Real fights are not telegraphed, and do not have units responding to a voice on high dictating their precise positioning. This is played off as comedic (and it is, believe me) but it also feels more honest than most games of strategic combat. Scenarios become trial-and-error explorations of what military makeup can counter the opposition, and finding that swapping a few archers for Viking berserkers can change the entire tide of battle.
Restarting a scenario repeatedly can lead to wildly different outcomes, which are in turn further exponentially changed by the addition or removal of a couple units.
It’s a simulator of combat and most of the moment-to-moment gameplay is determined by each individual unit’s AI. This is not a real-time strategy game, it’s not much of a strategy game at all. This is the fun of the game, and coincidentally its most true-to-title feature. It is as much strategy as it is random chance, as even a well-constructed counter-army is made up of individual AI units deciding when to swing their pitchforks or fire off their flaming arrows. In these, players are given an allowance of points to spend on units from across the game’s retinue of soldiers. There is a sandbox mode, where armies can be freely constructed and then fired off at one another to clash somewhere in the middle of the arena, as well as a number of designed scenarios in Battle Simulator’s Campaign and Challenge modes. It’s a simple game, in its current early access form. The game follows developer Landfall Studios’ Totally Accurate Battlegrounds, and the titles' similarities are purposeful: Both games emphasized their physics-based animations as a source of gleeful chaos, but where Battlegrounds was a first person shooter taking heavy inspiration from PlayerUnknown’s take on the genre, Battle Simulator embraces the god-game perspective, giving players full camera control as their hodgepodge armies of chronologically-disassociated units advance on enemy forces.
0 kommentar(er)
