Episodic Sequels
Recently I watched a gameplay exposition and review for the upcoming Total War: Warhammer II video game, the highly anticipated sequel to Creative Assembly’s landmark title, Total War: Warhammer, set to release on September 28th. The review itself was straightforward and highly informative and I had no trouble with it. However it brought up an interesting point that relates directly to the nature of episodic titles in video games.
An episodic series of video games is a run of at least two titles with a single, overarching plot that runs through each title, tying the series’ storyline, characters, and even mechanics and themes together across the series. Normally the release dates, intended consoles, and even genre of the titles don’t define if a title is part of the episodic series; content is the only determining factor. Yet perhaps the most important aspect of an episodic series versus a franchise or saga is the proximity of each title’s release to the releases of the other titles in the series. It’s not enough to share the title, setting, and mechanics of prequels and sequels; an episodic title must be an indispensable part of a larger whole.
Axis & Allies
Axis & Allies is a video game adaption of Milton Bradley’s Axis & Allies strategy board game of the same name. Both games simulate the broad strategic situation of World War II at the beginning of 1942. Players take on the role of one of the five great powers: Germany, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The original board game focused on the strategic aspects of gameplay, while Axis & Allies the video game emphasizes real time strategy combat.
Axis & Allies features three single player modes. These include the campaign, in which the player takes the role of various Allied or Axis factions in key battles throughout WWII, with fictional “what-fi” scenarios serving as the majority of the Axis missions. Skirmish mode is a one-off match between the player and up to seven AIs played out on of the maps featured in the campaign or in WWII mode. Since there is no resource harvesting in Axis & Allies the size of the map is the only limiting factor for the number of players.
Red Alert 3
Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3 is a real-time strategy game developed and produced by Electronic Arts, released in late 2008. EA had finally gone back to a longtime staple of the RTS genre, eight years after the release of the previous title in the series, Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2, and five years after closing down Westwood Studios, the original developer of the Command & Conquer franchise. EA had already released Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars in 2007 to great success and was wisely pursuing its foray into RTS with a revival of the other half of Westwood’s RTS legacy.
Red Alert 3 follows roughly the same formula of its predecessors. Players construct their chosen faction’s base around a central building alongside such requirements as power and proximity between structures, as well as requirements for unlocking higher level structures and units. Units are produced from their respective production facilities and Red Alert 3 features land, air, and naval combat, with many units capable of transitioning between these battle spaces. Resources take the form of ore, which in previous Red Alert titles was represented by fields of golden nuggets, but in Red Alert 3 has been boiled down to a neutral mine structure, reminiscent of Warcraft style gold mines, that harvesters automatically collect from.
Three factions are playable in Red Alert 3. The Allies and Soviets return with many familiar units as well as completely new developments, and the Japanese Empire of the Rising Sun is introduced combining tactical and strategic elements of both sides. The Soviet faction focuses on overwhelming numbers and powerful tanks and warships. The Allied faction features more heavy combat units than in previous Red Alert titles but still emphasizes defense and long ranged, powerful attacks. The Empire of the Rising Sun strikes a balance between the two with large numbers of adaptable, hard hitting units.
Three story campaigns allows players to fully utilize each faction as they play through the faction’s path to eventual victory in the three-way war that dominates the main plot. Here is where Red Alert 3’s innovative failures start to show. Instead of picking up where the series last left off, the current story begins by erasing everything that occurred in the previous games. The campaigns commence with a three-way brawl that plays out as a series of loosely connected missions chosen more for their memorable locales than for their relevance in the strategy of global war.
Red Alert 3 is the first Command & Conquer title to introduce campaign co-operative play, allowing two players to proceed through the missions against the AI. In single player mode a friendly AI represented by one of the faction’s characters takes the place of the second human player. This marks one of the first RTS titles to take the step into co-operative story modes and the missions are well balanced around them.
Unfortunately they are a bit too well balanced and suffer when a co-op player is not present. The AI replacement for a second player tends to lack the strategic finesse and resilience of a human player. While the player is still fully capable of handling the mission alone the imbalance of proficiency makes many of the challenges, especially timed missions, frustrating and stressful. Additionally the co-op feature was hosted through GamepSpy servers which were shutdown in 2013, rending the feature useless without a third party server hosting.
