Command & Conquer 3: Kane’s Wrath

A Command & Conquer title is just not the same without an expansion pack to accompany it and flesh out its content.  C&C expansions come from the golden age of expansions when gamers could expect at the least new units, missions, and multiplayer maps if not full fledged campaigns and new factions.  Thankfully Electronic Arts has not departed from this model with its expansion to Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars; Command & Conquer 3: Kane’s Wrath.
Each of the three main factions receives new units and support powers.  Many of these units, like the GDI Slingshot anti-air unit, were added to remove deficiencies in existing faction rosters or new gaps that arose as a result of the new minor factions.  Epic units, one for each side, were also introduced as super powerful vehicles capable of crushing lesser units and could be customized by loading infantry into their hard points to add secondary weapons.  The new toys are worth a few games just to play with and are enjoyable for the most part but can still be overshadowed by high tier units.
Following after its successful implementation of minor factions in Command & Conquer: Generals EA chose to add two minor factions to each major faction in Kane’s Wrath.  The minor factions focus on a particular strategy or aspect of their parent faction; like flame weapons and heavy infantry for the Brotherhood of Nod or sonic weaponry and tiberium immunity for GDI.  Minor factions also receive build restrictions in exchange for their specializations; one GDI minor faction can only produce basic infantry units but gets a strong boost to its armored units.  Many of the new units added by Kane’s Wrath are unique to the minor factions; some are entirely new and others are improvements of existing designs to match them with their respective minor faction’s emphasis.
The campaign for Kane’s Wrath is less filled out then the rest of the game as its 13 missions only feature the Brotherhood of Nod as the playable faction.  The campaign is still very well done with strong narrative and many entertaining missions.  Players will also get to utilize each of Nod’s minor factions to their fullest and will also encounter the other minor factions as enemies throughout the course of the campaign.  Sadly it can only serve as a blueprint for the campaign experience that could have been; the lack of a similar model for the other two factions puts a damper on the player’s ability to enjoy the new minor factions in a narrative environment.
Perhaps the most innovative addition that Kane’s Wrath brings is the Global Conquest mode.  This single player options presents a turn based world map where the player, as one of the three major factions, builds bases, raises armies, and conducts global warfare against the other two factions.  Bases can be upgraded with defenses and tech levels to allow them to produce armies with stronger units.
Armies can be moved a set distance across the map, or ferried between bases on different continents.  When opposing armies meet or an army attacks an enemy base the battle can be auto-resolved or played out in real-time in a manner resembling a skirmish battle.  However if the attacking army does not include base-building units it will not be able to construct a base and if the defending base has high enough technology and defenses it will be able to produce advanced units a the start of the game, tying in developments on the strategic level with tactical combat.
The Global Conquest mode compensates somewhat for the lack of a full campaign.  Players can enjoy what each faction has to offer at length.  The AI in this mode is essentially a basic Skirmish AI and is competent enough to manage the world map effectively.  However its tactical capacities are lacking on lower difficulty settings and don’t always mesh in capability with the AI’s performance on the world map; making for a somewhat dichotomous experience.  On the flip-side it is usually fairly easy for the player to establish a continental stronghold thus allowing the full extent of the mode’s options to be tested at length.
Multiplayer sees little improvement from C&C 3.  The new minor factions can offer interesting tactical opportunities, but some limitations on their tech tree limit tactical flexibility; generally making the main factions the safer and well-rounded option.  Perhaps the greatest tragedy for multiplayer was the lack of inclusion for Global Conquest mode.  Granted the mode features only three factions so a multiplayer version would have been either incredibly limited or PvP only but the option still would have been a great benefit to the game; all the more so if a co-op feature had been included.
Kane’s Wrath isn’t needed to make C&C 3 a great game; the full package was already there.  The minor factions are a welcome addition for expanding skirmish and multiplayer gameplay, but the lack of campaign options to enjoy them at leisure detracts a bit from their impact.  However the Global Conquest mode suffers only from the somewhat mediocre performance of the AI at lower difficulty levels.  In all other aspects it is a very ambitious and enjoyable experience with a smooth design that needs only the ability to share it with a friend.  Kane’s Wrath isn’t its own game, but it expands C&C 3 to the fullest possible extent.


