82 of 115 people (71%) found this review helpful 8 people found this review funny
28.3 hrs on record
Posted: October 19, 2014
Before i start - keep in mind that many reviews have been posted before Multiplayer was abandoned by the developers. Anyway:
Order of War is a game of deloying units and taking flags - there is no base building.
It has some good features:
*There is a certain level of tactical gameplay. This is pretty much simply decision-making about which reinforcements will be needed to counter your enemy's deployments. *The units have a solid WW2 feel if not a little aged in graphical quality. *There is a good variety of units with various infantry, motorised and armoured units to choose from. Adding to this there is a limited selection of air units available that can be countered by anti-air units. *There is satisfaction to be had from breaking through the enemy front line and advancing to the next objective (objective meaning 'flag' because the game is essentially 'capture the flag').
Order of War however also has some issues that in my opinion stop this 2/5 game being rated maybe a 3/5 or 4/5.
*There is no Multiplayer any longer. By lack of Multiplayer I also mean no LAN either. This is a major show-stopper as the game seems almost geared towards Multiplayer than Single player. I can see the potential that Multiplayer would turn the routine flag stealing from a tactically-naive AI into an epic struggle of egos. * The campaign feels a bit routine and by the numbers. It is a fairly monotone experience of basically capturing and defending flags. *So with no Multiplayer at all and a join-the-dots campaign we need a good skirmish experience to compensate. The Skirmish option allows some limited customisation but simply borrows campaign maps, uses them as a blank canvas and asks you to capture all the flags - a victory theme we are getting a little too used to in this game. And to limit things even further the developers offer you only a handful of maps.
Don't get me wrong. If you like WW2 RTS games you will still have some fun with elements of this game, but it will only be a temporary distraction from games with more replayability.
I would highly recommend the game if the developers simply:
Added more skirmish maps and make skirmish more customisable. & Re-implemented LAN and/or MP capability. Why, when developers shut down servers, do they not replace online Multiplay with LAN is beyond me.
It's thumbs down until they restore at least LAN to the game and add some more content. The game feels half-baked.
21 of 22 people (95%) found this review helpful 2 people found this review funny
129.3 hrs on record
Posted: May 10
With all my sincere respect for the developer of this WWII strategy game, Wargaming-dot-net studio, I'm having a hard time with actually recommending this game. At least there, on Steam, with its current unpatched state. You see, this game heavily suffers from the memory leakage bug, which ends up in crushing after every mission or even during the long ones (especially when they interrupted by videoclips). There is a cure, sure, but you have to look for it yourself, and it will not be a quick search. So I clearly understand some of the people, who wants to buy that game, but Not-On-Steam, considering the fact Steam is really, really Slow with updating non-mainstream games, even if it's obvious gems like Fallout 1&2, which was unplayable on Steam (with modern system) for several years!
Now, when I said that, let's get on with an actual review. Order of War is an interesting approach on the field of modern strategies, when everyone knows one-two games, three at most. So, generally, no, it is not like the Company of Heroes, totally another scale, more like in the Total War... quite different in details, but close at feeling out of the game session. For many people, Order of War is looking like World in Conflict... well, yeah, there are some common points, like lack of many core elements of "classic" strategies, like building units, push-pull struggle for resources and other "micromanagement" - all gone. You have some regiments under your command, and for successful operations, you'll be gaining some "points" to upgrade your troops (for better attack, defence etc.) Sometimes there will be small tasks like to conquer 2-3 AA-guns or bunkers, and 1-2 squads for you, and sometimes you'll be ordering full front assault for dozens of tanks, managing large scale army successes. And all that according to history books: paratroopers landing and storming the coasts in Northern France, stalemate at Bulge, and all other noticable operations - all there. I've seen some whinings from people who trying to play for Nazies, like "upgrades costs too much, there are less reinforcements and resources for Germans, that's not fair!" Oh, yeah, it's fair. Here's a short morale lesson: it is always easier on Bad side at first, and miles-harder at finish. And in the year 1944 it was almost the end end of Nazi conquest, their numbers were greatly diminished at East, their productions were at pieces thanks to Allies bombardments... no doubt it is Hard to play for Germans at 1944! Well, think of it as of challenge: a hardest level of it. Save every soldier possible, maneuver like Mars himself, and fight like Leonidas to secure the borders of Vaterland... and postpone the unevitable.
Other than disbalance between sides (which Was really nerfed in skirmishes, BTW), the only real blame I've seen from people about Order of War is that by terms of gameplay you just gotta send your troops straight on frontal assault, every time. That remark shows really how far those critics moved into the game... as that tactic works in first mission, and partly in second. They are kind of tutorial, see - so the player get the flow, such as effective distance of fire, grenade throws, effectiveness and weak points of artilliry and tanks... First mission is forgiving the errors, but if you can't catch the drift, you'll be lost very quickly (maybe the easy setting is different, but who's playing strategies on easy?)
