Field of Glory: Empires

« Empires lacks the breadth Imperator has striven for and is a few years behind what Total War is doing these days, but it's a smartly made game and gives a deeper military experience for those who prefer those aspects. It's definitely one to consider and an excellent new contender in the grand strategy space. »

« Field of Glory: Empire is a complex, deep grand strategy game in the vein of previous AGEOD titles. While great for long-time fans of the genre, its lack of adequate tutorial and its lousy interface could very well scare away new players. »

« The new effort by AGEOD and Slitherine introduces an even more fascinating and dramatically real aspect: the decadence of a nation and a people which, then as now, must be fought with culture, good administration and infrastructure investments. »

« Strategically, Field of Glory: Empires is one of the more accessible 4X strategy titles out there. It's not too demanding on the player around the diplomacy and trade side of things, allowing you to focus principally on the military strategy. The interface, sadly, will put anyone off who isn't a wargaming veteran, but anyone who has an interest in ancient Rome and its military history should push through that, because they will get a kick out of Field of Glory: Empires. If only because you'll be able to hand Hannibal the great victory and conquest the poor guy clearly deserved. »

« FOGE is a fresh and innovative grand strategy game that blends a lot of good ideas in the strategic department with fun and entertaining tactical battles. AI, diplomacy and, above all, interface design, need a lot more polish. »

« Did I mention the unique gameplay touches designed into some of the nations? The excellent interface that makes it easy to jump to whatever information I need, whether it’s the size of the Carthaginian navy, the closest source of amber, if there’s a river crossing on the way to the next province, or how good that unit is at besieging fortifications? The scattered tidbits of historical flavor text, especially on each of the buildings? The post-release support, which includes a new diplomacy system currently available in a beta build? And did I mention that I haven’t played a strategy game this unique and absorbing since Victoria and Imperialism before it? »

« Field of Glory: Empires is a grand strategy set during the hellenistic period: is deep and complex, but it lacks of some key points. »

« Essentially, Field of Glory: Empires is a quintessential Slitherine game. Big scope, big idea, but executed in such a way that will not click with anyone, but the nichest of fans. It doesn’t really add anything that was missing from any other grand strategy game, and all of the glory, character, and scope of the Roman Empire is virtually nonexistent here, feeling instead like a virtual version of a very charmless boardgame. However, if you’re a long time fan of Field of Glory (or a hater of Imperator or Rome II), this game might end being right up your alley. »

« A great surprise. Is very good and deep, different from other grand strategy games, full of layers of complexity. It deserves a try. »

« Best grand strategy game ever, it's not about painting the map with your colour it's actually about expanding, managing, developing and holding an empire. »

« On of the most boring and irrational games I've ever played. Too many mechanics, cannot conduct the battle on my own (28 armies vs 4 and yes, the 4 ones can easily win). Definitely this games indicates that the team didn't pay any attention to the battle aspect of the game. So much time to occupy only 3 areas. That's extremely boring. Try the medieval series or the civ series. Not that. »

« definitely deserves praise, it is still worked on and improved, needs a few tweaks, but it is already a very good game. some unique mechanics, the systems are deep (though it takes time to learn about this, as very little info is in the game, overall the ui seems to be the worst part of the game, mainly because of lack of info (e.g. buildings tree). but the manual is ok, it's highly recommended to read it before the game or at least refer to it during the game. can get tedious to manage regions manually, a few more options for the autogovernor could help with this. it may be too easy (on "balanced" difficulty i'm currently second in legacy ("victory points") as judea, having conquered egipt and most of arabian peninsula; in my first game i was owning northern and eastern europe as gothones, but who knows maybe i'll have problems with decadence later... macedonia is currently crumbling because of that, they are leading in legacy, time to attack them... or maybe i should just wait and see, i'm getting more legacy per turn now, so i should outrun them eventually...). »

« I clocked around 15 hours in the game and so far I am very impressed. Some of the pros and cons: - Very innovative concepts in the Grand Strategy genre such as aging, legacy, decadence and culture. It is one of the best ways I have seen that balances player expansion with internal stability. - Huge strategic difference and breath of experience. The nations are truly unique. Playing Sparta is very different from playing Gallic tribe or Carthage. The game not only has a lot of replayability as a result but it offers the player variety to fit their personal playstyle - Very complex systems that are relatively easy to comprehend (at least withing the genre) but hard to master. The various systems really play well together. The pop management, building management, trade, culture, decadence - it is all tied together and forms interesting system that gives player freedom of strategic choice. The game truly rewards good planning. - The combat system is very interesting. The game offers breadth of unit types - but mostly between cultures. The combat to me seems logical and balance of cavalry, skirmishers and infantry is usually the best approach to the combat. The combat offers some variety - as terrain is really important in the game and so are generals who have various perks and stats. - The last but not least is an option of exporting battles to Fields of Glory II. Now to be honest I am new to the franchise but I am loving the feature. By itself I think the FoGII probably captured the overall ancient warfare closest to what it has historically been. The battles are exciting and luck plays the role but it is also rewarding. Nevertheless the game does not require this addition - although I would strongly recommend to buy it in a bundle. - As a downside the game lacks tutorials and the online resources are spare so far - for sure compared to other titles in the genre. But there are some Let's plays around so I recommend you check them out to see for yourself if the game is for you. As a final words this is the game I was looking for for some time. It captures exciting period in the history and it really offers the player to forge their own story and leave their stamp on the world. Given the game just released and it will probably be patched and DLCs added it offers a lot of options that I believe will be enough for many hours of gameplay uncovering what devs brought to us. »