Read the rest

Total War: Rome II

Ever since Creative Assembly’s landmark Rome: Total War catapulted the Total War franchise into the mainstream of strategy gaming fans of the series have eagerly awaited its sequel, Total War: Rome II.  Elements eagerly anticipated in a sequel were increased control over family members, improvements to naval combat, and a greater number of diverse factions.  Rome II promised all of this and more.  In development terms it was also considered the next step in advancing Total War game mechanics and technology as a whole.
Veterans of the first Rome: Total War game will actually find few similarities in the new Rome.  Most of the factions make a return alongside dozens of new ones, but otherwise the game has received an overhaul derived from the years of experience and development Creative Assembly accumulated from its subsequent Total War titles after the first Rome’s release.  The campaign map is populated with numerous towns and cities organized into provinces each composed of a walled provincial capital and one to three un-walled towns.  Local resource deposits provide real economic benefits in the province and indirectly the player’s empire as a whole.  Naval combat can now be fought in real-time and armies are formed around the generals (an army cannot exist without appointing a general).
For all that’s changed, the basic formula of Total War remains.  Wealth is generated in the cities and towns of the player’s empire which is in turn used to raise and maintain armies of period infantry, cavalry, archers, and warships to conquer the ancient Mediterranean world.  The great factions of the period, such as the Roman Republic, Empire of Carthage, and Ptolemaic Egypt are all present.  Historic figures such as Hannibal Barca and Julius Caeser can make an appearance, but are not afforded any prestige or abilities beyond other generals.  City populations must be controlled and diplomatic relations between factions can be manipulated for trade, alliances, and threats.
Like its Total War predecessors Rome II’s single player is at the heart of its entertainment value.  The campaign, with downloaded content, features over twenty playable factions to choose from over one hundred on the campaign map.  Factions are placed into culture categories such as Latin (Rome and its neighbors) and Hellenic (Greek city states) with each culture bringing some faction bonuses in addition to the unique attributes that individual factions gain.  All factions follow the same general rules of economics, internal politics, and Imperium levels (with the exception of Rome and Carthage which also feature political sub-factions within their primary faction).  The Grand Campaign, Rome II’s primary single player element, starts at 272 BC with most of the factions (aside from a few successor states) starting off with only a province or two in their control.
The Imperium level, a new mechanic to the Total War series, is a defining feature for gameplay in Rome II and applies to every faction, not just Rome.  The Imperium level is determined by the number of cities under the player’s control and as it goes up it applies small but steadily increasing levels of empire wide stats such as taxes, morale, and corruption.  The Imperium level also defines how many armies, navies, and agents a faction can maintain.  As a mechanic the Imperium level is a fairly effective way to emulate the feel of an expanding, powerful empire and certainly encourages aggressive expansion on the part of the player.  However its limitations cut into the some of the “total war” aspects of the game; at higher levels players can feel strapped for armies and navies to cover increasingly larger and complicated campaign theaters.
Like in Shogun 2, technology makes an appearance and is divided into three trees.  Research unlocks buildings, units, and empire wide benefits.  The Roman Marian Reform event from the first Rome is gone; now all factions share a similar unit tier system.  Once a technology makes a unit obsolete, all of those units throughout a player’s army can be manually upgraded for a minor sum.  Structures upgrade in similar fashion although the process is far more costly and some higher tier units require the empire to have access to special resources such as lead or iron.
Politics is another new addition that Rome II brings to the Total War series.  The political system is basically an expansion of the loyalty and family tree mechanics for generals and replaces both mechanics with statesmen that become generals or admirals, and a set of statistics that emulate the power struggles of the republican Roman Senate.  Each statesman increases the influence of their family/party in the empire’s political affairs which allows political actions such as assassinations to be used.  Additionally the more influence the player’s family/party has grants increased bonuses and penalties to the empire, but also increases the chance that the other families/parties will rebel and attempt to overthrow the player’s faction.
The political system is a clever and heavily integrated design, but sadly does little to actually improve the gameplay.  Benefits to having political dominance are minor compared to the arbitrary threat of civil war and the other families/parties provide minor but persistent annoyances that cannot be removed.  The system is well thought out and does not hinder overall gameplay, but the lack of control the players can ultimately develop over the gentry of their own empire becomes tiresome and breaks the immersion of world conquest.
Overall single player combat has been streamlined and refined to arguably the highest level to date in a Total War game.  Units are well designed to reflect their historical roles and battlefield performance.  The AI is competent enough to know how to use the different units and abilities under its command.  Empire and city management is easily accessed but incorporates some new details that greatly increases its learning curve.  Naval combat, a feature that’s been greatly expanded since Shogun 2, still needs some work to adequately define and balance the roles of different ship types and thus avoid having all naval battles turn into numbers games.
Multiplayer, particularly the co-op feature for the grand campaign, is very well implemented in Rome II.  For the most part load times and real time combat are amiable to lower internet speeds and the mechanics of cooperative play did not produce any problems.  The only glaring problem with co-op play is the presence of so many diverse cultures in Rome II.  Cultures affect public order and competing cultures generated by allies in close proximity can cause some trouble in border provinces.  This often requires players to choose factions a fair distance away from each other, eliminating some of the elements of cooperative play.
Graphics are certainly fresher and on higher settings require a mid-to-high end machine to run.  This is one of the great tragedies of Rome II.  Individual details have been modeled to an unprecedented degree but the player can rarely enjoy this feature.  Large scale battles require the player to constantly shift their attention to different units with the screen zoomed out, away from the shiny details.
Rome II’s combat is more integrated and diverse, although at times suffers from its own improvements due to the degree of micromanagement brought on by increased options to the player.  Multiplayer is one of the best experiences to date.  Sadly, many of the new features Rome II added to the franchise are as troublesome as they are new.  Seeing historical military tactics pay off is as rewarding as ever and even more accessible with the greatly improved faction and unit designs, but outside the battlefield empire management remains overly cumbersome and sometimes outright frustrating.
Rome II’s place in the Total War franchise is highly debatable since many of the new mechanics have uncertain futures in upcoming titles.  Fans of the first Rome will miss some of the old simplicity, but those looking for greater options in their conquest of the Mediterranean will appreciate the increased detail.  Casual gamers, especially those new to Total War, should probably refrain from purchasing Rome II until they experience a different modern Total War title to avoid Rome II’s steep and somewhat ambiguous learning curve.