Okay, in the end, I recommend Order of War to all people who have any interest in real-time strategies. There are not enough of them now, as you know... This game provides real battlefields of WWII, with realistic maps of battlefields and ability to resize the view from very close one, where you notice projectiles flying over the ground, to the mile-high-observation post, to see the whole town at once - and your units sieging it from all sides, for example. Also, there are quite enough background info to sink in, as usual in the games from Wargaming, so think of it as of history discourse of sort. The level of challenge is raising from mission to mission, so, even when you see all the map from the start of mission, that certainly doesn't mean you see all on it. That means the game is not simple as it seems at start, when you don't notice "fog of war" and shouldn't count the reinforcements. It's all comes later, when you presumably learned the basics.
The only real downside is that that game has no particular reason to buy it through Steam. If you'll find another source, where you'll be knowing that memory leak problem is already taken care of - maybe it would be better choise to get it there. Mark 7.2/10.
24 of 30 people (80%) found this review helpful 2 people found this review funny
52.8 hrs on record
Posted: January 19, 2014
Order of War is an awesome WWII strategy game, it has decent graphics giving you a better feel for the game. This game puts you in command of the American, Soviet and Nazi German war machines. Its simular to the Company of Heroes series but in a wider scale. Its a real test for your skills in strategy and over all its an awesome game which I definetly recommend!
Played it long ago, good and bad game. Was considered a flop by companies but most still held it as a fun time killer. Good graphics for a old game and fun units, annoying slow painful turtling through the entire game. Your units sit around and get shot at when they try to fight and make NO effort to evade.
10 of 13 people (77%) found this review helpful 3 people found this review funny
11.2 hrs on record
Posted: October 8, 2014
I like it so far, Ive only played skirmishes so far and they are very good I love the huge infantry-tank charges. To bad its not multiplayer anymore. But I recommend it to people who like Massive warfare, but you may think it looks complex but its really not if you've played any Total War games, or Men of War, or Company or Heros, Ect...
This is an ok game, has some nice touches in it with a lot of unit variety. It's basically as another reviewer said Company of Heroes but a big scale (for example your tank units come with 5 in each section) so you feel like a real General rather than a company commander. It's also in my opinion more realistic in some ways - infantry get slaughtered, tanks get knocked out pretty quickly vs the right defences like anti tank guns or tank destroyers and artillery really does play havoc when it lands accurately. You can play as either the Americans invading Normandy or the Germans fighting on the Eastern front in the campaign. In Skirmish mode you can play as America, Germany and the USSR (Russia) which gives nice unit look variety.
However there is still a lot to be desired - the gameplay does become easily boring as it's pretty much the same. You call in reinforcements using credits you earn from capture points (no base building) and can win every map just by dominating in artillery if you plan it right. In some maps I only needed one tank unit and the rest was anti tank guns and artillery destroying everything that moved. Units like infantry are basically obsolete and they will be wiped out the second anything fires so it doesn't allow many tactics apart from tank rushing in my opinion. The units are pretty much identical however for all nations - I've not noticed any special tactics or way of playing myself.
Overall if it's on sale (around half the asking price now) it is certainly worth a buy and you'll get a good few hours out of it.
I also have read that the multiplayer has gone offline - while this doesn't bother me personally that would be a downside for most. The option still is in the menu though so I'm not sure what is going on with that.
9 of 12 people (75%) found this review helpful 1 person found this review funny
35.4 hrs on record
Posted: March 25, 2014
Game is ok, nothing more nothing less, but considering it's cheap it's a must for every rts fan even though it has oversimplified unit commands and is only a challenge due to poorly designed missions. Wargaming does have a lot of lessons to learn.
When I bought this game I thought it will be similar, or identic, to Company of Heroes, or Men of War. Happily I were mistaken. The way Order of War handles some features is unique. I like the unit size and conflict size which is completely new thing to me when it comes to world war II strategy games. It reminds me of tabletop miniature games like Warhammer 40k, or Flames of War, where whole unit of tanks or vehicles is controlled.
On the other side there are some things lacking on physics and the game system. Vehicles and infantry could cooperate bit more. Another thing I would like to see is mechanized infantry using halftracks and stuff like that. Also the role of normal infantry is a bit lacking, as Infantry automatically starts crawling as they approach the enemy.
When it comes to my final opinion... I like this game. There are definitely ways to improve it, but I give it a good mark.