Struggle in Russia - v3 Chapter 903 unhappy

Twenty years after the birth of the "Fortress" series, it has gradually consolidated its interesting position as a combination of city building and management games and traditional real-time strategy games. The latest work "Fortress: The Separation of Heroes" still continues the traditional design of the series on the basis of adding a few new mechanisms. Players are going to the East of the Middle Ages this time. However, as an RTS (real-time strategy game), this work seems to retain the style of some ancient works. As a city construction and management game, although it is simple and easy to play and the experience is more interesting, it always seems to conflict with the ultimate goal of conquering the enemy.

The biggest difference between the same works in the "Fortress" series and RTS such as "Warcraft" and "StarCraft" is to further subvert your understanding of the concept of "space". You're going to turn an empty land into a metropolis full of traffic...but that's when no one comes to burn, kill, and loot. Not only do you have to consider natural resources, but the location of resource collection points can also have a significant impact on your economy; the happiness of your people also depends on how far they live from the temple. In the process of building, you really need to think about the planning of the future city in advance, and you also need to consider the location of the fortifications to maximize the advantages of the city's defense. The building process results in a Tetris-like gaming experience, where long-term upfront planning pays off in the end.

The entire series follows the same gameplay design described above, but Clash of Clans adds a new mechanic where you can choose to govern your people with love or fear. One type of building is torture racks and various other things that symbolize coercion. Another type of building is to make people live in peace, so that your army is loyal and the common people love you deeply. It's just that if they are too casual, it will lead to lower resource output efficiency. I like the trade-offs the game introduces, and I can keep experimenting with new strongholds on how to use different **** methods to maximize people's productivity.

It is very important to ensure that people have a certain level of happiness, because then your resource production will increase. If you want to increase taxes to train advanced troops, you must distribute food or sell silk to improve the happiness of the people. This design avoids the traditional RTS, where each city-state fortress is just a fixed icon of gold coins for building an army. However, putting these troops you raise into battle is the most important part of this game.

The best part of the combat system in Clash of Clans is the siege, whether you're on the offensive or the defensive. The various functional modules when building the city wall can be combined and matched to some very interesting tactics, which greatly improves the advantage of fighting against a large number of troops. If you know a thing or two about the design of the castle in reality, you can build the city wall in the game to be impregnable. It's fun to think about how to take down an enemy's fortress, spy on its weaknesses, choose the right time to attack, and more. On the other hand, fighting on the flat ground is less fun.

There is a visible difference between the movement speed of low-level assault soldiers and later heavy armored imperial soldiers. Therefore, commanders who are familiar with the art of war can still defeat powerful opponents through mobile combat. However, these battles are still at the level of "Age of Empires" in both pace and scale. While not terrible, it's still a bit dated compared to recent RTS (Northern Lands, Total War). Moreover, the art style of this work is not very good. The buildings such as castles and pagodas are full of details and eye-catching, but the low-definition model of the soldier unit is not even as good as the original "Company of Heroes", which was released 15 years ago. game.

The six single-player campaigns add up to 6 to 10 hours long, taking players through history to a different time and region, and since most missions will limit what players can build, the game seems to be full of forces feature. In the multiplayer battle mode and the skirmish mode against the AI, the characteristics of this faction disappear. Not only is the unit list for each faction extremely similar, your swordsmen will still speak Chinese even if you're using Vietnam. Genghis Khan can recruit ninjas and samurai as easily as Japanese generals, and Japan can buy Mongol cavalry just as easily. Building units of different factions have slightly different appearance styles. But on the whole, the game spanned thousands of years, and the architecture has remained the same, which is strange.

The game's voice acting is also not very good. In particular, the main narration in the battle sounds like the old Chinese feudal bureaucrats with the poses commonly seen in European and American cartoons. While such a voice-over style is similar to previous entries in the series, it's hard not to feel awkward uttering these words from the mouth of a non-European character. The voices of the leaders of the various factions, although slightly exaggerated, are not as comical as his.

But at least the types of missions are diverse, and many famous battles in history are restored. This game is not a strictly historical game, but they make these historical battles more interesting by building elements~www.novelbuddy.com~ Several battles require you to command the army and capture the castle without replenishing troops. Other missions simply require you to develop the economy while defending the castle. The latter game experience is the most interesting, especially after you absorb the surrounding AI warlords as vassals through force or diplomacy, it can bring many benefits. Therefore, I prefer to add a protracted battle mode to the encounter mode and multiplayer battle mode. Adding such a design can carry forward the excellent gameplay of "Separation of Heroes" and bring almost unlimited replayability.

Overall review

Fortress is the most casual and fun way to play when building cities or defending against enemy sieges. However, the construction gameplay of this work is better than the RTS gameplay. But aside from an almost unlimited free-build mode, there's not much else. The apparently outdated character modeling is so ugly, I can't help but wonder if there's really no money for art for a game of this budget. Several historically based campaigns bring some interesting quests, but in multiplayer and skirmish modes, the gameplay is designed to blend such a vast area, spanning a long history, and multiple factions. , can be said to be the failure of this work. I don't regret putting in the time to play Stronghold: Fallout, but there's nothing memorable about this game either. Advantages The "Fortress" series focuses on the eastern civilization for the first time. Excellent design of siege battles and more realistic RTS experience. Disadvantages: Poor modeling quality and poor picture quality

Fortress is the most casual and fun way to play when building cities or defending against enemy sieges. However, the construction gameplay of this work is better than the RTS gameplay. But aside from an almost unlimited free-build mode, there's not much else. Text/KamuiYe