Read the rest

Shattered Union

I unfortunately deprived myself of the opportunity to get into the turn-based tactics genre of strategy games during their heyday in the ’80s and ’90s.  Shattered Union, developed by PopTop Software and released by 2K games, was a relatively late arrival to the market upon its release in 2005 but was nevertheless my first foray into a game whose principle mechanics revolved around turn-based tactics.
Shattered Union takes place in a United States that has been divided into several region-based factions after political disunity and domestic terrorism disrupt the national government.  Seven playable factions are presented (six U.S. factions plus European Union peacekeepers) and each has its own starting difficulties and opportunities.  Players assemble a fighting force on the strategic map and choose territories to attack.  Only one territory may be attacked per turn and all units committed to an attack cannot be used again until the following turn so it is generally advisable to keep units back for defense.  Income is also received at the beginning of each turn and is based on the value of the territories controlled by the player.  Units can be purchased, repaired, and sold any time during the player’s turn on the strategic map.
When a territory is attacked the game enters the turn-based tactical battle phase and this is easily the best and most developed part.  Most of the U.S. ground arsenal is represented with the air force making a good showing but not fully filled out, likely due to redundancy issues, and there is no naval combat.  Units are divided into categories to help the player easily identify their battlefield purposes; i.e. the player may not know what an LAV or Sheridan tank is for but their assignment into the Scout and Light Armor categories respectively puts their abilities into perspective.  Each faction also gets a fictitious unique unit (a heavy armor unit for each faction except the Great Plains Federation which gets an artillery unit) with similar statistics but varying degrees of effectiveness versus specific unit types.
Tactical combat is divided into turns with the attackers always taking the first turn.  Deployment zones are chosen at the start of the map with the attacker usually sequestered against one edge while the defender can deploy into the major cities around the map.  Once units are deployed the battle begins and fog of war covers the map, even for the defender.  Each unit has a specific movement range for negotiating the hex grid map with roads and pathways allowing more movement than forests and hills.  Helicopters move and act in the same manner as ground forces but fighters and bombers are stored an in airfield structure and only move when issued a specific order (such as an air patrol or bombing run).  Units can move until their movement points are used up but can only attack once per turn.
The story behind Shattered Union’s plot is simple and mostly implemented for continuity.  Increased popular dissent across the United States coupled with the elimination of the presidential succession by a terrorist nuclear attack on Washington D.C. prompts the 48 contiguous states to either secede from the Union or simply conglomerate into regional alliances, forming the game’s principle U.S.-based factions.  Very little dynamic is added for the E.U. faction and the Europeans are mechanically treated the same for gameplay.
The Political Reputation element adds some personality to faction AIs and player choices.  The more landmarks and strategic buildings a faction destroys during a battle the more its reputation slides towards ‘evil’ (the red side of a green to red progress bar that can be viewed on the strategic map).  Conversely making attempts to avoid collateral damage and preserve landmarks will slide a faction’s bar towards ‘good’.  To facilitate this every unit in the player’s arsenal has a factor for collateral damage allowing the player to determine which units to use in urban combat versus open range combat.
The alignment of a faction’s political reputation affects some of its abilities, most importantly support powers and the number of partisan units that appear in tactical battles.  Factions with good reputation will attract partisans in defensive battles and make use of support powers that repair units and buff defense.  Evil reputation drives partisans toward a faction’s opponents but unlocks powerful offensive abilities that damage units en mass and lower unit defense.  Story-wise, political reputation does not affect the progression of scripted events but does influence the narrative of the player’s ending; different cutscenes are shown at the end of the campaign based on if the player’s faction was primarily good, evil, or neutral.
With little storyline, most of the game’s single-player content revolves around the tactical battles.  This element is by far the best developed and most important part of Shattered Union.  Players assemble a pool of up to 42 units and deploy any number of them into offensive and defensive battles.  Depictions (not to scale) of real landmarks, cities, even interstate highways make the map come alive as the factions battle over familiar locations.  Rivers, bridges, and mountains all contribute to make the tactical experience engaging and challenging while bringing the in-game world to life.
Shattered Union’s multiplayer aspect is limited to the tactical battles in the form of a skirmish mode.  Players determine beforehand the amount of funds used to purchase armies, then purchase units and engage in a tactical battle across one of the maps used in the Campaign.  Power types and levels are chosen through the assignment of a political reputation level for each player during the setup.  As turn-based game Shattered Union’s multiplayer quality demand is low and should perform adequately on lower internet speeds.
The game’s limited story, two-faction unit roster, and large but static campaign map can devolve into repeating situations and strategies.  Since the bulk of the game’s enjoyable content is found in the tactical battles this is only a partial handicap to long term replay options.  However aside from each faction’s unique unit most of the enjoyment comes from a player’s improvisation and willingness to explore new and even potentially handicapped strategies.  Certain elements of the campaign, such as how many times a player can be attacked each turn, are constrained by difficulty level.  Thus a greater challenge can be acquired by raising the campaign difficulty however the AI’s competency does not improve vs its ‘cheating’ tactics, such as ganging up on the player or knowing where the player’s units are even without scouting.  This can lead from entertainment to frustration.
The Skirmish mode offers far more variety for tactical battles.  Players can explore different unit combinations, play the Russian faction, and explore the full range of support powers in the good, evil, and neutral levels of political reputation.  This is also a much faster and easier method of exploring the factions’ unique units.
Shattered Union is almost on the level of a tactical simulation game; most of its strategic and story elements are background for the tactical battles of the campaign.  The campaign itself is enjoyable and worth playing at least once for the excitement of conquering the United States and fighting off the Russian invasion.  However this game is appropriately termed a tactical strategy game; only in the tactical battles do the game’s design elements and enjoyment value come into their own.  Shattered Union is dated by modern standards and even casual gamers will likely find it to be little more than a distraction good for a dozen or so hours of gameplay.  However the game is cheap, easy to learn, and on modern machines has virtually no load time.  Its genre is also a fairly rare perspective and focus for PC games and is worth the experience for that element alone.
Note: Shattered Union is available on Steam but has known loading errors for most recent operating systems.  The Steam Community has very helpful guides and quick fixes which should allow Shattered Union to operate with little or no difficulty.


