Bandolero -

Let me tell you a short tale that has absolutely nothing and somehow everything to do with Kingdom Under Fire II. This is a tale about my history with MMO's, the ups and downs and the in-betweens. It's also why this review of Kingdom Under Fire II is going to seem split because this is a game that manages to encapsulate the highs and lows, with an extra high on top of that. I began my life in MMO's watching The Legend of Mir on the UK TV channel Game Network. That was also, as you may guess, my very first MMO. From stopping playing that around 2002, I've played a good 5000+ hours in World of Warcraft from around 2004 to late 2009. During that time I was also a fan of Guild Wars, which I bought at launch, as well as all of its expansions and also the second game. Other smaller highs came through reviewing an updated and improved Black Desert Online, loving a post-Tamriel Unlimited Elder Scrolls Online as well as a post-A Realm Reborn Final Fantasy XIV, the latter are both titles I purchased upon launch. On the other hand, I've also played some average or at least decent MMO's, as well as some downright bad ones. Updates to Elder Scrolls Online, such as Morrowind fall into the former category, as does Secret World Legends, Star Trek Online and Defiance (I loved the show though). On the lower end of the scale, you have titles like Blade & Soul and Devilian, the less said about titles like Tabula Rasa, Firefall, Darkfall and Matrix Online, the better. These are just the ones I remember. So anyway, what does all this have to do with Kingdom Under Fire II? Let's have a look. Part of it is that I'm completely worn out when it comes to traditional (dated) quest mechanics. These being the constant backtracking and other downright pointless quests that are designed to waste time. I mean this literally. Some here must have been designed with time-wasting in mind, dragging out what's happening. I had a quest chain which had me running between four or five people, repeatedly talking to them, picking up items that were quite literally sat next to them. To say I got angry at this point is an understatement, I was swearing at the game for being so blatant at its lack of consideration for my time. What is even more infuriating is that the game never actually grows out of this, nor does it seem to have anything that offers variety or flavour quests to simply offer mindless entertainment. Yes, even the side quests are designed in the same way. The problem then is that you have to do them since it would take an insane amount of time to level up through the killing of enemies. I made a note of looking a few times at different levels and it always seemed that with scaling experience gains and requirements, you'd always be looking at between 700 to 1000 kills going that route. I suppose that wouldn't be such a bad thing if it wasn't for the time it'd take. Actually, thinking about it, if they would double the experience gained I'd barely ever touch any quests due to how fun and engaging the RPG combat mechanics are. It genuinely feels something like a Dynasty Warriors game, letting you hack and slash your way through hordes of enemies in action-oriented combo-based combat, with traditional MMO elements like button-pressed skills added in. Fortunately, you'll find yourself actually progressing through the levels pretty quickly, if only because of the sheer abundance of quests that are so close to each other. They never actually require a massive time investment, despite the sense that it's taking a long time due to the boredom. At least it lets you get to the part of the game that is genuinely excellent. This would be the strategy element of Kingdom Under Fire II. So yes, this is a hybrid of an MMORPG and MMORTT. They say RTS (real-time strategy), but I'm precise (read: pedantic) and it's actually an RTT (real-time tactics) game when it comes to the strategy side of the game. The best way to look at it is that the dungeons, raids and whatever else you'd find in a regular MMO have been replaced by a sort of Real-Time Tactics game mode. In these, you control your hero and a number of squads. How many you control naturally depends on your level and the level of the area you are fighting in. At any time you can only actually control a maximum of three units plus yourself. You are able, however, to select up to eight units to compose your army. This is because larger battles have a resource that allows you to rotate as you may need to or, should a unit die you can call in reserves. With the huge variety of units available, it offers a great sense of tactical flexibility and really helps to make these battles even more engaging than they originally feel like they would be. What is really impressive about this mixture of RPG and RTT hybrid is that, with very few exceptions, seamlessly move from the overhead strategy view where you're controlling your character as well as your other units. There are very few games that manage such a seamless move between two different styles, particularly where you move from overseeing a huge battle to actually being in the thick of it, swinging your sword at the hardened ankles of a giant scorpion or getting tossed through the air by an ogre. It's the variety of units and the flexibility they offer, particularly