The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth II

The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth was very well received by series fans and real-time strategy gamers and is arguably the best RTS representation of the Lord of the Rings trilogy yet produced.  When Electronic Arts announced the upcoming release of The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth II fans were energized not so much with the prospect of new campaign content by with a newer and more expanded chance to enjoy the Lord of the Rings mythology.  Its release in 2006 garnered a great deal of praise and sold very well but its failure to continue the Battle for Middle Earth series hints at some unfortunate shortcomings in the design.
Battle for Middle Earth II changed a great deal of the gameplay mechanics that its predecessor introduced.  Bases are no longer static locations but are now made up of individual buildings constructed by workers.  Base size was also indeterminate as resource buildings need a certain amount of free space around them to generate resources efficiently.  A central fortress building constructs workers, trains heroes, and functions as a command center for the player.
Unit production and composition also received an overhaul.  Buildings still need to reach higher levels to produce more advanced units but instead of leveling as units are produced the player must purchase building tier upgrades.  The units themselves increase in squad size with most units now holding ten units and some evil faction squads holding twenty.
There are six factions in BFME II but only two from the first title make an unaltered appearance.  The forces of Good have been merged into the Men of the West, essentially the Gondor faction with Rohan cavalry.  Elves and Dwarves round out the forces of good and are ranged against Isengard, Mordor, and the new Goblin faction.  Each faction features its own unit and building roster and many of the heroes from the previous game have been divided up among their respective races; new heroes were also introduced to round out the new factions.
The single player elements include good and evil campaigns, a War of the Ring mode, and of course skirmish mode.  The campaigns focus on each side’s perspective of the War in the North, a parallel conflict to the battles in the south during the War of the Ring that were mentioned but not covered in J.R.R. Tolkien’s books.  Some battles like Mordor’s attack on Dale and Erebor come from the original work while other missions like the goblin attack on the Grey Havens were developed specifically for the game.
The War of the Ring mode is perhaps BFME II’s most intriguing feature.  The entirety of Middle Earth is divided into a regional world map similar to the mission map from the first game.  Players take on the role of one of the six factions in a battle for supremacy over all of Middle Earth against other factions, which can be of any race regardless of alignment.  Two regional buildings can be constructed in each region and are also present in real time battles that take place in the region. For example the Fortress forces a battle whenever the territory is invaded when normally only strongholds like Helm’s Deep or Minas Tirith provoke a confrontation with invading armies.
Each faction has three armies, led by the faction’s three main heroes, that can move one region per turn and re-spawn in the player’s home territory if defeated.  Other armies without a leader can be raised by regional production buildings for defense or reinforcement but cannot invade hostile territories.  Resource buildings on the global map generate resources that are used to purchase buildings in other regions or train units for armies.  A global population cap limits the number of units on the regional map.  Armies always gain a worker unit when engaged in real time combat and can produce any unit or building during the battle regardless of the units the army actually contains.