Read the rest

Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars

After the dissolution of Westwood Studios in 2003 the Real Time Strategy market experienced a general stagnation in productivity.  Several companies continued to produce stand alone RTS titles and some spinoffs but suffered from a lack of stylistic direction as they attempted to formulate new templates of RTS gameplay separate from the Blizzard and Westwood formats.  In this period gamers were introduced to a lot of different RTS mechanics and interfaces; yet none of them were able to compare with the genre setting giants of old until Electronic Arts introduced a new title in the Command & Conquer series: Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars.
Command & Conquer 3 revived the long absent Command & Conquer series; bringing with it the familiar standards of the Westwood RTS format such as a central Construction Yard, refinery resource processing, and flashy explosive late game battles.  Most skirmish battles, multi-player battles, and single player missions start the player off with little more than a construction yard from which the player must construct a base and army in order to crush their opponents.  Base and army building follow the standard Westwood format with higher tier buildings unlocking more advanced units and abilities.  Power plants are required in increasing numbers to maintain a growing base and base defenses are divided by their effectiveness against different unit types.
The series’ principle factions, GDI and Nod, return to continue their struggle over the eponymous resource tiberium and their differing views on its terramorphic properties.  The game’s storyline picks up not long after the series’ previous title Command & Conquer Tiberian Sun and its expansion Firestorm.  Reminiscent of previous C&C games players begin the campaign with a limited tech tree; benefiting from more units and abilities as the campaign progresses.  Missions include the old RTS fares like escort missions, base defense, and territory control.  Yet unlike older RTS titles Command & Conquer 3 spices up these familiar missions with more appropriate strategies and units; often taking the unique tactical situation of each mission as a chance to introduce the player to a new unit type.  Stealth missions will utilize Snipers teams and Juggernaut artillery or Commandos and Stealth Tanks.  A feature not unheard of but seriously underused in previous RTS games.
Support powers, available on the left hand side of the screen as the buildings required for them are built, make an appearance in the mainline C&C series for the first time.  These powers require a certain amount of cash to be used and must recharge between uses; they also require a line of sight on their target.  Some powers are more useful in a multiplayer setting against human players and, sadly, many rapidly become obsolete as the tech tree is unlocked.  However many can be used to game changing effect and overall the support powers should be actively utilized; particularly in the single player campaign.
The single player campaign is undoubtedly C&C 3’s strongest feature.  Following the vein established by earlier Westwood games the campaign for both factions follows a series of story-driven missions where the player completes a series of objectives, often gradually unlocked as the player progresses through the mission.  New units and structures are made available each mission until the faction’s full arsenal is unlocked.  The enemies each faction faces vary as the missions go by and some missions will involve the player facing off against two enemies. Unlike older titles which feature supposed ‘bitter enemies’ ignoring their differences to attack the player; in C&C 3 three way battles remain a constantly fluctuating contest between all three factions (some brief ceasefires do appear).
The Scrin, a new playable race that EA has introduced to the Tiberium series of C&C games, is an alien race based off of hints and plot elements from earlier titles in the Tiberium series.  The Scrin are very dependent on tiberium and many of their strategies revolve around it; they also feature more heavily specialized units and a greater reliance on aircraft than other factions.  Although their short, unlockable campaign provides only a brief glimpse at their faction history and story it still provides challenging missions and entertaining cinematics (all CGI however).
Live action cut scenes and cinematics reappear with renewed visual splendor.  Each mission is interspersed with a live action briefing prefacing the situation the player will face in the upcoming mission and its relevance to the faction’s overall goal.  The acting and dialogue could certainly be called campy but is far more enjoyable as the characters struggle with the increasingly complex situations the game’s plot thrusts them into.  For what could be the first time in RTS history the characters actually sympathize with the player when real time situations turn grim.  Settings come alive with numerous extras and improved background visuals.  The only thing sadly missing are the old Westwood endgame videos; sadly few if any in-game units are seen in CGI animation.  In a masterful move by EA the story of C&C 3 is concise enough that players need not have played the older C&C games to follow the story (although their enjoyment of the cutscenes is enhanced by familiarity with the series).
Following on the heels of EA’s last C&C title, Command & Conquer: Generals, C&C 3 features a very vivid display with heat waves, sonic pulses, and dust clouds all beautifully rendered alongside vibrant explosions and flying wreckage.  While beautiful this does exact a heavy toll on graphics utilities and PCs with up to date graphics cards and drivers are recommended for anything beyond the barest visual experience when running C&C 3.
Skirmish mode varies little from previous C&C titles.  Map options ranging from 2 to 8 players are available and players can set the amount of starting cash they begin with as well as special options like bonus crates and allowing superweapons.  Although playing with a faction’s full tech tree is inevitably entertaining the game’s AI can be predictable and varies widely in its skill between difficulty levels making for a poor learning curve.  EA mitigates this somewhat by allowing players to select archetypes for the AI personality such as Rusher or Turtler.  Games also tend to be fast paced with the winner or loser often decided within the first ten minutes.  While this is preferable for many gamers it does deprive anyone wishing to explore and enjoy a faction’s tech tree of more than a few opportunities to test strategies and units.
Multiplayer in C&C 3 is smooth and consistent.  Sadly it suffers from the same flaws as the skirmish mode, namely predictable AI and a poor learning curve.  However the large number of map options and quick gameplay fare far better in a multiplayer setting and combine with easy multiplayer setup to allow a large number of diverse games to be played in short order.
Newer gamers, particularly those familiar with RTS games but not with older C&C titles, might find C&C 3’s rehash of Westwood’s style dated and perhaps even simplistic.  Fans of the C&C series will love this game and although EA’s touch has made subtle changes to the old Westwood formula the favorite elements of C&C, particularly its entertaining and immersive single player experience, return in new and vibrant glory.  Command & Conquer 3 brings back all that was good about old school RTS gaming.  Newer gamers will also enjoy C&C 3’s rich single player campaign.  Anyone who is a fan of the RTS genre should find this title a refreshing rework of the old RTS giants and C&C 3 by far is the best RTS game to be produced in the late 2000s.
 