surprising as I've played many full strategy games that don't have this level of variety. Here you've got infantry from spearmen to crusaders or your very own ogres, a selection of ranged units from wizards to archers, riflemen or mortarmen and even your very own creatures of war, such as a giant scorpion, ogres, armoured beetles or more. You can even get tanks or bombers. All in all, there are said to be over eighty different units within the game. Your personal barracks can only contain a limited number of units, all of which can be levelled and ranked up as well as 'dedicated', which is essentially trading them in for resources. With so many units, you've got the opportunity to mix and match, work out which you prefer, but you will be sticking to the same core team of eight towards the end, if only due to the fact that it would require too many resources and time to level and rank up an even bigger roster. I mentioned that you have a cap in your barracks, this can be expanded. In fact, your barracks and personal bag space can both be expanded using Cubics. Cubics can also be used to purchase items in the in-game store, such as booster packs, Region and Troop Visionstones (used to rank units up, potions, repair tokens, skill books for units, cosmetic items and even more. For that matter, you even have to use five Cubics to talk in world chat. "What are Cubics? Are they a premium currency?" I hear you ask. Well, magical talking bottle of beer, they are but they aren't. Kingdom Under Fire II, as I covered earlier, has been in development for ten years and has gone through multiple variations over that time. It also has regional variations. The version in the east is a traditional Korean MMO, where it's free to play and a huge amount can be purchased by through a premium currency. That would be Cubics. Here, they are given to you as a reward in a number of quests, for the usual attendance rewards, etc. I imagine it would have been too much of an overhaul to actually remove the system completely, so they went for what seems to be the next-best option. There is still a premium currency within the western version of the game, this being diamonds, which for the moment can only be used to purchase cosmetic items. While I was at an event for the game earlier this month I was told that the aim is for diamonds to only be used for cosmetic items or potentially something to speed up advancement, nothing pay to win. I can't actually attest to this because while the cosmetic items are there to be purchased, the diamond store for non-cosmetics has not yet been po[CENSORED]ted at the time of this review going live. Knowing the fact that you can move from a strategic view right to third-person where you can start personally hacking away on the battlefield, you would expect the game to have some issues or at least have to compensate for this with inferior visuals. Particularly as these are battlefields where you quite literally have hundreds of units fighting each other while fireballs rain down, giant scorpions launching rocks into the fray as well as other massive creatures that tower over, sending smaller units flying to their death. This isn't the case, a fact that still surprises me. Particularly when playing online with or against other people in some pretty huge battles. Kingdom Under Fire II isn't the best looking game in the world, not in any sense of the word, but by no means is it unattractive. Character models are well detailed and the use of colour, lighting and the general flashy nature of combat keeps the game looking good. Now, there are aspects that show the aged nature of development. Particularly, this is the UI, clunky, looks dated and does not scale at all to more modern (read: ultrawide) resolutions. At least the game works with them, not leaving it stretched or with vertical black bars. I do have an issue with the fact that you can't actually move the UI or rearrange it to you you'd prefer. At least no obvious way anyway, which leaves me with a bar showing my built-up combat runes in the middle of the screen. Another issue I have with the game is that the localisation is poor. Some text just smacks of google-translate, such as "Cannot learn the skill at once" in place of "Cannot learn this skill when you have learned". I can appreciate a few slight mistakes in the tens-of-thousands of words within the game but in core mechanics? Not really. Also, I'm still seeing Korean when comparing equipment. I was also seeing it when I was trying to level up my soldiers and it wouldn't let me, I believe because they would have been a higher level than me. I don't actually know if I'm right, but I was level 22 and trying to level up my Crusader unit which was also 22. All I saw was some Korean text pop up. I've seen some Korean popping at least a few times per hour throughout my 50+ hours with the game, so it's hardly something that should have been missed during QA. So, what do I think about Kingdom Under Fire II? Well, I honestly would have absolutely loved a single-player or simple co-op story-oriented game with this combat system. One where the MMO questing was just thrown right out of the door. To be fair to Kingdom Under Fire II, it can be played as a single-player game with very few exceptions (larger battles, etc). Most