EA didn’t spare any expense when adding its own innovations to the Command & Conquer formula. The shift to mine based resource harvesting, the addition of unique abilities and modes for each unit, and the emphasis on rapid, high cost battles are all new to Command & Conquer’s style of play; and they don’t necessarily mix well. Strategic management and defensive tactics take a backseat to rapid key-binding skills and fast paced reactions. Units are, on average, lightly armored and heavily armed making battles costly and quick. The one-dimensional resource system also prevents the player from increasing or otherwise modifying their income without simply capturing more mines, a situation compounded by the fact that the limited income is rarely able to supply enough forces to hold off enemy attacks and secure a new location simultaneously.
Red Alert 3’s graphics introduce another of EA’s innovations, the Sage 2.0 graphics engine. The engine provides bright and somewhat cartoonish effects, which given the game’s camp portrayal is actually appropriate. The graphics moved easily even on modern machines of the time and most devices should have no trouble operating it. Sadly multiplayer for Red Alert 3 is officially non-existent, although third party servers provided by C&C Online support multiplayer and co-op.
As far as strategy games go Red Alert 3 is a fair presentation. One of EA’s traditional failings is to take familiar titles and re-brand them with what it believes to be market selling points, usually patterned off of Blizzard games. This is effectively what has been done here and many Starcraft players would recognize familiar traits and tropes in Red Alert 3’s gaming style. The game itself is entertaining although the story-line sacrifices immersion for comedic presentation. Yet as it is Red Alert 3 falls from a continuation of a legendary RTS series to just one more title among many in the strategy gaming market.
Total War: Warhammer
In 2015 Creative Assembly celebrated the 15th anniversary of the Total War series of turn-based/tactical strategy games. A few days later it officially announced the upcoming release of its latest Total War title, Total War: Warhammer. For the past few years Creative Assembly and its current publisher Sega had been teasing the development of a Warhammer title in partnership with Games Workshop, the producers of the Warhammer Fantasy tabletop battle game. Finally fans were formally introduced to one of the most ambitious strategy projects of the decade and the first Total War game to not take place in a historical setting.
Total War: Warhammer is rooted in the revised Total War formula that had been fully developed in Total War: Rome II and its Total War: Attila standalone expansion. Regions of the game’s world map are divided into provinces, which are further divided into two to four territories each containing a single settlement with one of these settlements serving as the provincial capital. The settlements generate income, provide build slots for the construction of economic and military buildings, and list provincial statistics for growth and public order. Armies are led by a general unit, termed “Lords” in Warhammer, and each have a distance they can move each turn and various stances they can enter to generate effects on the strategic world map or the tactical battle map.
Other mechanics also remain in their traditional forms, such as the interaction of agents, now called “Heroes”, with armies, provinces, and other agents. Heroes retain the ability to be embedded into an army to provide a passive buff and to gain experience over time. Settlements include a garrison of troops that don’t count towards army upkeep and cannot be ordered away from the settlement’s control zone. Certain terrain types hinder movement or cause attrition damage to armies moving through them.
Beyond these is where Warhammer’s unique nature and radical development noticeably change and improve the established Total War formulas. Warhammer features four playable factions which can be expanded to seven plus six minor factions with free and paid DLC. Each of these factions feature new racial mechanics as well as completely distinct unit and building rosters. The Dwarven faction can only settle in special settlements called “holds” and are notable for having no cavalry units but some of the strongest heavy infantry. Alternatively the Wood Elves can settle in any province on the map, but only construct outpost style settlements with a single build slot; elven units are also light and quick with the Wood Elf faction possessing more archer units than any other faction.
Faction armies also benefit from unique mechanics and traits. The Chaos Warriors, as a horde faction, have no permanent base and must conserve some of their movement each turn in order to encamp and construct horde buildings, but as a result can simply run away to avoid danger to their faction. By contrast the Vampire Counts’ undead armies decay when outside specifically designated undead territory unless the level of vampiric corruption is high enough in the province they are invading, but at the same time areas of high corruption provide increased healing for undead units and cause attrition damage to armies of living units.
How all these unique factions mesh together and balance out is one of the primary design triumphs of Warhammer. Players are no longer promised the balance set of units and counter units from previous Total War titles; now faction compatibility depends on the player’s ability to utilize a faction’s existing units properly. An army designed to deal with monsters and heavy infantry will struggle against opponents fielding artillery and quick ranged units, yet each faction possesses the units and strategies to deal with both.