Read the rest

Warhammer: Mark of Chaos

Since Games Workshop released Warhammer: The Game of Fantasy Battles which began its Warhammer Fantasy tabletop line the Warhammer Fantasy setting has become a prominent and tragically underrepresented franchise in fantasy gaming.  Its diverse army lists, refined combat model, and well-developed setting and narrative make Warhammer Fantasy the perfect playground for role-playing games, video games, and even movies if anyone would care to invest the effort.
All this is probably the most prominent reason why Black Hole Entertainment’s production Warhammer: Mark of Chaos deserves notice from the gaming community.  Mark of Chaos is not the first tactical strategy computer game made for the Warhammer Fantasy setting but it is the first one to integrate tactical battles, strategic army management, and hero leveling elements on a level indicative of the table-top game’s detail and complexity.
Players familiar with Creative Assembly’s Total War series will recognize many gameplay elements in Mark of Chaos such as regiments of units, rather than single unit models; static battle maps, and combat elements like unit morale and obstructive terrain features.  Mark of Chaos features a single player campaign where the player chooses to command either the Empire and Elves in a good aligned role or fight for evil as Chaos and the Skaven.  The campaign is played out through a series of what essentially amount to scripted battles where the campaign’s iconic hero and the player’s ever growing army face various challenges such as rival hero units looking to dual or organized regiments defending a strategic location.  Between battles the player may spend gold looted from their victories to upgrade the units in their army with better equipment and add-ons.  As the campaign progresses additional elite and specialized units can be recruited into their army, although each battle has a maximum number of units that can be deployed forcing players to choose what strategy to adopt in the later game.
Battles are where the single player section of the campaign shines.  Most of the units from each faction’s tabletop armies are present in the game and are very well adapted to their respective roles on the battlefield.  Cannons are long ranged and effective but slow and vulnerable to enemy cavalry units.  Monsters are equally powerful but prone to drawing enemy fire and can become unruly during combat.  The user interface is fairly simple and straightforward ensuring players can rapidly move between regiments to issue orders.  Traditional military roles are present in some form in each army with pikemen, archers (or musketeers), light infantry, and cavalry all available to balance out an armed force.
Sadly the campaign’s story does not equal the luster of the battlefield.  Voice acting is fair, with most of the cut-scenes taking place ‘in-game’ using unit graphics.  The story line itself is properly done, but rather predictable and for the most part unaffected by the player’s choices on the campaign map (except for a very entertaining choice point for the Chaos faction).  The campaign for both factions is worth playing through and the developers were generous enough to allow the player to experience most of the game’s units over the course of the missions (with a tragically notable exception in the High Elf Dragon Prince).  However once finished there is little to endear the game to further single player activity.
A skirmish mode, treated as a subset of multiplayer by the game, is available where the player can run single fixed battles.  A small selection of maps is available with three battle types.  Arena is a simple army vs army clash; Siege is similar to Arena with the objective switching to defending or conquering a fortified position, and Reinforcement where strategic points around the map can be captured to generate income that allows reinforcements to be called during the course of the battle.  These modes allow the player to experience the well implemented army and unit designs, but a lackluster AI and absence of any driving narrative quickly become repetitive.
Multiplayer follows the same options as the skirmish mode.  Up to 4 players can participate in a single battle.  A preset number of points provides the basis for players to assemble their army with stronger units costing more points.  As in the campaign each army is led by a hero unit with different powers, abilities, and focus such as army command, dueling, and personal combat.  As the part of the game that most closely resembles its tabletop roots the multiplayer has the potential to be Mark of Chaos’ best aspect but unstable internet connections can quickly ruin any session and the game lacks diversity in its map choices, particularly for Siege and Reinforcement battles.
Warhammer: Mark of Chaos is a proper forerunner to what could have been and still could be a very entertaining series of games.  Replay options are low and it features few if any groundbreaking design elements, but what it does have, namely detail, an effective control interface, and entertaining combat are all things that great tactical and strategic level strategy games should strive for and the groundwork requirements for any game seeking to faithfully adapt the Warhammer Fantasy setting.  The game is entertaining enough to warrant purchase and play-through.
After the announcement of Creative Assembly’s Total War: Warhammer it seems that Warhammer Fantasy strategy gaming is moving to a different medium but that doesn’t mean Creative Assembly and other developers can’t learn from what Mark of Chaos did right.  Games like this need to be supported at least to show developers that Warhammer Fantasy can and should become a leading title in the fantasy section of RTS and Grand Strategy gaming genres.


Read the rest

Warlock: Master of the Arcane

By the time Paradox Interactive released one of its titles set in the Majesty universe game setting in 2012 the 4x genre was well established with the Civilization series and its latest iteration Civilization V serving as standard bearers.  Warlock: Master of the Arcane takes many traditional elements made popular by these other titles and adds a strong fantasy combat aspect to it.  Indeed, saying that Warlock is a ‘fantasy Civ V with more combat’ would be a pretty accurate summary of the game’s overall appearance and performance.
Warlock, despite its similarities, was not meant to be a Civ V clone but rather uses reliable mechanics of 4x play to facilitate its new concepts of fantasy adventure and conquest.  Domestic management, particularly in the areas of ideology, policies, and great people are toned down or practically non-existent.  The centrality and dynamics of military conquest takes a prominent, almost central role with each faction featuring its own unit and unique building roster and special Lord hero units appearing to add their considerable ability to a faction’s might.  Spells also make a significant appearance, providing the only element that could be equated to technology as the spells must be researched before they can be used.
As with many 4x games the storyline is oriented around the characters that represent a faction’s leader, in this case the Great Mages.  When selecting a Great Mage the player can view several paragraphs of biography and backstory.  This ties into the in-game lore, accessible when clicking on the portraits of units, and to a lesser degree the narrator’s exposition when the player achieves victory.  Aside from this there is little story to be found, with most of the in-world immersion coming from interaction with AI Great Mages and the exploring of the uncharted Ardanian landscape.  While this does effectively limit the game to one mode in singleplayer and multiplayer this is not a major detriment to the enjoyment of Warlock.  Just as in other 4x games the narrative is primarily crafted by the player.  Players can even customize or create their own Great Mages by choosing a portrait, name, faction color, race, and starting spells or abilities.
Other prime elements of single player enjoyment stem from exploring Ardania and parallel worlds.  With each new game resources, monster lairs, and neutral cities are randomly generated offering new challenges each time a new game is begun, ensuring that each race can be thoroughly tested before the process becomes routine.  Sadly the AI is less lacking in staying power with limited diplomatic ability and generally simple (if sometimes effective) defensive tactics.  The world’s monsters however form a vastly greater threat, particularly in pursuit of holy sites or rare resources in the parallel worlds.
Although multiplayer doesn’t exactly bring anything fresh to the experience of Warlock (aside from the obvious benefit of another human) the game is fairly easy on internet requirements.  It’s turn-based play is sadly limited to the active player, no simultaneous turns are present, but as a turn-based game with little in the way of In-between-turn processes the game experiences little variance in bandwidth requirement.  Unfortunately random crashes can be more common than one would like and frequent saves are recommended.  Several patches have ensured that primary functionality are maintained so simply playing the game is unlikely to induce an error, yet with the release of Warlock 2 further multiplayer support is not to be expected.
Warlock: Master of the Arcane for all its flaws is a masterful first step in what could become a very entertaining and endearing series.  Warlock 2 (which will be discussed later) follows in its steps with many improvements and gives great credit to everything Warlock served as a proving grounds to develop.  Warlock’s games are lively, humorous, and for the most part fairly prompt with a fair amount of customization options for players to explore.  Any 4x player, skilled or casual, who wanted to see fantasy and more combat in their Civilization games will be more than satisfied with what Warlock: Master of the Arcane has to offer.