battles can simply be completed solo, something I very much appreciate. Surprisingly, I've enjoyed playing with other random people here. Likely due to the immense fun I've had by wading in personally while others do the same. Blueside and Gameforge have made a massive gamble on Kingdom Under Fire II, $80 million+ spent over the ten years of development, the age does show in parts but so does the care and time spent in others. I can't, in good conscience, recommend anybody purchase the larger packages right away - there are three, costing £24.99/$29.99, £44.99/$49.99 and £89.99/$99.99 respectively - because you can always upgrade for the bonus content if you're enjoying yourself. Kingdom Under Fire II is genuinely one of the hardest games I've ever had to judge and I've yet to answer the question that started this section. Yes, I suppose I do actually like the game. There are some interminably frustrating aspects but these are well countered by one of the best combat systems I've ever encountered in an MMO, one that combines surprisingly well with a very engaging and fun strategy system. Sure, it's clunky and even boring during parts but I'm more than inclined to say that the good outweighs the bad. I know that I'll be playing more of it and if somebody had told me that at the start, I would have had them sectioned.

we saw the death in real life ? 1 #prayforalbania 1 help for us. ty

Arc has quietly been juggling a lot of properties, both in and out of their jurisdiction, for some time. Just when you think all they have up their sleeve is fighters, bam, Hard Corps: Uprising, a collaboration with Konami, hits you. Then just one year later, bam, a Persona fighting game with Atlus' help. They even have recent Dragon Ball portable and console fighters under their belts, and now they're just letting it all hang loose for a full-on massive crossover event in BlazBlue: Cross Tag Battle. BlazBlue: Cross Tag Battle (PC, PS4 [reviewed], Switch) Developer: Arc System Works Publisher: Arc System Works, PQube Games (EU) Released: June 5, 2018 MSRP: $49.99 (base), $69.99 (digital deluxe) If you couldn't tell by the title this is primarily a BlazBlue fighter. 13 combatants (three are free DLC) hail from the series, compared to the seven each from Persona 4 Arena and Under Night In-Birth, and the four from RWBY. As usual we have to talk about the pricing scheme, because someone is going to point it out and use it as an excuse to ignore the rest of the review. In case you haven't heard, RWBY's inclusion warranted controversy as they were immediately billed as "one of 20 DLC fighters." I asked Toshimichi Mori to clarify the issue myself, and he agreed that the message was muddled. In response, Cross Tag Battle's price was shifted to $50, with an "everything included" edition for $70 and a free DLC for the first two weeks. There's a simple formula for this one that you can follow along with at home without a calculus degree. Do you think [x] characters is worth [x] amount of money? It's your choice. Anyway, onto the actual fighting system! You have your standard two-button system with auto-combos (a recent staple of many fighters), ground and aerial recoveries, powered up EX moves, your basic stuff. But Cross Tag moves us into the arena of 2v2, and swapping is as easy as pressing the X button on PS4. You can also call them out from the sidelines for three different assist moves (R1), and initiate clashes, or double combos. Alternatively you can all in an assist during a super, which keeps the damage going and tags out safely mid-ability. If you drop to one fighter you can opt for a Resonance Blaze power-up, which is a sort of X-Factor that lasts 15 seconds, enhances chip damage, allows more skill cancellation, auto-fills meter, and recovers your red health gradually -- it also unlocks your instant-kill if you have enough meter to pay for it. There's a catch too, as the more partner skills you use, the greater the blaze's power will be. After all these years of playing a litany of tag fighters, I've sort of swayed into the favor of 2v2. I like the intimate feel of just managing one swap and the tempered challenge of picking duos with good synergy. It's also arguably easy to balance as the assists aren't game-changing (in 3v3 joints folks will often pick one member to use just for assists, with no intention of actually fighting with them). It's enhanced even more in Cross Tag given the sheer enjoyment of pairing up some of these duos like Ragna and Noel. To navigate all of this madness Arc once again utilizes the hub from Guilty Gear Xrd (which was brought back for the more po[CENSORED]r Dragon Ball FighterZ), allowing players to frolic around as a cute little avatar in a mini-game world. It's a glorified menu (you can even just bring up the quicker UI with the press of a button), but it's a nice little touch that adds some character -- especially when said avatar gets tired of your nonsense and falls asleep. On top of online play (which we couldn't fully test, but will keep you updated with by way of news updates) there's the story-like "episode mode," a training module, versus play, tactics (read: a mission mode that doubles as a tutorial), survival, and gallery extras. Dual Japanese/English audio is in, and yes, you can even set