![]() ![]() Last time I checked, Eugene told us they weren’t going to be doing sea-only maps, so I guess they must have changed their mind. On hybrid maps with both sea and land elements, they become just one more dimension you have to look after, but there are a few sea-only maps as well, which I wasn’t expecting. The Naval element itself is pretty interesting. There are four campaigns on offer at the moment, and the only thing I would ask for is more variety perhaps – one of the big draws of Wargame is that you can customise your army along national lines if you want, and there’s a limited amount on offer if you carry that desire into the single player, but that’s just a minor thing. You can move naval groups as well as land armies, your jets can strike from airbases, and of course there’s the political point system that allows you to summon in reinforcements where they’re needed. ![]() The improvements to the campaign mode alone make it the best example of a dynamic campaign since the Close Combat games. The game is as well designed and as well thought out as it’s ever been. The very fact that there have been few ‘grand’ changes to the formula however means that Eugene has three years of development experience behind them when it comes to developing Wargame – and it shows. but I’m not that good at it, and it can seem quite impenetrable sometimes. Wargame is a wonderful, engaging strategy game, the kind of strategy game that I’ve always wanted. In general, I’ve always found you're more vulnerable moving towards your enemy, but even if you try and turtle up and defend, sometimes you find that you don’t do as well as they did when the situation was revered, and again there’s no real way to find out why. Sure, stats have a lot to do with it, and you can intuit certain things, but half time I find my stuff just blows up, and I’m not sure why. Ultimately, Wargame’s biggest failing as a series is its feedback – there’s no real way to tell why you lost the way you did, why your group of tanks lost out to another group of tanks. With MP down to a T, I’d like to see more development here now. The campaign interface is as slick as ever, and you have a lot more control over things than you used to. Not only are they having to deal with a battle hardened, veteran community, but they’ve also got to learn a game with three wildly different unit types and try to figure out how to do well. I’m not saying this is necessarily a bad thing, although I do think it makes the game harder for newcomers to get involved in with each iteration. If you’re good at it, you’re going to remain good at it, and if you’re like me and struggle a little bit, well. But basically you’re playing the same game every time you purchase a new version. Some units are now amphibious as well, and there have been some other changes, like how infantry interact with buildings, along the way. But if you really stop to think about it – nothing's really changed, and this far in it could start becoming a problem.Īdding in the new boats, and the Jets that came with AirLand Battle, obviously comes with various gameplay tweaks and balances. ![]() The big feature for this game is the inclusion of Naval Units, and new maps to reflect this new area of battle. ![]() The third game in as many years – Red Dragon – takes the action from Europe to the China Sea, where old favourites like the UK, USSR and the Eastern Block duke it out against China, Taiwan and North/South Korea. I can’t help but feel that, as a franchise, Wargame is in a bit of a weird place right now. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |