GameRx: Sid Meier’s Gettysburg!

Minimum Specs CPU Type: Pentium CPU Speed: 90 MHz RAM Required: 16 MB Graphics Type: SVGA Resolution: 800×600 Depth: 256 Colors

One thing that has always really bothered me about modern RTS is that games are no longer based on tactical skill, but rather knowledge of the game engine and mechanics. In such games, knowledge of the game always comes before knowledge of tactics, where even a wonderfully planned assault can completely backfire if you haven’t bought the right upgrades or powerups for your troops. To me, this is pretty apparent in games like Starcraft — any game where you measure prowess with “clicks per minute” seems like an exercise in tedium to me rather than a demonstration of strategic genius. Where modern RTS’s largely fail to meet standard big-picture criteria, Sid Meier’s Gettysburg more than delivers.

Based on the engine used in the games Waterloo and Sid Meier’s Antietam, gameplay is reminiscent of games from the likes of Creative Assembly. One controls regiments rather than individual soldiers and moves them in formation across the battlefield, making an understanding of fronts, flanking, and the other essential parts of pre-twentieth-century strategy key elements in formulating your plans. Time passes more slowly, giving both players time to observe the field and react to each other’s movements, much like many battles of that era. Granted, this style of gameplay isn’t everyone’s cup of tea, but this is definitely a refreshing take on RTS for anyone with background in traditional wargaming.

The battle to hold the Pfeifer House (from GameSpot)

The game is meant to simulate the engagements of the battle of Gettys- burg, the Pennsylvanian battle of the American Civil War in July of 1863. Rather than playing the entirety of this battle in one sitting, the game brakes it into the major engagements and skirmishes of the three day campaign, breaking the game down into more easily digested chunks. Engagements start small as scouts and pickets engage each other and eventually escalate to the skirmishes, engage- ments, and assaults

Gameplay is what one could describe as a real-time boardgame between Union and Confederate forces. The passage of time is slow enough that one has time to consider multiple choices and to make an informed decision, feeling more like the simultaneous movement of both players in a conventional wargame. You can order individual regiments to advance, run double-time, fall into formation, wheel right/left, retreat, or charge, or you can use generals present at the battle to order an entire brigade with one command. Cannons must be limbered or unlimbered to move and can be captured if overtaken by enemy infantry. Overall, it’s a really solid simulation, although not being able to play the full battle is a bit of a disappointment.

In terms of historical accuracy, there are plenty of pleasant details that really bring the experience to life. Each regiment is labeled and modeled after the equivalent regiment from the battle, as well as the generals and artillery batteries. Cavalry have been omitted from the game, but this isn’t really a big deal. They were likely omitted as they didn’t have much impact on the battle and were likely difficult to balance given the nature of their tactics. The map has a truly impressive amount of detail, staying faithful to the topography of the area along with forests, family farms, orchards, fields, and the city proper. All in all, the game has good handle on the conditions of the battle as well as the relative strengths of each unit and general.

Joshua Chamberlain and the 20th Maine, focus of the film Gettysburg (1993)

For the realist strategist out there, the two places where the game drops the ball a little bit is in the preservation of orders, a typical shortcoming of modern RTS, and the lack of a supply-network mechanic to encourage an understanding of military logistics. Immediate and reliant relay of command was a luxury for generals before the invention of the radio, trusting in the messengers and officers to competently carry out orders. All orders took considerable time to relay to their respective units — by the time your orders got there, the status of that front has likely changed. Thus, the immediate relay of commands from a sky-bound third person acts as its usual setback. However, the game does go out of its way to have troops behave independently when they do not have orders. Troops will retreat without responding to your commands if their moral is sufficiently damaged, and if the enemy routes, some regiments with high spirits will break formation charge the current position in pursuit. Either situation can go well or disastrously depending on the situation. It’s not a perfect game mechanic, but it definitely keeps the game interesting.

Your standard acts as your scorecard in the campaign — a nice touch.

Now, I know the game is less than pretty. The game is rendered in two dimensions, the soldiers are all small and and a bit chunky, the typo- graphy is often less than elegant, there aren’t as many sprites in each regiment as there should be, and the surprisingly well-cut grass looks more like Antebellum astroturf than any sort of plant. I understand entirely. This is an old game, so it had limitations as to what it could do. Even so, I want you to look past the aesthetic shortcomings of the game and give it a try. It’s okay if it’s not your kind of thing — just give it a chance and see what you think. I’m sure some of you out there will enjoy it.

Doc Watson is the founder of The GameRx Clinic and editor of The RedShirt Crew Blog. He’s fond of military history, especially in technological developments post-Antebellum. If you have any questions, comments, or other input, leave a comment on this article or send him a tweet @DocWatsonMD