individual languages for fighters in combat. My only gripe here in terms of gametype delineation is that I really think the tutorial should be brought out into its own thing to better onboard players of all skill levels. There's going to be a lot of newcomers coming in due to the involvement of any given franchise, and having a tutorial even close to as good as Arc's own Guilty Gear Xrd: Rev 2 would be beneficial. The mission-baked one right now is far too dry, also requiring players to awkwardly "end missions" by pressing R3 (function two) instead of dynamically flowing into new concepts or presenting fun new ways to approach fundamentals like movement. Yet, BlazBlue: Cross Tag Battle pretty much speaks to everyone, even if a few of its core mechanics aren't as refined as several of Arc's other works. It has a wide array of cast members from several universes, a pointed 2v2 focus, and a sufficient amount of stuff to do if you aren't the online competitive type. I sincerely hope this sets the stage for more experimental "all-star" types of fighters from Arc, as they have a seemingly limitless well of ideas to draw from.

hello boy, Problem is that sv IP banned you,I had this once so just go to ftp and reloadadmins,or tell to your colleagues to do that,and to your setinfo pw,delete it complete and put new pass. Is a server glitch that banned u. If still doesn't work,I wait a pm to explain u and help clearly. G/L

While we haven’t drowned in business tycoon games over the last several years, there is a particular offshoot of the genre which hasn't seen a whole lot of examples coming up – the railroad tycoon game. Lots of business builders and resource management games, but not a lot of focus on the business of running a railroad specifically. If that is what you wanted, I have some bad news for you… Railroad Corporation from Corbie Games and distributed by Iceberg Interactive, publishers of Starport Gemini 2 and Starship Corporation, haven't knocked it out of the park, instead providing a very visually attractive entry into the world of railroad management games which can't really decide whether it wants to be part of that genre or not. This indecision is a problem for the player, not because it introduces complexity but because it causes the designers to cut what are normally thought of as important features for 'railway management games' in order to spread their development attention to less successful portions of the design. Tricky Tracks Ahead I'm not a newcomer to management games in general or railroad games in specific, all the way back to Sid Meier's Railroad Tycoon. Innovations in modeling minimum turn radius, gradient handling, and the other intricacies of putting down flexible track were added on to games along the way, letting you have greater control over how your trains could run. There is one part of this game which doesn't hold up in the face of what we have become used to in the railroad tycoon genre: the lack of flexibility when it comes to track placement. This is the biggest complaint you'll find in online discussions about Railroad Corporation which has been in Early Access for a year. In short, "track placement is fiddly." Sometimes it won't attach to the section you want it to for reasons which are unclear, sometimes it will try to make an extremely and ridiculously broad turn, even though with fiddly placement you can get it to simply move a little bit and make a much smaller radius turn. The one thing it allows you to juggle a little bit is increasing the height or depth of a given piece of track but don't think that it's going to let you actually build a trestle or a tunnel under track that you already have in place or help you to do such -- because it won't. Tutor Me There is a tutorial, and that's all you can say about it. It shows you the very basics of laying down tracks. It tells you to connect up to stations and doesn't talk about signaling, sidings, or anything else (mainly because it doesn't handle them well when it does at all), it gets you to move cargo from a place that's selling it to a place that's buying it, and along the way you buy a train – then it just steps out of the room, handing over control to the first mission in the campaign without even a supportive nod. The campaign is just a set of missions which instruct you to: Move cargo of specific types to specific places. Build up your HQ building with an R&D department in order to research and improve trains. An HR department to hire people that give you minor percentage cost breaks or research bonuses. And a Law department to grease palms in order to get tax breaks and incentives or increase taxes on goods your opponents are selling. Not that you will see an opponent in the first four rather sprawling chapters of the campaign. Chugging Through The campaign is what the developers intend you to spend most of your time with, at least for many, many hours, because while there is a sandbox mode in which you play a given map, build your own empire, and compete with some AI-driven opponents, those maps are not unlocked until you beat the associated campaign chapter. Getting to play in a very traditional railroad tycoon-style way is gated behind actually playing all the way through the campaign to get all of the maps. This is as big a problem