Read the rest

Age of Empires II: The Age of Kings

The Age of Empires series, originally developed by Ensemble Studios and later published by Microsoft Game Studios after Microsoft acquired Ensemble Studios in 2001, was a relatively late comer to the RTS genre.  Yet it quickly became a hit for the industry and would go on to establish an impressive and iconic legacy in the gaming community.
Age of Empires II: The Age of Kings follows its predecessor Age of Empires as a period development and expansion game.  Players take one of thirteen civilizations (eighteen with the Age of Empires II: The Conquerors Expansion) from Dark Age hunter gatherers through three following ages of technology into the Imperial Age where they deploy highly advanced armored cavalry, heavy infantry, and siege equipment to destroy all who oppose them.
Players start with the central Town Center, a universal drop off point for resources and the only building that can train the resource gathering villagers and research the advancement tech to a new age.  Villagers collect four types of resources (food, wood, gold, and stone) which are scattered around the map.  Since these nodes are not always near the Town Center villagers may construct repositories like Lumber Camps and Mills to shorten collection time.
Villagers also construct all of the game’s buildings and remain valuable, and oh so vulnerable, through the game.  Several military buildings serve as training sites for the games different types of combat units (Barracks for infantry, Archery Range for all ranged soldiers) and a single Dock building serves as the production center and resource drop point for all naval related activities.  Research buildings like the Blacksmith and University develop technology to improve and refine the civilization’s military and economic capacity.  More advanced buildings are unlocked as the player advances through the ages of technology, for example all of the resource collection buildings are available in the Dark Age but the mighty Castle can’t be constructed until the player’s civilization reaches the eponymous Castle Age.
The Castle is the only building which, despite having generic architecture, is unique to the civilization.  It cannot be converted by Monks (the game’s healer unit and the only unit that can ‘capture’ enemy units and sometimes buildings) and produces the civilization’s unique unit (and with The Conquerors their unique tech).  The Castle is also a powerful defensive building and provides several strong generic technologies and units.
Overall unit design in Age of Empires II is generic.  Units are divided into the five categories of Infantry, Archers, Cavalry, Siege Weapons, and Naval units.  Each individual unit has a set of statistics for its hit points, attack, and armor.  Players accustomed to the unique faction skins of Command & Conquer or Starcraft may find the presentation a bit bland; but it is this generic approach to development that make civilization bonuses and unique units more applicable.  For example the Frankish Throwing Axeman unique unit has a ranged attack but is classified as an infantry unit allowing it to defy other aspects of the game (such as ignoring the bonuses of counter-archer Skirmisher units).
Age of Empires II is nothing if not a historically based game.  All of the civilizations, units, and even campaigns are designed after historical models.  Five campaigns are available in which the player controls a single civilization through five missions that follow a historical figure during the pivotal events of their life (like Joan of Arc’s battles against the English and Genghis Khan’s uniting of the mongol tribes and subsequent conquest of Asia).  Each mission is heavily scripted and expansive providing hours of game play.  Several different skirmish modes against AI opponents with five difficulty levels are available and Age of Empires II also includes a scenario editor allowing players to duplicate the tools used in making the campaigns to develop their own scenarios and even campaigns.
The scenario editor is perhaps Age of Empire II’s greatest asset for replayability.  With The Conqueror’s adding three new campaigns and several single mission historical battles the single player modes can provide at least forty hours of game play but restrict the player on available civilizations (many civilizations are never playable in the campaigns).  Difficulty and victory conditions can be adjusted in Skirmish mode but the AI remains generally predictable and its competency tends to degrade as games run on.  The scenario editor makes Age of Empires II the player’s sandbox and while primitive by modern standards is more than enough to flesh out the Age of Empires experience to the max.
Multiplayer is a very intriguing aspect of the game and one of the reasons Age of Empires II has remained popular over the decades.  Multiplayer uses the same settings and victory types of the skirmish mode (scenarios can also be used if the scenario supports the right number of players) but the rest is up to the players.  Using Siege Onagors to make a back door into an enemy’s base through the woods is a tactic the AI would never use and is legendary for its effectiveness.
Sadly multiplayer is touchy in Age of Empires II.  Movement in the game is rapid and a relatively strong internet connection is required for all parties involved.  Game crashes, while rare, are also a danger and can lead to a half hour of downtime.  Players living in areas of limited connectivity will find Age of Empires II to be more valuable for its single player elements.
The release of the Age of Empires II: HD Edition on Steam has revitalized the game’s relevance to the modern gaming community.  Now, anyone who expects the HD Edition to be an updated remake of the original will be sorely disappointed.  The HD Edition is not a remake, it adapts the game’s graphics to be compatible with high resolution displays and makes the game acceptable on newer operating systems.  The HD Edition also includes The Conquerors expansion and all of the original game’s modes and content.  Mod support has also been added through the Steam Workshop and a new expansion from Microsoft, The Forgotten, has added four new playable civilizations and campaigns.  This expansion, while officially published, is based off the community mod Forgotten Empires and features a noticeably unique style.  With the HD Edition players familiar with the Age of Empires series can now enjoy what is quite easily the best of this classic series and hope for continued expansion and improvement in the future.