Another innovation that generated a lot of excitement was the hero creator system.  Utilizing several templates for appearance, race, faction, and class players could create heroes that would utilize certain abilities of various tiers and take on roles similar to those filled by the standard faction heroes.  These created heroes could not be used in the campaign but were available in skirmish, War of the Ring, and multiplayer.  During creation the players adjusted bars that related to stats like health, damage, and special abilities to determine the focus and balance of the hero.  In general these created heroes were not especially comparable to faction heroes but still provided very unique flavor.
These changes made BFME II its own fully enclosed game and EA did a very fine job balancing the different races (except the Elves whose unbalanced archer upgrades had to be fixed through patches).  That is both a strength and a weakness of the game as players who enjoyed the first Battle for Middle Earth because of its gameplay will find little to endear them to the sequel.  At the same time many of the mechanics EA introduced would not have functioned properly in the first game’s style.
In fact that is possibly BFME II’s greatest failing.  Any attempt it made to directly improve upon the original was a failure.  EA advertised larger units and bigger battles and, while squads were bigger, population readjustment ensured that there actually wasn’t a difference in models or numbers of units on the field.  Dynamic base building and the standardization of lower tier unit rosters (every faction has an infantry, archer, pikeman, and cavalry unit) caused the factions to lose a great deal of their unique flavor and feel.  Special powers, which increased in number dramatically in BFME II, also become standardized even at higher tiers among the factions causing a lockstep of strategies regardless of which faction was played.
The campaign also failed to deliver the same feel of epic struggle that the first game provided.  Most of the missions play like the great siege battles from the first Battle for Middle Earth but lack a sense of scale and also restrict gameplay due to map and objective limitations preventing players from exploring the races and mechanics they are using.  Special powers also fell flat as the players are mechanically prevented from generating enough power points to unlock the full tree of powers available and if they finish the missions too quickly may not unlock higher tier powers at all.
The War of the Ring goes a long way to redressing these issues through increased re-playability and greater freedom for the player, but brings its own shortcomings as well.  Movement is far too limited in relation to the player’s ability to defend home territories.  Armies move too slowly and marauding enemies can conquer any region that lacks an army or defending fortress with impunity.  Also aside from annoying and petty tactics the AI is for the most part incompetent, attacking the same territories repeatedly and following little rhyme or reason in its utilization of units and heroes.
By itself BFME II is a decent game with numerous options to explore and a great deal of good old fashioned RTS combat to enjoy.  At higher tiers factions gain a great deal of unique abilities and high level battles can be very entertaining.  The hero creation system is nothing like an RPG but is a fun way to mix up traditional skirmish battles.  Yet anytime BFME II tries to assert itself into the Battle for Middle Earth series as a sequel or improvement it fails to measure up to expectations in almost every way.  Another major point that does little to affect gameplay but is worth mentioning on behalf of Lord of the Rings franchise fans is that the units and heroes EA made up to fill in racial gaps feel downright alien.  They are balanced and they can be fun but in no way would they ever feel natural in the original trilogy’s books or films.
Fans of Lord of the Rings will have to temper their genre love with appreciation for innovation to enjoy this game, but there is still a lot of Middle Earth to experience with the new single player modes.  Most RTS fans will at least find BFME II a familiar addition to the genre and a far better title than many modern RTS games.  Hard core gamers are ironically the most likely to enjoy BFME II as its gameplay panders to fast battles and micro-management.  In all situations the game would be welcome in any RTS library but probably shouldn’t be purchased outside of a sale.