as a railroad tycoon game with bad track laying mechanics. It's as if they want to get in the way of you playing the game. The missions themselves are bland – though they do force you forward through gameplay. It does throw you into the deep end and force you to flail around to try and figure out what it wants you to do. There is a mission to run clothing to Atlanta with the suggestion that you should buy the material suppliers to make clothes along the way. What it doesn’t tell you is that if you buy the intermediate product manufacturer, while you no longer have to spend money to buy the output product, you also don’t make money from putting the product in. This is a big deal when it comes to relatively high ticket cargoes that you use to pay for your network. Suddenly you will find yourself working at a deficit, even though you’ve just purchased most of the supply chain. You are forced to learn what things need to be left alone and what things need to be scooped up by repeated failure of the whole mission, requiring you to start over from your last save or autosave. Since the mistakes that you made that led to your current bankruptcy might have happened 15 minutes before and the game only keeps one autosave which gets written quarterly during the year, restarting the entire chapter is going to happen, unless you save manually religiously. You will need to keep a steady supply of trains running which have very little to do with your given mission in order to keep money coming in for gameplay. Here’s where you discover the game really wants to be an empire builder that just happens to include rail as the only means of transportation. Towns and cities have resources they wish to buy and as you sell them those resources, their po[CENSORED]tion increases. At certain po[CENSORED]tion breakpoints, they stop desiring lower tier resources and prefer more processed ones, adding empty plots in the city which you can purchase and build production sites or warehouses to hold goods. Having a town suddenly stop wanting wheat when you have a train full of the stuff on the way is marginally annoying but that they don't give you any warning that it's about to happen is very annoying. Shipping from a farm without an attached village for long enough will cause one to spring up, giving you the option of sending them basic resources for good money or selling them that resource directly if you happen to own the farm. It won't let you automatically sell goods that you produce in town to that town. This is a common theme with the design of Railroad Corporation; things that are trivially able to be automated must be manually clicked. When you finish a campaign chapter, don't expect to be told that you've succeeded and then turned loose on the map to play around for a while. You get the heads up you're done and the last mission has been completed, and then you go on to spend some experience points on your character which allows you to slightly change some costs or gains in your next play. Turnabout Bad track mechanics. Bad tutorial. Inconsistent mission design. A character advancement system that feels tacked on. I haven't said anything about the HR and Law departments, because neither of them make enough contribution to gameplay to be other than a distraction. They really represent a money sink that take forever to be worth it. There is multiplayer! You only have a selection of four different maps, and at least two of the game modes at the time of this review had no options that you could actually select to customize the experience, while the other two at least allow you to set the initial money in the bank, how much debt you can accrue before you're out of the game, and the color of your buildings. Unless a lot of work goes into the multiplayer design after release, I don't think it's going to be a compelling experience – not least because it’s one versus one and doesn't allow for even multiple AI to compete against human players. The best thing about Railroad Corporation is that it is very attractive. The graphics are not stunning but certainly a lot better than we've seen in some of the retro styled business tycoon games of late. Is that enough to save the game? Not really,noThe best thing about Railroad Corporation is that it is very attractive. The graphics are not stunning but certainly a lot better than we've seen in some of the retro styled business tycoon games of late. Is that enough to save the game? Not really, no. Summary GOOD It’s very pretty Interesting choices of places to set the maps BAD Terrible track management and interface Mission system is repetitive and uninteresting Maps are static, not procedurally generated Both character XP and Law system seem tacked on and ineffective

V2 effect+text BB