The units in each army are one of the two primary components of flavor, the other being faction mechanics, that enriches overall gameplay and are also one of the reasons Warhammer has a strong custom battle and multiplayer scene even within the Total War series. In previous titles it was not uncommon for a majority of factions to possess slightly altered unit rosters from a single template. In Warhammer the differences are so distinct that some preferred strategies from previous games aren’t even possible now.
Hero units are also a noticeable change, and improvement, from previous agent systems. When embedded in an army, heroes actually become powerful units with their own special abilities and combat statistics. They still provide passive benefits to the army they are embedded in but their true strength is revealed on the tactical battle map. Embedded heroes take up one of the twenty slots available for army composition, but the loss is rarely felt as only the lord units possesses more raw power and potential in combat.
Heroes, and lords, are also the medium for a completely new mechanic in Total War: magic. Heroes and lords with the spellcaster trait can learn magic spells as they level up. These spells are utilized in tactical combat and use a power reserve system dependent on the Winds of Magic mechanic, a constantly shifting pattern of strong and weak power reserves that covers the strategic map and changes the amount of power reserve available for tactical battles in the different regions. The magic system in Warhammer is another great design triumph as the new mechanic is woven seamlessly into the game. Spells are intuitive, easy to manage, and for the most part powerful enough to warrant their continual use but not so powerful as to break game balance. Each faction also possesses its own variations of spellcaster heroes and lords. The spells available to these units are determined by the magic lore of that unit and not all lores are available to each faction. Except for certain legendary characters, each spellcaster has only one lore.
Legendary lords take the mechanics of lords and heroes even further. These units are similar to generic lords of their respective faction, but feature unique appearances, voice acting, unique unit upgrades, and even unique mounts for tactical battles. Legendary lords can not be permanently killed, if they fall in battle they remain wounded for several turns then become available for recruitment once again. These special lords can be used in custom battles, but it’s in the grand campaign where their power and potential truly shine.
When choosing a faction for the campaign the player also chooses which legendary lord they would like to be the faction leader. Each of these lords brings its own command bonus and set of starting units. The other legendary lords are made available for recruitment when the player completes specific tasks like constructing special buildings or conquering certain cities. Throughout the campaign players are given objectives from a quest chain tied to a unique item for each legendary lord they control. These quests are optional and if completed allow the player to fight a special quest battle against pre-determined enemies using only the relevant legendary lord’s army. If the player is victorious, that lord gets the corresponding unique item permanently.
Many more subtle yet flavorful improvements populate the grand campaign and custom battle experience. The grand campaign itself can occupy many hours of gameplay per faction and with up to seven distinct experiences it makes Warhammer’s replay value one of the highest for Total War games of the decade. Even players dissatisfied with a faction’s campaign style can still enjoy its army roster in custom battles.
Multiplayer continues the Total War conventions of competitive custom battles and a co-operative grand campaign, both of which are stable and viable even on lower internet connections. The unique factions break up the metagame to a greater degree than any previous title. A competitive grand campaign between two players was also introduced, differing from coop in that the players are not linked by an unbreakable military alliance and do not share objectives. The players can still ally over the course of the campaign but need not even encounter each other if their faction objectives don’t call for it. This is a strength in that it gives players a great degree of freedom to interact with the AI and each other, but also a weakness in that the potential lack of interaction takes most of the enjoyment of the multiplayer experience away from overall gameplay.
Total War: Warhammer, is truly the crowning achievement for the Total War franchise and perhaps the greatest title of the series since Rome: Total War. It demands the most stringent graphics requirements of any Total War game, but is perfectly enjoyable on lower graphic settings and playable without error on systems that meet the minimum requirements. The game over-relies on DLC content and Creative Assembly rightly took a lot of heat from the gaming community for its overuse of the sales gimmick, yet with the DLC Warhammer becomes a masterful work of game design that can be enjoyed by gamers of any level including those who have never picked up a Total War title before. The gaming community deserved a cross-title compilation like this for decades and now that its finally here it’s a must for any strategy gamer.
Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds Saga
Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds Saga is a real-time strategy game derived from the blending of the Star Wars hype produced by the prequel trilogy, and the golden age of real-time strategy games. The RTS game Age of Empires II was released in that sweet spot of game development at the turn of the millennium when creative development had caught up to and in some cases outpaced graphic design. Games in this period were a perfect blend of simple user-interface and complex tactical mechanics that made micromanagement fun but easy to grasp. It’s no surprise that Age of Empires II, and games like it, manage to stand the test of time and continue to benefit from a dedicated fan base. Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds is a prime example of this legacy.
Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds, released by Ensemble Studios and Lucas Arts in 2001, and its expansion pack the Clone Campaigns, released in 2002 and followed by the Saga boxed set, takes all of its design cues from Age of Empires II and its Genie graphics engine. Players familiar with the medieval strategy game will recognize most of Galactic Battlegrounds’ conventions and mechanics. Worker units construct civilian and military buildings and gather the game’s four resources: food, carbon, nova crystals, and ore. Buildings produce military units of their respective types or conduct research upgrading unit combat abilities, building defense, and resource extraction speed and efficiency.
Ground units are divided into three broad groups: infantry, mechs, and heavy weapons. Infantry units, which consist of basic infantry and specialized units for combating buildings, aircraft, and mechs, form the workhorses for most of battles as they are cheap, easy to acquire and upgrade, and most factions get the technologies to upgrade them fully. These are the grunts from Star Wars; the battle droids, stormtroopers, and Naboo security forces.
Mechs are the quintessential armored and/or walker units of the Star Wars universe; AT-ATs, Trade Federation droid tanks, Gungan beasts, and the like serve as the armor and cavalry of the various factions. Mechs come in three designs capable of effectively combating infantry, other mechs, or most units respectively. The heavy Assault Mechs can also carry infantry and in some cases have a long enough range to destroy fortifications with impunity. Heavy Weapons fill the Age of Empires niche of siege weapons and include Assault Cannons, the battering ram-like Pummels, anti-air units, and siege cannons which can out-range any defensive structure.
Air units are also included in the form of multi-purpose fighter units which get bonuses for attacking other aircraft, and ground attack bombers with combat bonuses against buildings. Technologies can be researched to greatly improve these aircraft including the ability to better target moving units as well as gain personal shields. The Clone Campaigns adds the Assault Cruiser, a large shielded aircraft with a slow and powerful long range attack. Aircraft bring their own dimension of combat as they can only be targeted by other aircraft, anti-air units, and anti-air buildings.
In Age of Empires II all factions shared the same building and unit trees, what made them unique were the technologies, buildings, and units that they missed, their faction bonuses, and the unique units constructed at the castle. In Galactic Battlegrounds this formula is continued but given a Star Wars flare that keeps the franchise themes among the eight playable factions. Each faction has its own bonuses and unique units and misses some technologies while specializing in others.
Yet the units and buildings of every faction feature their own uniforms, architecture, and vehicle designs. The Rebel Alliance fighter units are X-Wings which face off against Imperial fighters in the form of TIE Fighters. Faction bonuses even correspond with their faction’s theme; for example certain Gungan buildings can be constructed underwater and the Trade Federation’s droid armies do not require housing.
Perhaps the least unique but most telling differences among faction units are the Jedi and Sith temples. In terms of units, technologies, and mechanics the Jedi and Sith are functionally the same. Jedi/Sith take the place of the monks from Age of Empires II, they convert enemy units and grab holocrons to bring back to their temples for additional resource income. Unlike the passive monks, Jedi and Sith also have melee attacks in the form of their lightsabers and are very resistant to damage.
The five good-aligned factions construct the Jedi Temple and train Jedi Padawan, Knights, and Masters while the three evil-aligned factions train Sith Apprentices, Knights, and Masters from a Sith Temple. Thematic flavor abounds: Jedi use blue lightsaber blades and the Sith use red; the Sith Master shoots lightning from his fingers as his attack. Most Jedi factions also can be considered the most proficient in this aspect of the game, with only the Galactic Empire faction possessing reasonable competence in Sith technologies and units.