Read the rest

Sid Meier’s Civilization VI

Two hefty expansion packs, numerous DLC, and a vibrant modding community combined to give Civilization V a long full life in the gaming community and formed what will probably be an enduring legacy.  When Firaxis announced the development of Sid Meier’s Civilization VI in May of 2016 the fanbase was energized, not so much with dissatisfaction over the current title in the Civilization Series but with gleeful anticipation of the new material Civilization VI would introduce.
Civ VI maintains the core elements of the Civilization series.  Players use Settler units to found cities which generate gold, production, food, science, culture, and faith fueling all the options and projects the player must undertake to achieve victory over competing civilizations.  Regional terrain types also remain alongside bonus, strategic, and luxury resources.  Combat most closely resembles Civ V with single units each occupying a hex; although a new feature allows two or three units of the same type to merge into a corps or army.
City planning is the most noticeable overhaul that the series received in Civ VI.  In addition to a roster of buildings and the tile improvements constructed by workers cities can now produce districts in any workable tile.  Districts resemble great person tile improvements from Civ V in that they focus on one type of resource.  Only one of each type can be built in a single city and the city can produce buildings to improve those districts.  Some districts like the encampment and aerodrome focus on unit production while others like the entertainment district and neighborhood improve the city’s happiness and growth.
Districts emphasize the importance of city tile management in Civ VI.  Districts must compete with world wonders and worker-built tile improvements for space around the city.  Districts also yield more resources if they are adjacent to other districts and some can only be built on certain terrain types.  City specializing is heavily encouraged along with the importance of founding cities early in the game.  Great people, which are now generated in competition with other civilizations, can only be utilized on a district appropriate to their type (holy sites of great prophets, harbors for great admirals, etc.).
Luxuries and population growth have also received an overhaul.  Now luxuries are referred to as amenities and each city has its own count of amenities that affect its populations mood.  Luxury resources provide an amenity to every city in a civilization.  Entertainment buildings and other factors now only affect the city they are constructed in, however cities no longer suffer penalties due to the number of cities the civilization owns.  Also occupied cities do not cause the rest of a civilization to suffer unrest.
Housing is determined by the base capacity of a city and any buildings in that city that increase housing as well as other faction specific research and benefits.  When a city exceeds it’s current housing limit population growth slows significantly regardless of the food the city produces.  District production is also limited by housing as a city can only produce a certain number of districts for each level of population.
The social policies of Civ V have been heavily redesigned to resemble scientific development.  Culture generated by cities contributes to research through a tree of available civic techs.  When a civic tech is researched, new civic policies are made available.  Civics are divided into military, economic, diplomatic, and great person categories and a civilization is limited to the type and number of each civic based on the government they currently have.  Civic techs unlock new governments over the course of play with some governments emphasizing military or economics by by allowing more military or economic civics to be active.  Civics can be swapped out anytime, and can be changed without penalty whenever a new civic tech is researched.
Culture and scientific research now benefit from a bonus system.  Most civic and scientific techs have an optional bonus objective, like clearing a barbarian encampment or constructing a mine, that will decrease the research cost of the tech by half.  These boosts can’t always be easily completed each game but savvy players can use them to jump ahead in certain areas as the game progresses.
Civ VI features the series’ first official religious victory option.  Cities follow a religion if a majority of their citizens convert to it.  The faith resource can be used to purchase missionaries, apostles, and inquisitors that spread the player’s religion or combat opposing religious pressure in friendly cities.  The victory condition is fairly straightforward: simply convert a majority of cities on the map.  Certain religious units can even engage in theological combat, which is functionally the same as combat between conventional units, but cannot be healed.
Diplomacy is all about exploiting in Civ VI.  AI opponents now have one pre-programmed agenda and one randomly selected hidden agenda that dictates their attitude towards the player.  They also receive a randomly generated hidden agenda that is only revealed to players with sufficiently advanced diplomatic relations.  The agendas allow the players to engage more tactfully with the AI, however they also have the side-effect of making the AI very one-dimensional.  AI civilizations will denounce the player if the player’s actions fail to satisfy their agenda within a few turns.  Additionally, even when the AI has moved to this passive aggressive state they still initiate trades with the player giving their convictions a mechanical feel that destroys immersion.
Graphically Civ VI is very beautifully designed.  A more cartoonish approach to details was taken but the colors are vivid and the units and buildings are animated and precisely detailed.  The game also features optional daytime-nighttime transitions giving the effect of passing days although it does not have an effect on the actual speed of play.  Even on lower graphics settings Civ VI is pleasant to look at and meeting the minimum requirements for play is sufficient to enjoy the game completely.
Civilization VI brings no shame to the Civilization series and re-introduces some of the concepts that Firaxis attempted in Civilization: Beyond Earth.  Bugs are virtually non-existent and it’s release is overall very polished.  Some elements could use refining, like the similarities of several civilization’s unique buildings and bonuses, but a good expansion can fix those easily.  One notably pervasive change is the slower environment of play on standard speed.  The early and mid-game are very well fleshed out so it doesn’t detract from the game, but players used to the active and hectic end-game of Civ V may be surprised at the crawling science victory requirements or slow build times for modern units.
Any 4x fan will enjoy Civ VI and even at its release price its a valid purchase for any casual strategy gamer.  Online performance is very stable and playing with friends is one of the hallmarks of an enjoyable Civilization experience.  Not everything veteran Civilization players enjoy may have made it into this latest release but there is still plenty of new and improved elements to warrant numerous playthroughs.