INTRODUCTION Sigma Theory: Global Cold War comes from the creators of the award-winning sci-fi game Out There. Although this game does not only come from Mi-Clos Studios but comes from FibreTiger and Goblinz Studio as well. In the near future, a paradigm-shifting scientific discovery looms over the world, promising, new technologies. Suddenly the world’s superpowers realize they could have the power to destroy the global financial system, wipe out entire countries or even gain access to immortality. The player is placed at the head of their country’s Sigma division, with the objective of ensuring that their nation reaps the benefits of Sigma Theory before anyone else. Therefore, achieving this is the player’s top priority and with powerful resources, such as a cadre of the world’s most elite covert agents, advanced tactical drones and their own skills in diplomacy and subterfuge; at their disposal success is guaranteed. STORY Sigma Theory: Global Cold War is a new take on the spying genre and it is set during a futuristic global cold war. In the near future, a paradigm-shifting scientific discovery looms over the world, promising radical new technologies. The world’s superpowers realize they could have the power to destroy the global financial system, wipe out entire countries or even gain access to immortality. However, this discovery called The Sigma Theory can only be harnessed by a handful of scientists and the player’s objective is to acquire as many scientists as they can to utilize Sigma technologies for their country of allegiance. Although Sigma Theory does involve traditional spy genre tropes, which were given a well-deserved freshness that added an immersive quality to the game. GAMEPLAY Sigma Theory: Global Cold War has as many facets to rival a diamond and it may be just as hard as well. Sigma Theory is a turn-based strategy game with a focus on micromanagement. These aspects are both developed and managed through the player’s actions, the orders given to their agents and their relations with the in-game NPCs. CONTROLS Sigma Theory: Global Cold War is a turn-based strategy game. Therefore, its controls are quite simple and easy to grasp, given all the player needs is a mouse. The player’s use of a mouse will involve navigation of the map, placement of agents, giving out orders and so on. This is done by moving their mouse and confirming actions with a simple left click on the action of choice. TUTORIAL Sigma Theory: Global Cold War had quite a thorough tutorial. Although the tutorial is not explicit about its existence, players are made aware of the game’s mechanics, how they work and given a chance to interact with said mechanics. Furthermore, the tutorial happens in sequences, meaning each time a player performs a certain action a dialogue box from their in-game character will come up on the screen to provide an explanation. RECRUITMENT Recruitment is important in Sigma Theory, as agents are the player’s lifeblood. The player has to recruit a team of four special agents from fifty unique unlockable characters to support their missions. Each comes with their own story, motivations, and traits that define their behavior during missions. In addition, with particular characters the player will have to convince them to join their team, thus it is important to pay attention to their files if the character decides to ask why they should join their team. ESPIONAGE Once the player’s team is ready, they can assign them missions around the world to gather scientists, discover compromising documents on local politicians, and more. Furthermore, the player needs to exploit their agent’s abilities to seduce, mani[CENSORED]te and bribe if targets are to be persuaded to their side or neutralized. In addition, some characters have arrest warrants in particular countries and it is vital the player does not send them to these countries. COUNTER-ESPIONAGE In Sigma Theory other nations will also use their agents to infiltrate the player’s country and seize their scientists. Therefore, the player will have to track, capture and interrogate them to gain information on their enemies. Thereafter, the player can then exchange them for ransom when they are no longer useful. EXFILTRATION The player can order their agents to exfiltrate scientists recruited to their cause during gripping turn-based exfiltration phases through the world’s greatest capitals. Furthermore, the player will have to choose the position of their drones wisely, as they will support their agent during these delicate missions. DIPLOMACY In Sigma Theory, diplomacy is the key to the player achieving their goals. The player will meet their foreign counterparts, which will either set back or further their objectives. This is done through the use of flattery, threats or blackmail. Furthermore, the player can also recover their captured agents, advance their research, and much more through the game’s diplomacy mechanic. TECH TREE In Sigma Theory: Global Cold War the theory is the cause of this cold war. Therefore, the player has to rally scientists from around the world to their cause to discover new technologies which will lead to gaining a necessary edge and change the world. This means the player could discover mind control, perhaps destabilize the world economy, invent robot soldiers, and much more. GRAPHIC AND AUDIO Sigma Theory: Global Cold War is a turn-based strategy game, meaning graphically and audially it could deliver quite well. Sigma Theory certainly does deliver on both ends. Graphically, the game uses modern graphics and embeds it with espionage aesthetic. This aesthetic improves the theme of the game, as it adds an immersive quality to it. In addtion, the character portraits and busts were quite polished, however, they lacked a liveliness which could have added more to the game.