The translation of a well-known medieval strategy game into a sci-fi strategy game is actually quite smooth mechanically as well as thematically. Understandably most combat is done at range instead of melee but distinctions of infantry, cavalry, and siege weapons remain in their strategic forms. Mechs for example are superior to infantry in every way, but many have a minimum weapon range and are vulnerable to specialized units. Walls and defensive towers still abound and are resistant to most attacks but vulnerable to the siege attacks of the cumbersome Heavy Weapons. Shields are also introduced in the form of Shield Generator buildings and the Gungan unique mobile shield generator. Shields basically act as secondary hit points for all buildings and units in their radius, healing over time and absorbing damage until depleted by enemy fire or deprived of a nearby power source.
The Galactic Battlegrounds Saga includes one tutorial campaign and seven primary campaigns. Each faction except the Naboo get a campaign of six to eight missions inspired by the movies or the expanded universe. Each campaign features at least one bonus mission relating to great battles from the Star Wars prequel or primary trilogies such as the Battle of Hoth or the Battle of Endor. The Trade Federation and Galactic Empire bonus missions feature what-if scenarios from the Battle of Naboo and Battle of Endor where the Dark Side has the chance to prevail.
Skirmish battles against the AI and multiplayer random maps are also included. The game takes its cues directly from Age of Empires II in this format, featuring standard map (including some parodies that AoE fans will recognize like Fortress and Highlands), Death Match, King of the Hill, and Nomad options. Up to eight players can join one game and the population cap, starting resources, and starting age of technology can all be preset.
Hero units are also included, usually in the form of infantry or Jedi but occasionally as vehicles like the Millennium Falcon, and appear in most campaign missions. Each hero has their own vocal script and features the special abilities of their unit type. They are also available in the scenario editor, an in-game tool players can use to make their own maps and scenarios using every unit, tile, and trigger built into the game.
The original Star Wars saga has its share of epic battles and grand scenes but it is an adventure at its heart. It’s no surprise that few strategy games have been produced around the Star Wars universe. As such it might seem that saying Galactic Battlegrounds is one of the greatest Star Wars RTS games is superfluous. Yet it truly is one of the best strategy experiences that gamers can find for the Star Wars universe. It features the perfect blend of flavor and accessible mechanics that make it appealing to Star Wars fans, casual gamers, and hardcore strategy gamers.
The fact that it was developed on the foundation of one of the most endearing RTS games of all time only adds to its appeal and staying power. If there was a flaw in this formula, it would only be that Galactic Battlegrounds strays too close to Age of Empires II’s general style while failing to equal or surpass it. Yet obviously that was never what Galactic Battlegrounds was meant to accomplish.
While Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds Saga is without a doubt a Star Wars game and deserves its place in the universe it is important to remember that this game is first and foremost a terrestrial RTS. Cloud and space tiles, which can only be crossed by flying units, can create the impression of space battles but the great Imperial Star Destroyers do not make an appearance; missions and scenarios take place planetside. Jedi are powerful and unique but cannot deflect blaster bolts or force choke enemies (except in cutscenes). Anyone looking to enjoy some classic RTS action Star Wars style will love Galactic Battlegrounds. Age of Empires fans will have to unlearn a few habits but otherwise should feel right at home. Those looking for the grand experience of the Star Wars space epic might find the Galactic Battlegrounds Saga’s generic RTS mechanics restrictive and should engage the game mindful of the older RTS legacy it is based off of.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Civilization V Complete Edition
No series of games did more to establish a genre in PC gaming than Firaxis Games’ Civilization series. Since Civilization’s release in 1991 the Civilization series has set the standard by which 4x games are measured. Civilization V’s, the latest title of the series, has continued this trend alongside its advancement of the series in the gaming industry.
Single player and multiplayer in Civ V are effectively the same experience. As with most 4x games Civ V does not have a story driven element. Players start with a settler and a warrior unit from which they must construct a capital city and go on to lead their chosen civilization to greatness. The game world is divided into tiles, hexagonal spaces that units move over and cities work to produce resources, of which their are four primary resources. Strategic, bonus, and luxury resources can appear on terrain tiles and are worked by the owning city to provide benefits to the player’s civilization, research, and the city itself.
Cities produce citizens depending on the food available to that city with higher food increasing citizen production. Citizens work the tiles that the city owns, adding the tile’s yield to the city’s base production. The more citizens a city has the more food it consumes thus requiring increasing supplies of food to support large cities. Worker units can construct buildings on tiles and special resources to increase their resource yield and provide stockpiles of those resources for trade. Workers can also construct roads between cities and into the countryside to increase unit movement on road tiles.