Read the rest

Warlords Battlecry III

In the early 90s, when the limits of the gaming market were still being tested, a 2D turn based strategy game, with some minor roleplaying elements, titled Warlords was released by Strategic Studios Group after it was designed by the series creator and visionary Steve Fawkner.  The game itself was deceptively simple but featured great potential for extended gameplay and was easy to learn.  The Warlords series would go on to spawn three sequels and in 1999 Steve Fawkner developed a spinoff series titled Warlords Battlecry.
Warlords Battlecry shook up the Warlords formula, translating the turn-based strategy and fluid army design into real-time strategy and race-based factions.  Roleplaying elements were more heavily emphasized through four hero classes that any race’s hero could adopt.  The game used a graphics engine reminiscent of Warcraft II and featured a similar economic style and combat system, with worker based infrastructure and mined resources and fast paced combat.
Warlords Battlecry III, developed by Infinite Interactive and published by Enlight Software in 2004, is the last title in the Battlecry series.  Like its predecessors it built off the system and mechanics of the first Battlecry game, using a 2D graphics engine, expansive hero class system, and bringing back the original races and units from previous titles.  Players began a battle with their hero and whatever retinue units they chose to bring along at the battle’s setup.  The hero and worker units construct buildings, including a central keep or fortress that can be upgraded to unlock higher tier units and buildings.
Resources take the form of mines that must be captured by a hero unit or faction general.  Battlecry III features four resources: gold, iron, stone, and crystal, and each race’s strategy emphasizes some resources more than others.  Mines can be filled with up to eight worker units (four for the Dwarves and Dark Dwarves, who have more efficient workers), increasing the rate that resources are extracted.  The workers remain inside the mine and are effectively removed from play; if the mine is destroyed or captured by another faction the workers are lost.  Collected resources are added to their respective pools for the player and the resource cap can be expanded up to 3000 as the central keep is upgraded.
Battlecry III expanded the number of playable races to an unprecedented 16.  Each race generally follows the same tech tree progression and build style with minor exceptions.  For example the Wood Elf builder unit cannot be placed into mines, but several can be combined to form a crystal generating combat unit.  The Undead, for another contrast, only build a few types of units and their basic infantry, the Skeleton, instantly upgrades along two paths into the various combat units of the Undead army.  Each race also features certain technologies and upgrades that it may share with some other races but should not be expected in every race.
Combat takes place purely in real-time and features a surprising potential for micromanagement in an older game.  Units can be set to a variety of different stances that can cause them to automatically use healing spells, follow other units around, and autonomously scout the map.  The factions are balanced more through their number than through specific unit design.  They are heavily thematic and most factions are better in combat against certain rivals (i.e. Knights vs Undead), than against other factions in general.  Each faction has access to at least one spellcaster unit as well as a general unit that can convert buildings and inspire nearby troops in a manner similar to the hero.
The hero is the defining feature of Warlords Battlecry III’s overall gameplay.  The hero acts like a regular unit in terms of movement and combat.  It also features a mana pool and spellbook with which it casts the spells related to its class.  Heroes can also equip items that are found on the map or taken from defeated enemy heroes; some items like weapons and armor are more effective for combat but may harm spellcasting ability while contrasting items can lower hit points and increase mana regeneration.  A player’s heroes are also persistent across the game keeping their level, items, and retinue between games and game types.  Any hero killed in combat is returned to life at the end of the battle and remain with the player unless made using Ironman Mode, which makes hero death permanent.
Heroes are made by the player before beginning a campaign or random map and gain experience during and after a battle.  A hero can upgrade one of its four stats and one of its class skills by one point each when it gains a new level.  A hero can be made from any race and class combination, although some classes are obviously better for certain races than others.  In skirmish mode the race of the hero doesn’t matter in terms of selecting what faction that player will use in the battle.  In the campaign, the player starts with the faction that the hero is a part of, and can play as other factions as the player accumulates allies throughout the campaign.
Warlords Battlecry III’s campaign is partially story-driven and partially open world.  The player’s hero travels across different locations and complete repeat missions and story missions which affect its diplomatic standing with the other races and allow the hero to acquire new items and experience as well as advance primary and localized plot points.  After each mission the hero accumulates crowns, a global resource that can be accessed on the world map to purchase mercenaries and items.
Warlords Battlecry III’s old graphics and less refined RTS style are heavily dated by modern standards but for its time it was revolutionary in its approach to strategy gaming.  It was the first RTS game to feature unique hero and roleplaying elements and was radical in its unprecedented number of unique races.  The game wasn’t without its flaws; primarily an ambiguous learning curve and poorly explained hero revival system.  Its play speed was also quite slow even for its time.  On normal speed common campaign missions can take well over an hour to complete simply because the player must wait to accumulate the resources needed to assemble an effective army.
That being said, gamers will be hard pressed to find a game with a similar formula to Battlecry III.  The unique factions, persistent hero system, and combination of numerous skirmish maps alongside an extensive campaign can make for hours of new and intriguing gameplay.  Battlecry III has been reported to be quite buggy on new operating systems but it is now available on Steam and gog.com.  It also benefits from an extensive online community with help sites for running the game on newer operating systems and advice on which patch version (of which their are three) is best used for the player’s preferred style.


