hoped to finally find the definitive game/sim to enjoy. Where as I realize no game/sim can be perfect, or replicate this battle in complete accuracy-I am a tad disappointed and concerned by what I see in the tutorial. The devs were astute enough to include a lot of detail on the map that is missed by a mile in other games/sims. Such as the Bliss farm with its orchard and wheat field running with it's approximate fences to the Emmitsburg road. The Rose farm with it's often neglected lane running east to the Wheatfield. The Triangular Field with it's wood fence on the east boarder joining the stone walls that complete the fencing. Most always that would be mistakenly placed as a stone wall, as it is today. I agree that it was most likely a wooden fence (a point still debated today).
Yes, lots of neat detail showing the devs did their homework with some loving care. But then....I see a white house at the south-west tip of the Wheatfield..with a tree growing right out of the center of it no less. There was no building ever there and it sticks out like a sore thumb. The famous "angle" with the copse of trees is done pretty well. But there is an important wood fence missing running north from the angle of the stone wall that needs to be represented.
What is with the blobs of stone placed all around the map where there were none? A few designate some kind of rocky/rough ground accurately, and again I applaud the detail. But quite a few should not be there. I keep looking around the map at times really appreciating the details often missed by other efforts; and then shake my head at other things in disappointment.
Units are another problem. Take the regimental strengths. While some are within an acceptable range, some are way off. Take Meredith's Iron Brigade for an example. The 19th Indiana is given 465 men and the 24th Michigan is given 384 or so. This is backwards. On June 30th, the 19th Indiana had 339 men (30+309). It's engaged strength has been thought to be around 308. The 24th Michigan on June 30th had 511 men (32+479) and an engaged strength of 496 (28+468).
Picky? Ok..for you maybe..but I am from Michigan and would love to command the famous 24th Michigan at it's correct strength. In fact, when I command any regiments in a game/sim about Gettysburg, I would hope to have their strengths at least approximately close to correct.
The AI is a bit wonky at times. For an example, I had a cavalry HQ of 20 men make a suicide charge at a regiment of over 300 men. They were decimated, of course, and that all was immediately followed up by the HQ officer charging the same infantry and was promptly shot and killed.
May I ask any of you folks who have unlocked the game, and know the battlefield and battle, what your take is on it's accuracy and devotion to historical detail? Also, I see mention of an editor. Can we edit the units and the map too? I would love to buy this, but I am concerned it is a mix of accuracy and glaring errors that will detract from any enjoyment of playing it.
Yes, lots of neat detail showing the devs did their homework with some loving care. But then....I see a white house at the south-west tip of the Wheatfield..with a tree growing right out of the center of it no less. There was no building ever there and it sticks out like a sore thumb. The famous "angle" with the copse of trees is done pretty well. But there is an important wood fence missing running north from the angle of the stone wall that needs to be represented.
What is with the blobs of stone placed all around the map where there were none? A few designate some kind of rocky/rough ground accurately, and again I applaud the detail. But quite a few should not be there. I keep looking around the map at times really appreciating the details often missed by other efforts; and then shake my head at other things in disappointment.
Units are another problem. Take the regimental strengths. While some are within an acceptable range, some are way off. Take Meredith's Iron Brigade for an example. The 19th Indiana is given 465 men and the 24th Michigan is given 384 or so. This is backwards. On June 30th, the 19th Indiana had 339 men (30+309). It's engaged strength has been thought to be around 308. The 24th Michigan on June 30th had 511 men (32+479) and an engaged strength of 496 (28+468).
Picky? Ok..for you maybe..but I am from Michigan and would love to command the famous 24th Michigan at it's correct strength. In fact, when I command any regiments in a game/sim about Gettysburg, I would hope to have their strengths at least approximately close to correct.
The AI is a bit wonky at times. For an example, I had a cavalry HQ of 20 men make a suicide charge at a regiment of over 300 men. They were decimated, of course, and that all was immediately followed up by the HQ officer charging the same infantry and was promptly shot and killed.
May I ask any of you folks who have unlocked the game, and know the battlefield and battle, what your take is on it's accuracy and devotion to historical detail? Also, I see mention of an editor. Can we edit the units and the map too? I would love to buy this, but I am concerned it is a mix of accuracy and glaring errors that will detract from any enjoyment of playing it.
