Recent reviews by STAVKA

War of Rights is a beautiful multiplayer game where you play as a Union or Confederate soldier fighting out various sub-battles of the Battle of Antietam. Unlike other "first-person-shooter" games, you can't run off on your own and snipe people from 1,000 feet away. Just like Civil War units, you have to line up and fire volleys. Yes, there are entire "clans" of people who drill and compete, and their private servers are generally better than the public ones. I think the game has progressed for the better over time, from the customization of soldiers to the introduction of artillery and even buglers/drummers. I'm not sure a Civil War game like this will ever have mass appeal beyond history nerds, but here's hoping for WoR's continued success.

The Hearts of Iron series is based on a simple premise: what if you took grand strategy games similar to the Total War series (minus the battles) but set it during World War II? Because everything happens at a macro level and days can fly by, don't expect a precise recreation of historical events. For example, Germany always invades the Benelux countries immediately after taking Poland when following the default historical path, instead of waiting until after Denmark/Norway in 1940. Indeed, changing history has become one of the main features of HoI IV, with virtually every DLC containing alternate historical paths for major and minor countries alike. As Germany, you can overthrow Hitler and replace him with the Kaiser. You can turn the USA communist or the UK fascist and so on. Of course, you can also play "historically" if you want, and this is the mode I usually play in (Ironman).

What's good? I generally like the art and the UI. Hover over something, and the tooltips will usually explain it very well, even if you are a beginner. The map looks nice too, although like with many Paradox games, you can turn off the bells and whistles for better performance. I like how unit counters change as you zoom in or zoom out; you never get the level of detail you do as in Total War battles, but HoI4 doesn't promise that. It accepts that this game belongs to a genre of games with hexes and NATO counters, but makes it as visually pleasing as possible. I also like how, for being a "war" game, a good chunk of it is about economics and the production that goes into making conventional weapons. Unlike squad-based games that celebrate the individual soldier or "bands of brothers," soldiers in HoI4 are just meat for the meat-grinder, components that make it possible to deploy a division, tank, submarine, etc. And so long what you want to do is "war," you're going to have a good time. It may not be realistic for Romania in 1936 to conquer the Balkans before 1939, but it's fun to do. And, if you have the superior force, it's as easy as painting lines on the map and setting battle plans (which are fun mechanics). And as long as you're playing as one of the "majors" (or even a "major minor"), chances are you're going to be on the superior side. Fortunately, the game balances this out with the faction system, meaning eventually your quick little annexation/puppet wars are going to become mired in, well, a world war that you'll have to decisively win to settle. There's no "cultural victory," though; HoI4 is a sandbox game, sort of, as long as you want to wage war in said sandbox.

The bad? HoI4 is hardly the first piece of media to treat World War II as "just a war" for entertainment. There is no mention of the Holocaust or war crimes of any kind. While Hitler is included as Germany's leader in countries where his image is not banned (unlike Germany, where it has to be used for educational purposes only), the Nazi flag is missing from the vanilla version (meaning players have to seek out mods that use the historical flag). Himmler and the SS do make an appearance, but purely as a mini-game within the game when playing as Germany, where you have to balance the interests of the SS with the regular military. The problem with all this is that young people who play HoI4 may be inclined to think German or Japanese soldiers were "soldiers like any other," i.e. simply following orders. Conquering other countries is about "war goals," not an extreme nationalist ideology dependent on the ethnic cleansing of "inferior" people. Of course, if this was all implemented in the game, it would be so tasteless, that no one would play it, and rightly so. To have a WW2 game like this, the only solution is to lampshade all the disturbing parts. But, by sweeping these things under the rug for a few hours of entertainment, it does feel like you are being complicit in revising history where these troubling things are forgotten and even romanticized.

The DLC for this game is messy. You are not just buying alt-history paths for Germany, the USA, or whatever country, but clunky mechanics like design-your-own-ship and design-your-own-tank that I have no interest in (and I doubt I feel alone in this). I forgot which DLC gave me the "planning" and "force attack" bonuses, but I can't imagine playing the game without them now. I wish HoI4 DLC was more "a la carte" in that I could pick and choose which specific features I wanted to add or not add.

Speaking of, some of the earliest DLC (Together for Victory and Death or Dishonor) unlocked special focus trees for Allied and Axis minors, but these countries are a lot more difficult to play successfully since the development of the new supply system. When you have to be careful about how to use each factory, dealing with railways and supply hubs just adds another layer of complexity you're not developed enough to deal with. I used to enjoy playing as nationalist South Africa and going independent from the UK, but now it's just a matter of time before my units get overrun because they're too slow to outrun British tanks. Of course, it's not realistic that South Africa could conquer southern Africa from the UK in the 1940s, or that Australia could beat the Japanese navy in the Pacific, but as I said, following history isn't something HoI4 does very well anyway. Hopefully, the devs return to some of the minor Allied/Axis countries now that all of the majors have gotten some love, but understandably, they primarily focus on the majors everyone plays.

HoI4 is a great grand strategy game for a popular audience. People who want something deeper but are willing to accept compromises in graphics and accessibility will hopefully check out more "grognard" games like those by Matrix Games, Slitherine, etc. Does it successfully address the elephant in the room that is the politics of WW2, which continues to resonate in current events? Not really, but about as good as any game like it can.

When Creative Assembly decided to make a Total War game with a high fantasy setting, they could have used any number of intellectual properties or, very easily, slapped together their own universe with the usual tropes (dwarves, elves, orcs, etc.) and called it a day. Instead, not only did they go with one of the better established fantasy settings out there in Warhammer Fantasy, they have really done their utmost to be faithful to the extensive lore put out by Games Workshop. Every faction's style of play is unique, and (most of the time) the lords themselves have their own special strategies and identities. At it's best, WH II feels like an excellent turn-based strategy game AND a great story-driven role-playing game.