Read the rest

Dear Mindy: Origin

Since the success of Valve’s Steam Client in revolutionizing the gaming industry’s distribution and marketing methods many major game providers have developed their own online platforms for supplying clients with products, support, and community.  Origin is Electronic Arts’ digital distribution platform and one of the primary digital outlets for EA games and digital products.
Origin began life as EA Downloader which was released by EA in 2005.  It would transition between various iterations such as EA Link and EA Download Manager, with each new version adding additional features and capabilities.  These older versions provided both an online store for EA products as well as a profile management system and update source for digital products and hard copies.  Origin was released in 2011 and combined all the elements of previous EA online services.
Like its competitors and equivalents, Origin features the staples of a modern digital gaming client system such as a friends list, a profile with achievements and avatar customization, a games library, store access, and automated support for currently owned games.  Any game in the user’s library is available for download any number of times from Origin.  Like Steam and Battle.net, product keys can be used to redeem physical copies of certain EA produced games; however if the game is already installed on the user’s computer the code cannot be redeemed even if the user does not intend to download the game.
At this point Origin only supplies titles owned and/or developed by EA.  Origin can be accessed on PCs and recently on mobile devices but is not currently available for consoles.  It is currently unknown if EA plans to include titles from other producers in its store selection.  EA has specifically stated that Origin is a competitor with Steam so it is highly possible that Origin will eventually become a digital marketplace.
It’s worth noting that an Origin installation and account are required for more recent EA titles, primarily those released within the last few years, even if they are bought on disc or another form of third party distribution.  Origin itself is a free service and can be utilized in offline mode if the user saves his or her login information in online mode first.  Games installed from a disc do not need to be synchronized with Origin to run their single player and LAN functions.  However they do need to be registered on Origin to receive updates, access multiplayer servers, and communicate with other players in-game.
Origin provides all the services necessary to play and enjoy the games it provides.  It’s only glaring downside is that it is a first and foremost a store.  Navigation is heavily weighted towards the store; and community interaction, such as forums and community posts, is limited.  Games listed inside the user’s library are effectively placeholders and do not have their own pages, in contrast with Steam or Battle.net which have dedicated displays for each game.  Purchasing and accessing games on Origin is quick and easy but any utility related to the account’s interaction with those games is minimal.  Support is also lacking for older games with newer products receiving most of the attention as far as deals, advertisements, and FAQ posts are concerned.
Like everything EA touches Origin takes a popular concept and puts its own spin on it with rather mixed results.  Origin features all the services necessary for acquiring and using EA products and connecting with the community of EA gamers.  However on the flip-side Origin is heavily geared towards EA’s marketing and sacrifices its community development for customer interaction with the online store.  It’s high quality and no doubt sufficient for EA’s purposes, but Origin will certainly have to be optimized to better support and reflect the gamer culture before it can truly equal its competitors.


