XIII Century: Death or Glory

[Gabe123]

Has anyone ever heard of/played this game before? It looks like it could be pretty good. As far as I can tell it is quite similar to the Total War games but without as good of production values. But, from the reviews I've read it's more tactically challenging than Total War and has better AI, which would be great because that's the Total War series biggest problem, IMO. The Total War games are GREAT, but they just get really easy after awhile and this game looks promising in that respect.

P.S. IGN, Gamespot etc...all have reviews, I think

 

[iamahorse]

It's fairly good and serves as an occasional afternoon diversion for me should I finish up a paper early.

 

[Bellum]

There's no wiki page? 

 

[Archonsod]

It's on Gamer's Gate. IIRC there's a demo too.

It's not that bad. If you imagine the battle segment of Medieval 2 with more attention to detail and history you're just about there. No kind of campaign or the like though, just a selection of battles culled from history to fight through (well, technically there's three themed campaigns, but it's just an "unlock the next battle" thing, no persistence and the like. Some nice bonus scenarios unlocked when you finish too).

If you like the actual battles in M2 then you'd probably enjoy it. The battles are pretty much always the same of course, but then the AI and mechanics tend to benefit from the more focused nature too.

 

[murphy9926]

I thought about checking this one out but its a bit hard to find. Amazon has a few copy's but your talking between $35-$45. If it were more then just battles I would call that a fair price.

 

[Archonsod]

Gamer's Gate $29.99

 

[M@ster-$]

Yay, Alexander Nevsky FTW.

 

[MountainBlade]

Sounds good. The battles are the only thing I really like about TW anyway. But I can't find the demo. Certain there is one?

 

[Redcoat-Mic]

Sounds good. The battles are the only thing I really like about TW anyway. But I can't find the demo. Certain there is one?

Meh, they go hand in hand in my opinion. Playing just battles alone can't compete to playing battles that have consequences in a grander scale.

 

[MountainBlade]

I agree but the TW campaigns are incredibly boring to me.

 

[Archonsod]

Meh, they go hand in hand in my opinion. Playing just battles alone can't compete to playing battles that have consequences in a grander scale.

Depends what your looking for. You're not going to be in a different position as a result of winning or losing the battles, but that's not usually the point of historical wargames. The question is whether (for example) you could have won the battle of Stirling Bridge for the English, which you can't answer with Total War (well, unless the answer is "yes, if the British had elephant mounted cannons").

 

[Bellum]

Someone should quote that. It was really beautiful.

 

[GetAssista]

I was one of betatesters of the thing  Athough did not get my free copy as was outta the country, plus played really enough already and did not bother that much.
The game has nice tactical depth with complex morale/stamina/injuries system efecting performance, and refreshing AI. Learning curve for the stuff is somewhat steep and you can expect your ass handed to you until you grasp morale importance. Preset battles can get repetitive, although AI sometimes tries new tricks in offensive, and you can always try new stuff on your side to minimize your casualties