Read the rest

XCOM: Enemy Unknown

When I first experienced Firaxis Games’ and 2K Games’ XCOM: Enemy Unknown, the original UFO: Enemy Unknown, developed by Mythos Games and MicroProse and marketed as X-COM: Enemy Unknown, had already existed for nearly a decade and established itself and the resulting series of X-COM games as favorites of the turn-based and tactical strategy genres.  Within a few years the game had become a cult classic and would continue to be a major influence to tactical strategy, adventure, and turn based games for the next decade.  Thus its fair to say that XCOM: Enemy Unknown, as a reboot to the original UFO: Enemy Unknown, has an impressive legacy to uphold.
XCOM: Enemy Unknown puts its players in the role of the Commander of the XCOM initiative, a secret organization formed by a council of select nations to combat a new and mysterious alien menace that has begun abducting people around the globe.  Gameplay is divided into two parts; the player commands individual soldiers in turn based tactical combat as they go on missions to stop alien abductions, investigate crashed UFOs, and save civilians from terror attacks.  The second part of the game involves managing and upgrading the XCOM Headquarters, an underground base that the player views via a cross section type display and features the barracks, research lab, engineering department, and other areas where the player’s soldiers and resources can be managed and upgraded.
Single player is the heart of the XCOM experience.  The principle plot of XCOM: Enemy Unknown follows its predecessor: a previously unknown extraterrestrial enemy has started abducting citizens from cities around the globe.  The XCOM Initiative is an attempt by most of the worlds advanced nations to combat this threat.  It could be said that the base plot of the game is not highly original; however it’s in the execution of this plot throughout the game that the story becomes intriguing.  The aliens are expertly portrayed as an advanced and unpredictable threat, with the player having no sure way to predict where they will strike next or in what form.  As the months of in-game time pass new types of missions appear and new alien species are added to the enemy’s growing arsenal.
Following a famous trend set by earlier X-COM titles the player is ‘invited’ to become attached to soldiers in their squad.  Each soldier the player recruits starts with a random appearance (which the player can customize), nationality, and gender.  As these soldiers advance in rank they gain a specialized class which defines the abilities the player can use to upgrade their combat performance.  The soldiers can even be renamed, allowing the player to follow in the X-COM tradition of naming and designing soldiers to resemble friends and acquaintances.
There are few characters with actual identities and they play a supporting role for the player (none of them appear in combat missions).  They advise the player on new developments, serve as voice assistants, and provide a conduit for the advancement of the single player story line before and after each scripted mission.  The missions, aside from a few scripted missions that serve as boss encounters to advance the main objective, are also randomly generated based on what type of mission is currently in progress.  The terrain is chosen from a series of pre-built levels and enemies are seeded on the map (although as the game progresses higher level enemies become more frequent).
XCOM is at its heart a single player game.  It’s multiplayer aspect consists of matches similar in design to single player missions in which players are pitted against each other after selecting a team of XCOM soldiers, alien troops, or a mixture of both based on a purchasing system that is set by the match host.  Combat in XCOM is turn-based, an element that is far more forgiving on lower bandwidth connections.  Sadly no multiplayer aspect exists for the campaign mode with no possibilities for such an improvement in the foreseeable future.
XCOM’s lack of a heavily plot-driven campaign makes replayability a far more entertaining aspect of the single player mode.  The many randomly generated aspects of the game ensure a wide degree of fresh experiences; the player can select additional features for single player to add random effects for their soldiers and special missions or increase the difficulty.  The end game remains the same but the bulk of the game remains unpredictable and, depending on the player’s preferences, quite challenging.
The release of a dedicated expansion, XCOM: Enemy Within, increases replay options substantially.  New sub-plot missions and enemies are added as well as additional upgrades and features for XCOM soldiers, including a new class of soldier, the powerful Mec Trooper, through the appearance of a new type of collectible resource called Meld, which the player must gather from the enemy during missions.  Once again the endgame remains the same, which depending on the difficulty selected can feel a bit anti-climatic but overall has little negative effect on the experience.
XCOM: Enemy Unknown has many aspects which old fans of the series will recognize and enjoy.  New players may find the wealth of different aspects overwhelming at first, but the game features a tutorial integrated into the campaign and very forgiving game play on lower difficulty levels.  Also a single failed mission does not spell defeat for the player and a degree of sacrifice is to be expected throughout the campaign.  Once familiar with the game’s aspects turn-based tactics fans of all skill levels should enjoy this remake of a venerable, time-tested series.


Read the rest

Age of Wonders III

After a healthy experience of the Eternal Lords expansion to Triumph Studio’s latest title in its Age of Wonders series it seemed like a good time to mention recent 4x contender Age of Wonders III.  The Age of Wonders series has brought up 4x fans since 1999 and features many traditional elements of 4x play such as turn based strategic and tactical modes, city building and management, and multiple resource requirements such as gold, production, and research.
Faction design in Age of Wonders III takes two intertwined forms.  Players must choose a class from six choices (seven with the latest expansion, Eternal Lords) and a race, of which there are a total of nine with all the expansions included.  Each race comes with a set of generic units as well as strengths and weaknesses in their economics and unit abilities.  Player classes determine what the player’s faction leader class is as well as what spells, technological upgrades, and specialist units are available.  Any combination of race and class is allowed and part of a successful strategy is determining which class and race best combine to fit a player’s style.
Leaders are chosen at the beginning of a random game or scenario (and preselected in the campaigns).  Players can also create custom leaders, allowing them to customize the leader’s appearance, starting preference, and adept and mastery spell skills.  All adept skills are available at the beginning and mastery skills can be chosen once the corresponding adept skill is selected.  A leader can have a maximum of three skill selections and does not need to choose a mastery.  Skills contain a set of spells that correspond to their type (Air, Earth, Fire, and Water originally with several more added in the expansions) and are useful in supplementing racial and class strategies.
Notably among most 4x games Age of Wonders III focuses heavily on combat.  Players will quickly learn that two moderately prosperous cities are superior to one large, wealthy city.  Thus the ability to conquer new cities and protect existing ones is paramount to success.  Triumph Studios put a lot of effort into the detail of class and unit designs and perhaps the most strategically critical and unpredictable part of the game is the tactical combat mode.  Racial and class units all have their own strengths and weaknesses and most classes are not necessarily all encompassing.  The Rogue class for example has a wide range of stealth and support units and is very flexible in most combat environments.  However the Rogue class is the only class which lacks a Tier IV unit (the highest unit tier) and can be swiftly overwhelmed by more martially focuses classes.
Combat is certainly the prominent feature in the single player story mode.  Players can choose between two campaigns, with each campaign following a faction on one side of a global war for racial and ideological supremacy.  Each mission in the campaign begins with a pre-chosen leader and a small army.  A settler is usually included, although in roughly one third of the missions the player must conquer a nearby neutral city to begin building their economy.  Several types of objectives like recovery or conquest appear throughout the campaign but the usual formula for victory involves keeping your leader and hero units alive while eliminating the AI factions.
While this is a fairly common approach to campaign development in 4x games it tends to lend a fairly abstract difficulty curve to the campaign.  Oftentimes the player is simply dropped into fog of war with no ability to sustain an army no indication on the best route of exploration to take; all while the AI opponents are building up their forces and claiming treasure sites.  Additionally the requirement to keep certain heroes alive, while certainly flavorful and effective at giving the leaders importance, discourages the player from using that leader unit in all but the safest and most secure combat encounters.  It can be a frustrating feature in a game where just one wrong move or a lucky shot can turn a battle.
The Random Map and Scenario part of the single player experience has much more potential and opens up the full race, class, and leader customization options.  Scenarios are single, pre-build maps with pre-selected leaders and races for the player to choose from.  Each scenario has a storyline governing its setup but once the game begins it functions more like a Random Map with the players free to develop their chosen factions as they please.
Random Maps are blank slate single and multi-player maps for 2-8 players.  At setup the player or host can adjust such features as the percentage of different terrain types, the number of monster lairs and treasure sites, if there is an underground level to the map, and other options.  Players can start with anything from their leader with a small army and settler to a large army and a metropolis level city.
The standard AI, while certainly an able opponent, tends to be more frustrating than dangerous.  Players can usually spot an AI’s advancing army through effective use of watchtowers and/or flying scouts; yet its complete awareness of the map means it can always find any vulnerable or unguarded cities.  The AI will target wounded and valuable units in combat even if it puts its own forces in danger.  It also behooves new players in Random Map games to leave the hero resurgence option checked when generating the map as the AI is fond of attacking leader and hero units.
Most 4x fans will enjoy the familiar genre elements in Age of Wonders III.  However those players accustomed to styles emphasizing economic or diplomacy victories may find Age of Wonders III underdeveloped in those areas.  However strategic and tactical combat elements are among the most detailed for a 4x game in the diverse number of units, abilities, and options available to the player.  Players seeking familiar 4x play with a strong fantasy setting will not be disappointed in the latest of the Age of Wonders series.