Read the rest

Total War: Attila

Creative Assembly’s Total War: Rome II was noted just after its release to be the worst Total War title to see the light of day.  Its excessive bugs and poor performance disappointed many fans of the previous Rome: Total War as well as franchise fans in general.  This was perhaps a greater loss for the game itself rather than Creative Assembly.  Numerous patches and quick fixes improved Rome II to make it playable and ultimately even enjoyable; but its place in infamy had already been secured.
Creative Assembly did its utmost to avoid a repeat with its follow-up title, Total War: Attila, which was released in early 2015.  Many of the systems introduced in Rome II, such as the Imperium levels, remain the same while other mechanics like the political system and provincial system have been modified slightly.  Provincial towns can now be upgraded to have walls and all provinces are limited to two towns and a capital.  The political system saw a revival of the traditional family tree within the wider context of faction politics and competing nobles.
Perhaps the largest change from Rome II that Attila brought was the change in setting.  The grand campaign begins in 395 AD as the now divided Roman Empire enters a period of decline.  The game models the catastrophic upheaval of the period with a return of the horde mechanic, first seen in Rome: Total War: Barbarian Invasions, which allows a faction to abandon their home province and form several armies that supply their own food and can make temporary camps to gain special benefits and a relief from income loss.  The Western and Eastern Roman empires suffer several penalties to add to their foreign woes such as historically inept faction leaders, a loss of traditional technologies, and unstable internal politics.
Attila brings an apocalyptic feel to the setting through various mechanics and faction themes.  Climate change; inspired by the historic 6th century Little Ice Age, makes an appearance as periodic global events that lower the fertility of all provinces on the map.  Another world altering mechanic is the ability for armies to raise settlements transforming the settlement into a ruin and blackening that section of the province, temporarily ruining its fertility.  Razed settlements can only be restored by settling army units in the province, restoring the town which must then be rebuilt from scratch.
The thematic presentation of the turbulent 5th century is Attila’s central point, and tragically is probably also Attila’s greatest failure.  The game succeeds so well in making the world a mess that it rapidly becomes frustrating and nearly unplayable.  The climate change unrealistically affects the entire globe, turning even the most fertile provinces like the Nile Delta and Euphrates River Valley into barren desert.  Cities suffer numerous wealth and public order penalties from effects such as food shortages, even when the empire has a food surplus, and immigration, an effect that the player has no control over.
Squalor now plays a proactive role in settlements and provinces; the higher the negative level of total squalor (derived from squalor minus sanitation) the more likely a plague will break out in that settlement.  This mechanic is reasonable in its idea, but its implementation is again excessive and frustrating.  Multiple build slots in the province must be devoted to sanitation buildings to keep the squalor down and even with a total squalor of zero plagues can still spread to and even break out in settlements.
Most factions start out in precarious positions.  The Roman empires naturally suffer from rampant unrest, multiple enemies, and hard-pressed economies.  Barbarian tribes start with strong militaries but are forced by approaching nomads and cooling climate to make for new homelands in Roman territory to the south and west.  The Sassanid Empire, the predominant eastern faction and widely assumed to be the easiest to play, still has its own problems keeping its client states in line and fighting off the White Huns.
These troubles don’t make the game unplayable; but in the wrong circumstances they swiftly make it unwinnable.  Attila is perhaps the first Total War game that will appeal far more to survival gamers than to strategy gamers.  The gameplay experience for many factions, particularly the Roman empires, is more about seeing how long the player can survive rather than trying to win.  The game’s buggy tutorial and abbreviated user interface add to the problem by giving Attila one of the sharpest learning curves in the series.
The graphics of Attila remain largely unchanged from Rome II and any computer that can handle Rome II will do just as well with Attila.  Sadly frame rate difficulties remain during the AI phase even with high performance machines but actual gameplay, particularly battles, run smoothly.  It’s worth noting that color and toning for battles has been subtlety altered to give a dark, gritty feel to the world to accompany the apocalyptic theme.  This doesn’t bring any mechanical alterations aside from increased rain but the various weather effects can also cause frame rate drops on high graphics settings.
Fans of Empire: Total War will enjoy the updates Total War: Attila brings to the new mechanics that Empire introduced.  Otherwise Attila has been love/hate with fans of the Total War series.  Even veterans of Rome II will have to learn many new mechanics and forget some old habits to play Attila properly.  Those that enjoy grand strategy will find Attila a very challenging addition to the grand strategy market.  Strategy gamers in general however are best served avoiding Attila, or waiting until an 80% off sale, as the game is far too restrictive for a traditional military strategy experience.


