I completely disagree with your take on the graphics. I love the 3d units. I wish more games would try to step out of the 1970s boradgame visual and try for a more modern aesthetic.
Exactly.I found his 3D comment ridiculous and just plain WRONG. I it MUCH better with 3D.Otherwise I would NOT want ot play a 1980's looking game thank you very much! I love the look the game has.spare and yet informational with character- Perfect!!
This is a very elegant game, I find the game challenging and fun at the same time, with an easy learning curve. I've even made my own scenario's very easily. Great game I would highly recommend it.
As a follower of your's Mr Fish I felt compelled to reply lol. I just loathe turn based combat ala board game mechanics with a passion. Will only play games with real time combat.
There are mp tournaments (one has just started with four eras and multiple divisions in each era). Some turns take around 10 mins so PBEM works well for this game.
@@simonlancaster1815 yeh not very fast game so you need to organize a match before, finding a guy in queque ready to pass 1 hour for a single battle is not very probable...
Had they only thrown into this game even a minimal strategic map---nothing too serious, just even a city and some towns around it (like hegemony 3) and make the battles these---would have been my favorite strategic game.
This game is really fun. I wish I'd found it when it was first released. I strongly prefer it to total war (for me, it's much easier to control units).
Ageod are making field of glory Empires and they teamed up with Byzantine to make the tactical battles exportable to this game. I can't wait till it comes out.
The gameplay is very similar to the tabletop "Field of Glory" and the troups basing reflect this. The 3D aspect helps to recreate the miniature game and moving around gives you a better grasp of terrain. The thing I wish they had done is to bring the 15mm visual of the units to 6mm or even 2mm to give a better taste of scale of battle, at leas as an option. The game itself is pretty light, so graphics should not be a problem for a moderately modern PC.
i would strongly request that you take a look at the game called ultimate general: civil war which is made by darth. The guy behind many great mods for total war. Its a really good game! its has that epic feel like total war (but no DLC nonsense :P)
Isn't this just an adaptation of the tabletop rules? FoG was super popular a few years ago, I think they are about to release a new rules book. That and DBA at 15mm scale are great.
Hi! Answering to this, let me quote the developer "“Field of Glory II is a complete reboot of the franchise, based on the original tabletop Field of Glory rules as a starting point, rather than on Field of Glory I” says Richard Bodley Scott, the main designer of Field of Glory 2. “There are therefore many differences from FOG1 - which we hope are all improvements. Being co-author of the original tabletop game, I am in a unique position to create a fresh take on the system”. If you like, you can check this thread for more details: www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=477&t=78154
Great game check out pike and shot and Sengoku Jidai they are the same kind of turn based table too game from the same publisher set in medieval Japan and 16th century Europe and the religious wars during the period. Great stuff love fields of glory 1 and 2
For me, the main thing that the game is lacking is a proper soundtrack music, and that's probably why I prefer Sengoku Jidai Shadow of The Shogun, otherwise it's a great game with a very solid gameplay
I'm going to buy the complete collection in the winter sale on Steam.. Thank you I am convinced seems like a lot of fun to play I have almost all Historical strategy games. But this one seems less exhausting to me than Total War You have to think fast, it's beautiful But a relaxed is welcome think this is it (;
To me is seems "lower" quality than their previous titles pike&shot / sengoku jidai - maybe it's because before they had a "cluster" of men in each unit and now it's like 6-8?
I like it more now cuz u see how many losses they take visually..8 full, 4 almost 50% casualties..6 is like 25% casualties and so on..so even visually you know when a unit is reaching 50% casualties and the almost certain auto-rout destiny., you know if you are facing a full unit or not etc....its cool..maybe putting 10-12 instead of 8 would be better..but then you wouldn't see the models like in Sengoku Jidai...
I'm fine with it being 3D, but I don't particularly like the look of the models. I play Pike and Shot, also by Byzantine Games, and I prefer the style in that game where it is in 3d but displays a great mass of infantry rather than 8 total war style figures. In either case it is an abstraction, but I like the site of the big blocks of men, they don't wave their arms around to fight but they look like a big unit of men might look from above.
They feel pretty unique to me, you can see the list of roman units and there's just as much for Carthaginian, greek, egyptian and barbarian with a few variations for the different time periods.
realistic but unique..but realistic..don't expect Total war bullshit where Elephants are unbeatable or Spartan Hoplites are immortal..a sword is a sword, it will still kill your soldiers and you won't find silly "magic traits", most important things are armour/quality of troops and morale. And these vary a lot depending on units and nations. The game is more about the battle tactics than OP units.