Read the rest

Age of Mythology: Extended Edition

When Age of Mythology and its expansion pack The Titans first came out in the early 2000s I was sure that Real Time Strategy games had entered an era of improvement and advancement.  Microsoft Game Studios had already delivered the stellar Age of Empires series and built an impeccable track record from which to pioneer new developments in strategy gaming.  Now, with the release of Age of Mythology: Extended Edition on Steam, I look back at the old style graphics and gameplay and realize that Age of Mythology was not so much a precursor of things to come as it was a development studio experimenting with new concepts as it prepared to embrace the new millennium.
Age of Mythology brought the myths of antiquity to the RTS genre.  Now players could command the heroes of Greek myth as they opposed legendary monsters like Minotaurs and Cyclops or marched alongside ranks of hoplites to fend off Viking raiders and their Giant allies or conquer Egypt with its incarnate demigods and mummified pharaohs.  Microsoft Game Studio’s superb attention to historical detail exhibited in Age of Empires II returns here with lore for each unit as well as an amazing variety of obscure mythical creatures to populate each of the four playable civilizations’ unit rosters.
Made back in the era when multiplayer and LAN was still coming into its own; Age of Mythology features a very well developed single player story mode.  The campaign guides the player through an ever expanding storyline with separate sections focusing on Egyptian, Greek, and Norse mythology.  Alongside an engaging story and a very diverse set of challenging missions the campaign also gives players a full experience of the game’s content; familiarizing players with the differences among the civilizations and showcasing the different units and god powers.  The campaign isn’t perfect; Age of Mythology abandons the traditional method of specially scripted and constructed cut scenes and uses its own in-game graphics to animate the characters and events.  The voice acting is marginal and those characters that aren’t mythically based are rarely sympathetic and often annoying.  Occasional touches of humor alleviate the disappointment to some degree.
The wide variety of information inherit in the unique civilizations can feel overwhelming if taken all at once and the single player campaign, while long, is easily the best resource for becoming familiar with the variations among and within the different civilizations; and there are many.  Players familiar with Age of Empires III will recognize precursor elements in the choice between minor gods that represent advancements to higher ages.  Each civilization has nine minor gods to choose from, with three major gods dictating which minor gods are available.  Once a major god is chosen, the minor god choices come in pairs with each minor god offering a myth unit, god power, and set of unique technologies upon reaching the next age of development.
The game doesn’t start with the myths either.  Mundane workers and soldiers are different for each faction with the Greeks taking the traditional approach of infantry, cavalry, and archers supported by a multi-tasking villager.  The Egyptians on the other hand, while still using simple laborers, must empower their resource and production buildings with their unique Pharaoh hero to increase their productivity and efficiency.  Egyptians military units are also more specialized, with each unit designed to counter another type; unless you construct the mighty war elephants which are effective against anything smaller than them.  The Norse throw an even bigger variation by having their soldiers construct all their buildings.  Dwarf units serve as specialized gold miners and Ox Carts are mobile drop off points following the gatherers and dwarfs to each new resource node.
The differences among civilizations make for a very interesting multi-player experience.  As with all of the older RTS titles Age of Mythology’s core concepts remain the same such as base building, resource managements, and large scale unit combat.  Once the unique aspects of each civilization enter play things become much more interesting.  Different combinations of minor gods keep each civilization fresh and observing the variations in each civilization’s economic system can lead to unusual strategies; particularly where Favor is concerned.  Favor is the new resource that allows the production of myth units, the monsters that make heroes what they are.  Each faction gains favor in different ways; the Egyptians construct increasingly large monuments while the Greeks need only assign villagers to pray at their temple.  The Norse must engage in combat with their foes, with hero units gaining more favor than myth units.
Modern RTS players may find Age of Mythology’s dated graphics, somewhat simple AI, and more varied civilization design primitive compared to more recent RTS titles.  Multiplayer matches can be routine, especially against weaker AIs, but players willing to invest the time in learning the finer parts of each civilization will find many new challenges to oppose other players.  It should be remembered that Age of Mythology: Extended Edition is a remake not a sequel.  Players who enjoyed Age of Mythology in its early days will find all their nostalgia return for the modern PC.  Newer players may question the game’s novelty but some patience and a little enthusiasm are all that’s needed to find one of the finer titles in RTS history.


Read the rest