Civ V is turn based so combat takes place between civilizations as the turns rotate. Military units are divided into ranged or melee categories. Melee units may not have melee weapons (Great War Infantry for example) but are classified as melee because they can only damage units in adjacent tiles. Ranged units can attack units one or more tiles away without fear of retaliation. Each unit can only make one attack per turn and only certain units can move and attack in the same turn. Military units can be upgraded into more advanced versions as the player researches technologies and advances in eras.
The core experience of Civ V comes from managing the myriad strategic, domestic, and diplomatic aspects of a growing civilization. Technologies must be researched to unlock new units, buildings, and bonuses as well as allowing the player’s civilization to progress through the games eras, groupings of technological level that range from the Ancient Era to the Information Era. Cultural policies must be enacted to grant empire wide bonuses and set the civilization’s ideology. Income, and the trade that helps it flourish, must be carefully managed and exploited to maintain building and unit upkeep while providing a surplus for quick purchases and negotiations.
There are five ways to achieve victory and each one focuses on, but does not require, certain playing styles. Like any good strategy game there is a Conquest victory; the player must capture the capital of every other civilization while defending their own. The player can win a Cultural victory by producing enough tourism from Great Works and Great People, items and units generated by culture buildings, to become the dominate culture in the world. The Science victory involves constructing the parts of an interstellar colonization spaceship; a laborious process but that one that is completely contained inside the player’s own borders. The Diplomatic victory involves the player’s civilization becoming leader of the world through election by the United Nations. Finally, if a turn limit has been set, the civilization with the highest score at the end the in-game year 2050 wins a Score victory.
Many of the Civ V’s gameplay features occupy the player’s attention simply for the sake of surviving one turn to another, but it is the player’s preferred victory path that truly determines the focus of overall gameplay. Different civilizations have unique units, buildings, and bonuses that aid them in achieving one victory type over the others, such as Germany’s reduced upkeep for military units and Babylon’s science boost from Great Scientists. However, the beauty of Civ V is that no component of a developing civilization is obsolete. Trade, Great People, and even religion can be leveraged to speed the player toward any of the victory options throughout the eras. Certain aspects can be sacrificed to prioritize a chosen strategy, but no amount of culture or diplomatic weight can protect a civilization from a military superpower. A truly successful civilization will master, if not dominate, every aspect of Civ V.
The AI in Civ V is well designed for a game with such layered complexity. Each civilization has its own flavor that bends them toward a particular path to victory, but the AI will also adjust to accommodate shifting developments as the game goes on. However AI diplomacy can still be one dimensional, with the AI rarely forgiving past wrongs and making illogical economic and military decisions. It also has some trouble going beyond the swarm mechanic for unit combat. This doesn’t inhibit the AI’s ability to be a true threat, but does decrease its capacity to hinder the player as games progress.
Multiplayer provides an added benefit over the somewhat predictable patterns of the AI. Players take their turns simultaneously, which can cause some lag on lower quality connections as the game tries to resolve all actions at once. However this does ensure that players aren’t stuck waiting for a single player to finish his or her turn. Diplomacy also takes place interactively, with a player’s offer displayed for the other player to modify, accept, or reject at their leisure. Civ V does feature an automatic re-synchronization system, which can be surprising during play as the game activates it automatically, but it does ensure that progress and continuity are preserved over game sessions.
Civ V’s graphics requirements were extensive for its time, but present little problem for modern computers. Full maps covered with development and activity can cause long load times on some older machines but do little to impact actual gameplay.
Ultimately, in what is perhaps Civ V’s single greatest feature, this latest title in the Civilization series cannot be fully experienced in a single game. A multitude of civilizations, maps, and paths to victory are available in myriad combinations. Random maps can also be generated for additional variety. The Complete Edition offers a total of 43 civilizations and any gamer should find at least half of those appealing for multiple games. Any strategy gamer would find Civ V fresh and thoroughly entertaining over multiple playthroughs. Fans of previous Civ games should note that Civ V brings new material to the genre, wisely choosing not to attempt to rehash Civ IV. This doesn’t make it better or worse than its predecessors but rather it is a new way to play Civilization; which is precisely what it should be.