Here you can find some details on the game modes ( www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=477&t=78642 ) and here the full list of the over 70 army lists available in case some of you wanted to know ( www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=477&t=78924 )
I really enjoyed your video and the explanation of the game's stile. I have been on the fence since the first Field of Glory came out. After watching and listening to your explanation I believe I am sold on the game now. Again, great job and keep up the good work.
This guy is too biased toward his likes and dislikes instead of telling what a great game an improvement it is over Field of Glory I. This is a superb game with perfect graphics for the type of game it is. He's some young punk that is more of a graphics hore than seeing the game for what it is and does an improves upon. Don't listen to anything he says except buy and play the game.
Overly harsh comment and your personal attacks do yourself no favours. Whether it is an improvement on an earlier iteration is frankly irrelevant. You should assess a product on its own merits. Graphics being good/suitable are to a large extent subjective. After clarity and function are satisfied, the rest is personal taste. I very much like the style and consider it fits the game well; but I can see why others may not like the "miniatures" effect.
A review is subjective, not objective. I agree you should probably review what’s there, but if you feel like something is lacking that’s valuable to people too.
"routing after 30-50% casualties"..which is realistic...if they wanted to be super realistic, sometimes units would flee just by seeing the enemy deploying or when they see reinforcements, or if they see a lighting in the sky..or because who the fuck knows..or just after 10% casualties...in real life deaths were a lot less than in modern games in most engagements unless one side overwhelmed the other.
If you want an awesome hysterically realistic game where your strategic military thinking is rewarded well and you can experience being an ancient general leading their army into battle by using realistic battle strategies from the distant past, no.
This game is a BIG shit! Never seen a wargame cheating like this! It is not a matter of winning, I win! But looking the lack of AI cheating on rout mouvement or unit rallying just on time to take your flank, or death of your General, just to give you challenge is BORING! Forget it!
Don't agree. You might not like ugoigo turn based systems, but for me, they work a treat. I enjoy real time games and chaotic activation games as well. The more variety the better. Don't try and kill of one form simply because you don't personally like it.
Massively disappointed in the Game Play, Cavalry under powered to the point of being nearly useless. It does not take many rounds of a Player encountering situations like Cataphracts being disadvantaged against Medium (lightly armored and Loose order) infantry to realize that the designers seem to have had no actually knowledge of Ancient Military history and a predetermined result in their minds. I would love to ask one of the Devs just why would anyone in the Ancient world go to the massive expense of Training and Fielding an Armored Horseman; when a man in a Leather Jerken with a Short Spear and small shield is far superior to that proto knight. Its utterly Ridiculous. A great many people seem to enjoy the game. And if you strictly play the Romans or other Infantry Dominant armies its may be worth your time. If your at all interested in anything like a historical result; your not going to come close. Personally I'm sorry I wasted my Money on this Terrible adaption of Miniatures Wargaming to the PC.
I have a confession. I like looking at maps.
+Wulfgar a lot of people do!
I completely disagree with your take on the graphics. I love the 3d units. I wish more games would try to step out of the 1970s boradgame visual and try for a more modern aesthetic.
Exactly.I found his 3D comment ridiculous and just plain WRONG. I it MUCH better with 3D.Otherwise I would NOT want ot play a 1980's looking game thank you very much! I love the look the game has.spare and yet informational with character- Perfect!!
Yea, love the game, but would really love to see this combat engine be linked to a campaign system such as total war.
A year later and your wish came true
Yeah take a look at Field of Glory Empires. It's made by Ageod and they teamed up with Byzantine to make their battles exportable to Field of Glory 2
The 3d graphics to its benifit makes it look more like a table top wargame
Essential part of any tabletop battle: admiring the paint job on your opponents minis 😄
@@OneofInfinity. Ouch, too much truth.
I preferred the Pike and Shot style, felt more like a battlefield instead of a tabletop.
This is a very elegant game, I find the game challenging and fun at the same time, with an easy learning curve. I've even made my own scenario's very easily. Great game I would highly recommend it.
The strategy is great in the game I just wish the multiplayer was more functional.
I only had one battle in it and it worked out fine for me, but found it hard to find someone to play with :P
1vs1 me scrub
As a follower of your's Mr Fish I felt compelled to reply lol. I just loathe turn based combat ala board game mechanics with a passion. Will only play games with real time combat.
There are mp tournaments (one has just started with four eras and multiple divisions in each era). Some turns take around 10 mins so PBEM works well for this game.
@@simonlancaster1815 yeh not very fast game so you need to organize a match before, finding a guy in queque ready to pass 1 hour for a single battle is not very probable...
Had they only thrown into this game even a minimal strategic map---nothing too serious, just even a city and some towns around it (like hegemony 3) and make the battles these---would have been my favorite strategic game.