It pays to be up-front about this: Narcos is not your typical IP adaptation. The concept of law agents vs criminals is solid, the use of the TV series unique quirks creates a great atmosphere, and the production values are, surprisingly, quite high. Unfortunately, it is also severely undermined by two small design decisions that turn the whole game into an unfortunate slog. Narcos: Rise of the Cartels is a turn-based strategy game similar to XCOM, but where you only move one unit per activation in an IGO/UGO style a la Warhammer 40,000: Mechanicus. Featuring two campaigns covering the illegal enterprises of the Narcos and the legal overtures of the United States’s DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration -- not 'Agency', as the game wrongly states), the title allows you to alternate between both sides of the conflict at your leisure, using separate save games to keep things clean. The first thing that hits you when you launch the game is how closely it tries to emulate the TV series. The intro video features an interesting montage similar to the Netflix show’s opening, narrated by someone who does a very good job of sounding like Agent Murphy in both delivery and tone. As soon as the main menu appears, the theme song by Brazilian musician Rodrigo Amarante kicks in, lending an undeniable air of authenticity to the proceedings. Unfortunately, that’s about as far as it goes. The game itself is heavily focused on tactical engagements of the player's 6-man squad versus large numbers of hostiles. Unlike XCOM, Narcos only allows you to move and shoot a single soldier at a time through the use of only two 'resources' -- an action point for shooting, reloading, and using abilities; and a movement point for things such as moving or resting to regain health. Narcos changes the formula slightly by replacing the now-classic Overwatch with something called 'Counteract': a charge-like ability that allows you to manually fire -- third person shooter style -- at any enemy that enters your field of vision. The mechanics of using this ability are a little bit convoluted; you recharge half of a full token for every movement/action point not used. The Counteract only recharges on one of the six units you have selected at the end of the turn, which makes everything unbelievably slow. Alternating activations is a legitimate design choice for tactical games, like in Mechanicus. BattleTech uses it as well, but the key is to design around it to keep things engaging. Narcos’ limitations in terms of its own design choices make it much, much less tactical -- and fun -- than contemporary titles. By shoehorning dozens of abilities into two choices that are immediately reacted to by an enemy unit, the game forbids any sort of interplay, ambush, or tactical manoeuvre from being executed. Instead, it behaves more like high-stakes chess, and it ends up being a painfully slow, frustrating experience that discourages more advanced strategies. The mix of 'one unit per turn' and movement/action point resources actually work against each other, and often means that you only move one or two units out of the six in your squad. Most enemies will start holding defensive positions and then charge forward as you approach, which makes it impractical to waste six turns moving six people into position as the enemy freely takes potshots at the person who ends up closest. This person is unable to do anything further without wasting the turn for every other member of the squad. This also means that once within weapons range, engagements become duels with very few options besides attacking or falling back. The most annoying thing about this arrangement is that it slows down gameplay to the point where most missions are long, largely unexciting affairs. It’s like the developers played other tactical strategy games and took all the wrong lessons. XCOM is often hailed as a ‘gold-standard’ for games like these, and perhaps it’s a tad unfair to compare it against what is essentially a tie-in game designed to raise awareness for a TV show; but it’s surprising how easy developers in general (not just the Narco devs Kuju) tend to miss the point of what made XCOM so good. The constraints imposed by the design decisions feel very misguided, which is a shame because there’s still a lot to like about Rise of the Cartels. The combat abilities are interesting and seem to be trying to make up for the lack of tactical freedom: Passive skills like extra Counteracts or free actions on kills, active items like frag grenades, even the ability to give Counteract tokens to surrounding units. In order to keep those all balanced, Narcos divides soldiers into six different classes that are mirrored on each side of the conflict (DEA’s Grenadiers are the Narcos’ Specialists, for example). The squad management part happens outside missions, in a token management layer called the 'war room'.