The large number of factions/lords means that the most popular and latest ones tend to be less challenging and more enjoyable, while others languish. Factions like Warriors of Chaos and Norsca, who were once the "new hotness" when they were DLC for the first game, are now so "old and busted" it's a common joke among the community. However, the "fun" factions all have multiple lords, so there is still a great deal of replay-ability.

Another issue is the inherent macro scale of the game. For all its rich flavor, at its essence, this is a strategy game, one in which you probably end up simulating most battles. That means you spend the majority of your time staring at a large map of a fantasy world, which is cool, but you often wish the game would embrace its RPG elements and narrow the focus of the game. Instead, CA has done the exact opposite, blowing up the map from the Old World to include the Warhammer Fantasy equivalent of the New World. WH III, the newest installment, blows up the map even bigger to include the setting's Asia analogue, something the original material didn't ever really do. The end result is a staggering number of factions and lords whose concepts and mechanics inevitably are bland, broken, or just bad. There is a tendency in games that "more content is always good content," but the WH series proves that, even with an excellent AAA game, that's not always true.

Instead of locking themselves into producing three different games and spreading themselves thin on flavor (which we are seeing now with WH III and Chaos), it would have been better if CA had stopped with WH II and spent its time perfecting what works and improving what doesn't with the various factions. Some of the even more RPG-ish stuff in WH III, like the customization of Daemon Prince lords, could have been incorporated into a new and improved Warriors of Chaos faction--which, even if it isn't popular to play is, is meant to be THE end-game force in Old World games. Presently, I'm far more worried about undead or greenskin doomstacks than I am about the armies of the dude literally chosen by the Dark Gods to usher in the end of the world.

Still, the merits of this game far outweigh the flaws. If you enjoy turn-based strategy games period, get this game. If you enjoy turn-based strategy and high fantasy, I can't believe you haven't bought this game yet.

I have 1451 hours playing this game. CK2 is NOT your traditional grand strategy game where the goal is to conquer the world. In fact, there is no "goal" other than those you set for yourself. Want to play as a minor Spanish king in 1066 and reconquer the penninsula from the Muslims? You can do that. Want to play as a minor German count and just hold on to your single province while keeping your dynasty alive? You can do that. Want to play as Genghis Khan and conquer India instead of the Near East? You can do that too! The popularity of CK2 is that it's a unique fusion of historical strategy with RPG and sandbox elements. If that description appeals to you, definitely get this game.

A common complaint with CK2 and other Paradox titles is you have to download DLC to unlock additional features. For example, to play as a Muslim ruler, an ruler in India, a merchant prince... You have to buy DLC to do these things. The good news, however, is that the vanilla game is fine, and you can spend many hours playing as a Catholic ruler in Western Europe to see if you like the game before you pay for the DLC. Also, the cosmetic and musical DLC is entirely optional, and a lot of the more recent DLC -- Conclave, the Reaper's Due, Monks and Mystics -- add content and mechanics that, to me, feel entirely unnecessary compared to previous ones.

I would strongly recommend getting the vanilla game, seeing if you like it, and then get these DLC when you get bored of Catholic European rulers:

Sword of Islam - Play as Muslim rulers.
Legacy of Rome - Adds flavor events and traits for the Byzantines, and adds retinues (personal troops)
The Republic - Lets you play as merchant republics such as Venice.
The Old Gods - Adds a new 867 CE start date and lets you play as 'Pagan' rulers (Vikings!)
Sons of Abraham - Adds content for Abrahamic religions, and lets you play as Jewish rulers.
Rajas of India - Adds India to the game map along with gameplay aimed at Indian rulers. Feels unfinished to me.
Way of Life - Adds more role-playing elements to the game, if that's your jam
Horse Lords - Adds more content for nomadic/tribal rulers. The Genghis Khan DLC.

Everything else I feel is less important.

After 217 hours playing this game, here are my thoughts: if you're really into the history of the Sengoku Jidai (Warring States period) of Japan, this is an excellent game. As a strategy game, however, it's just OK. While you can personally manage the civil development and battles, you can (and eventually have to) delegate these to the AI. The real challenge and fun comes from the historical quests you get playing as the major clans in the different scenarios, where you have to achieve various goals to emulate actual famous battles and other events within specific deadlines. Yes, you can play as some obscure clan and lead it to greatness, or even create your own clan, but then the game just becomes a strategy game, and in that respect, Shogun: Total War 2 is the superior game with the same setting but without the "historical simulation" element. Another issue is that this game is a port from Japan, and as such is a lot more expensive than similar games and has some minor translation issues that cause confusion.

In sum, if you're a hardcore Oda Nobunaga fan who wants to simulate Sengoku history, pony up the cash and get this game. If you're just looking for a fun, straightforward strategy game of trade, diplomacy and conquest, get the Shogun Total War games instead,

I strongly recommend this game to anyone who enjoys first-person shooters or WWII games in general. This is the best Call of Duty games in the series and probably the best WWII shooter ever released. The controls are simple and straightforward. What really makes the campaign great is its diversity. You go from playing a Russian soldier at Stalingrad to a British soldier in North Africa to an American soldier in Europe. Yes, there is less "story," but the point of combat games should be to survive and meet objectives in a particular battle or skirmish, and with this approach you get a rich array of settings, weapons and even vehicles in some battles.

I especially like how the game does fair treatment to the Eastern Front. Stalingrad was really the turning point for the defeat of Hitler, and the scale and casualties of the Eastern Front far exceed the Western Front, although US and British culture tend to focus on it more. Infinity Ward managed to avoid the ugly stereotypes of Company of Heroes 3 as well as stealing from the "Enemy at the Gates" movie.