Take a look at Field of Glory Empires, Ageod have made a great empire game and allowed you to export the battles to this game for tactical play.
This game is really fun. I wish I'd found it when it was first released. I strongly prefer it to total war (for me, it's much easier to control units).
God I wish Civilisation had this kind of combat system.
Try Spartan Gates of Troy.
Anyone interested should check out Field of Glory - Empires. It allows its battles to be exported to FoG2. A little cumbersome, but it works.
really an awesome game if the devs implemented a campaign map were u can create/manage your own empire.
They are working on this, check out: Fields of Glory: Empire.
Ageod are making field of glory Empires and they teamed up with Byzantine to make the tactical battles exportable to this game. I can't wait till it comes out.
Love your little in character dialogue about the flank :)
Stuff like that is always floating through my head when playing games.
The gameplay is very similar to the tabletop "Field of Glory" and the troups basing reflect this. The 3D aspect helps to recreate the miniature game and moving around gives you a better grasp of terrain.
The thing I wish they had done is to bring the 15mm visual of the units to 6mm or even 2mm to give a better taste of scale of battle, at leas as an option. The game itself is pretty light, so graphics should not be a problem for a moderately modern PC.
i can see a lot of warhammer mod potential here
Came across as a very fair and openminded review. Very good. Subscribed.
This looks like a wet dream for a tabletop wargamer looking for a pc fix (e.g.: myself)
It seems like a nice game and very nice video, do more like that o/
i would strongly request that you take a look at the game called ultimate general: civil war which is made by darth. The guy behind many great mods for total war.
Its a really good game! its has that epic feel like total war (but no DLC nonsense :P)
I've played the shit out of it is great
I remember playing something similar in the 90s
Isn't this just an adaptation of the tabletop rules? FoG was super popular a few years ago, I think they are about to release a new rules book. That and DBA at 15mm scale are great.
Hi! Answering to this, let me quote the developer "“Field of Glory II is a complete reboot of the franchise, based on the original tabletop Field of Glory rules as a starting point, rather than on Field of Glory I” says Richard Bodley Scott, the main designer of Field of Glory 2. “There are therefore many differences from FOG1 - which we hope are all improvements. Being co-author of the original tabletop game, I am in a unique position to create a fresh take on the system”. If you like, you can check this thread for more details: www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=477&t=78154
excellent job..........I really enjoyed the way you described the game.
8:49 OMG charging in melee... CA pls fix... oh wait...
Hope to see more in this series ;-)
Loved this video. Great review 👍👍👍👍
If you ever played Spartan Gates of Troy you definitely should try FoG2.
Great game check out pike and shot and Sengoku Jidai they are the same kind of turn based table too game from the same publisher set in medieval Japan and 16th century Europe and the religious wars during the period. Great stuff love fields of glory 1 and 2
For me, the main thing that the game is lacking is a proper soundtrack music, and that's probably why I prefer Sengoku Jidai Shadow of The Shogun, otherwise it's a great game with a very solid gameplay
dope vid my dude
Thanks for posting
I'm going to buy the complete collection in the winter sale on Steam.. Thank you I am convinced seems like a lot of fun to play I have almost all Historical strategy games. But this one seems less exhausting to me than Total War You have to think fast, it's beautiful But a relaxed is welcome think this is it (;
Hope you enjoy!
To me is seems "lower" quality than their previous titles pike&shot / sengoku jidai - maybe it's because before they had a "cluster" of men in each unit and now it's like 6-8?
I like it more now cuz u see how many losses they take visually..8 full, 4 almost 50% casualties..6 is like 25% casualties and so on..so even visually you know when a unit is reaching 50% casualties and the almost certain auto-rout destiny., you know if you are facing a full unit or not etc....its cool..maybe putting 10-12 instead of 8 would be better..but then you wouldn't see the models like in Sengoku Jidai...
I'm fine with it being 3D, but I don't particularly like the look of the models. I play Pike and Shot, also by Byzantine Games, and I prefer the style in that game where it is in 3d but displays a great mass of infantry rather than 8 total war style figures. In either case it is an abstraction, but I like the site of the big blocks of men, they don't wave their arms around to fight but they look like a big unit of men might look from above.
Reminds me a bit of Sid Meier's Pirates! land battles.
Its more immersive and engaging in 3-D
How varied are the factions in this? Are they copy/paste of each other or are they unique?
They feel pretty unique to me, you can see the list of roman units and there's just as much for Carthaginian, greek, egyptian and barbarian with a few variations for the different time periods.
realistic but unique..but realistic..don't expect Total war bullshit where Elephants are unbeatable or Spartan Hoplites are immortal..a sword is a sword, it will still kill your soldiers and you won't find silly "magic traits", most important things are armour/quality of troops and morale. And these vary a lot depending on units and nations. The game is more about the battle tactics than OP units.