Warhammer: Chaos & Conquest Review Warhammer: Chaos & Conquest iOS and Android mobile game is a new strategy game set in the Warhammer universe. It is published by Tilting Point and was released just a few days ago. However, the game already amassed quite the following and overly positive reviews on both Google Play and the iTunes App Store. It is free-to-play, with in-app purchases of course, in a familiar strategy environment, so we are intrigued as to why has the game reaped such critical success. Tilting Point The publisher of Warhammer: Chaos & Conquest mobile game, Tilting Point, is a games partner which focuses on providing development studios with lucrative investments, good financial plans, publishing options, and so far they’ve had great success with FTP games. They are behind such titles as TerraGenesis – Space Settlers, Dino Bash – Dinosaurs v Cavemen Tower Defense Wars, and other. Reviews and scores in stores On the Google Play store, Warhammer: Chaos & Conquest Android version has a 4.2-star rating with almost 6k votes and positive comments. However, its version on the iTunes App Store, Warhammer: Chaos & Conquest iOS for iPhone and iPad, has smaller vote count and therefore the sample is not presentable, though it is overly positive with clean 5 stars so far. Story Over the ages, the old world was in many wars. The Chaos Worshipers were the deadliest of armies in the old wars. Now, long after the conflicts, Dark God followers rise again to fight and try to achieve what they could now. They rally under the strongest of Chaos Lords, which is where you come in as the player. You are one of these Chaos Lords and you gather your chaos armies on your march to Norsca, where you aim to conquer the ultimate prize – the empire of man. You need to sack their capital city and take your place as the Everchosen of Chaos. Gameplay Warhammer: Chaos & Conquest Mobile game pretty much functions as a familiar strategy game. It is along the lines of the well-known genre hit games like Game of War and Mobile Strike. It does bring some improved features, but in a nutshell, that is the game you should expect. Warhammer: Chaos & Conquest is actually aimed to be the next MMO strategy competitive experience for the fans of the genre who want to start fresh and gain ground in this title which is at its infancy. Graphics and Appereance Warhammer games have always had an interesting and kind of a minimalistic take on the appearance. However, this is not the case with Warhammer: Chaos & Conquest mobile game, as it is pretty much-done hand in hand with the latest trends. It is flashy and smooth, the lighting and the textures really bring about the immersive atmosphere of a chaos-consumed hellish world. The models are attractive and cool, especially the demon heroes. Overall, graphics are impressive, no doubt about it. Final Verdict As said, Warhammer: Chaos & Conquest is meant to be a new and improved take on the familiar and beloved strategy genre. The game does not intend to fix things that are not broken, which is a good thing of course. It is an upgrade in terms of graphics and the engine, but the goodness of the genre is intact. Since the game is very young, it represents a good opportunity for veterans of the genre to grab a foothold early on. Also, it is a good chance for new players to jump in. Lastly, the game’s in-app purchase system does function like in other competitive strategy games before, but it appears to be less necessary or less pay-to-win if you will.

V2 text&effect good job