Read the rest

Warlock II: The Exiled

After Paradox Interactive’s fun-loving, fantasy-filled 4x Warlock: Master of the Arcane became a surprise success it wasn’t long before fans of the game were delighted to learn that Paradox was producing a sequel.  Warlock II: The Exiled, which was released in 2014, brought improved performance, a greatly improved user interface, and new content to the burgeoning Warlock series.
The first thing that should be made clear about Warlock II is that it should be viewed more as an expansion than a sequel.  Warlock II contains tons of new content and new campaign modes but its foundation remains the same.  Players will recognize the graphics, mechanics, races, units, and terrain immediately.  This doesn’t in anyway detract from the enjoyment of Warlock II or its position as an improvement over its predecessor but it is important for players to avoid the potential disappointment of viewing Warlock II as a true sequel in the same vein as Age of Empires III or Warcraft III.
The story of Warlock II follows the narrative setup by the Armageddon DLC of Warlock.  This is reflected by a major change in the campaign layout.  Players now follow a linear progression of story quests and scripted events to return from the outland shards of the multiverse to Ardania where the United One, a Great Mage who successfully cast the Unity Spell, awaits to confront them.  All of the 4x elements of Warlock remain for this campaign mode (except the Unity Spell victory, which is not available in the campaign mode).  Players can explore the outland shards through portals by completing a quest to open a portal and sending units through to the new world.  Story quests can be completed at the player’s discretion allowing the player to explore all of the randomly generated shards before finally proceeding back to Ardania.
An alternative form of the campaign called Battle for Outlands mimics the outland shard environment of the campaign without the story quests turning it into true 4x freeform gameplay. Each shard is based off of a single terrain environment found in Warlock on Ardania and the various underworlds.  Several new terrain types were added to the previous underworlds of Warlock and seventeen shards can be found in a single game on the largest map size.  Each shard has enough room for three to four full sized cities, but this isn’t a serious problem with Warlock II’s new special city mechanic which allows players to convert unwanted cities into specialized minor cities that can produce gold, mana, or serve as fortresses.  These special cities only occupy the tiles immediately around them and do not count towards the game’s new city limit feature.  A city limit should seem unusual in a 4x game but it can be expanded through research and is sufficient for player needs in all but the largest maps.
All units, structures, spells, and great mage perks from Warlock return in Warlock II and are joined by two new races: the multi-racial Planestriders and the mechanically oriented Svarts.  The new races feature entirely new unit rosters and each brings two Great Mages to the usual selection of Great Mage profiles.  As with the previous races, the Planestriders and Svarts specialize in the production of certain resources and emphasize certain unit and damage types.  They blend in very well with the existing races and add greatly to the sandbox potential of mixing racial combos in large games.  Warlock II also adds several new Great Mage perks and starting spells; including ways to moderate the city limit and the possibility to select starting shards and even a spell that can summon a random lord for hire.  DLC has also been released providing more start locations, starting lords, and unique spells.
Perhaps one of the most notable changes in Warlock II is the enhancement of the spell research system.  In Warlock five low tier spells appeared randomly at the start of the game for the player to research.  Each spell would be replaced by a related, higher tier spell when it was researched.  Now spells have been divided into Sorcery, Wizardry, and Divine categories and further broken up into several tiers based on their cost and power.  Researching a certain number of spells in a category unlocks the next tier of spells for research giving the player much greater freedom to choose what spells to get and when.
Sadly, multiplayer has not seen much improvement since Warlock.  The campaign and Battle for Outlands modes are both compatible with Warlock II and, despite a buggy launch, are for the most part very stable.  However, the lingering lack of simultaneous turns, while appropriate for a 4x game that emphasizes combat, is a real damper for a game with limited demographic and economic micromanagement.  The additional fact that the interface is only somewhat successful at keeping track of units strung out across the many outland shards makes turns in the later game laborious as each player checks on their multiple worlds while the other players idly stand by.
Graphics requirements have not increased by any noticeable amount.  Machines and internet connections that handled Warlock should be able to just as easily manage Warlock II.  The voices and sound for the new units is a welcome addition to the existing cast.  Another minor change was the transition of several of the Great Mage’s expressions into fantasy languages.  This change certainly increased the flavor of encounters with other opponents, but considering the limited number of phrases utilized in diplomacy it can be a minor annoyance as the AI babbles random words at the player over and over.
Warlock II is a very appropriate follow on to Warlock.  Even though it lacks the all-encompassing content overhaul that marks a true sequel, Warlock II vastly improves on every feature of Warlock and fans of the first Warlock game, and the Majesty series of games in general, will certainly enjoy Warlock II.  The added content greatly increases replayability even for those gamers who have already exhausted Warlock as the new races, game modes, and content provide even more options for exploration and racial combos.  Perhaps the greatest mark of Warlock II’s triumph (and tragedy) as a follow-on is that after playing Warlock II, the original Warlock will appear too lackluster and uninteresting to revisit.


Read the rest