This game is free right now on steam
Here you can find some details on the game modes ( www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=477&t=78642 ) and here the full list of the over 70 army lists available in case some of you wanted to know ( www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=477&t=78924 )
When it's on sale its cheap and the DLC is good
do FIELD OF GLORY: EMPIRES now
I already did
I really enjoyed your video and the explanation of the game's stile. I have been on the fence since the first Field of Glory came out. After watching and listening to your explanation I believe I am sold on the game now. Again, great job and keep up the good work.
It's not Bottles, but Battles
So this is like total war except its turn based?
Sort of. Its more like a board game.
It's like total war except it sucks total ass.
anyone wanna play 1v1?
This guy is too biased toward his likes and dislikes instead of telling what a great game an improvement it is over Field of Glory I. This is a superb game with perfect graphics for the type of game it is. He's some young punk that is more of a graphics hore than seeing the game for what it is and does an improves upon. Don't listen to anything he says except buy and play the game.
Overly harsh comment and your personal attacks do yourself no favours.
Whether it is an improvement on an earlier iteration is frankly irrelevant. You should assess a product on its own merits.
Graphics being good/suitable are to a large extent subjective. After clarity and function are satisfied, the rest is personal taste. I very much like the style and consider it fits the game well; but I can see why others may not like the "miniatures" effect.
Ehh not sure, looks interesting, but not impressive... there is not demo and the game costs 27 € :/
So it's basically Civ style combat with some more expanded elements and mechanics?
umm no..
Nope, it's more like XCOM... in fact it's exactly like XCOM's combat except you have 20 units to manage instead of small squads.
And also there are less gadgets and less "verticality", since the scope is much bigger. But yeah, it does remind of X-Com
It's a combat style more like Pike and shot - a game also made with the help of Slitherine.
@@Rex1987 pike and shot is pretty good too
Its missing what Rome total War 1 had. Points for moving army. It is not a great feature at all
Total war is better.
Your putting your perspective and bias on the review. You review a game for what it is not what you wish it.
A review is subjective, not objective. I agree you should probably review what’s there, but if you feel like something is lacking that’s valuable to people too.
This game is more about routing units than killing them..
Which is exactly what ancient battles were like.
Yeah that's how most battles work in real life. People don't really want to die/fight to the death. It doesn't take much to make an army run.
"routing after 30-50% casualties"..which is realistic...if they wanted to be super realistic, sometimes units would flee just by seeing the enemy deploying or when they see reinforcements, or if they see a lighting in the sky..or because who the fuck knows..or just after 10% casualties...in real life deaths were a lot less than in modern games in most engagements unless one side overwhelmed the other.
I want to like this game but its just so boring lol
If you want an awesome hysterically realistic game where your strategic military thinking is rewarded well and you can experience being an ancient general leading their army into battle by using realistic battle strategies from the distant past, no.
You racist! Not every roman is called tiberius. Jk
This game is a BIG shit! Never seen a wargame cheating like this! It is not a matter of winning, I win! But looking the lack of AI cheating on rout mouvement or unit rallying just on time to take your flank, or death of your General, just to give you challenge is BORING!
Forget it!
bro this game trash as hell
bruh
In this day and age, Ugo/Igo systems are outdated. A PC game should offer more than a board game experience from 1970.
I disagree, while I don't particularly like board games, I love turn based video games.
Don't agree. You might not like ugoigo turn based systems, but for me, they work a treat. I enjoy real time games and chaotic activation games as well. The more variety the better.
Don't try and kill of one form simply because you don't personally like it.
Massively disappointed in the Game Play, Cavalry under powered to the point of being nearly useless. It does not take many rounds of a Player encountering situations like Cataphracts being disadvantaged against Medium (lightly armored and Loose order) infantry to realize that the designers seem to have had no actually knowledge of Ancient Military history and a predetermined result in their minds. I would love to ask one of the Devs just why would anyone in the Ancient world go to the massive expense of Training and Fielding an Armored Horseman; when a man in a Leather Jerken with a Short Spear and small shield is far superior to that proto knight. Its utterly Ridiculous.
A great many people seem to enjoy the game. And if you strictly play the Romans or other Infantry Dominant armies its may be worth your time. If your at all interested in anything like a historical result; your not going to come close. Personally I'm sorry I wasted my Money on this Terrible adaption of Miniatures Wargaming to the PC.
Agree 100%
@@alexdetrojan4534 ty
Deeply flawed game. Developer not open to constructive criticism.