A wise man once said that an idiot admires complexity while a genius admires simplicity and I'm inclined to agree and so, I feel, does the creator of Field of Glory: Kingdoms - a game which, at first, appears to be as basic as they come, but with time reveals its depth through systems that have been carefully crafted to intertwine delicately, forming a synthesis that culminates in an addictive and interesting grand strategy game. There are very few levers with which you are able to manipulate the numbers that sum up your fortunes as a polity on the world map. You can build up your provinces with a novel and innovative building system, you can place effects or special bonuses with a card-draw system, you will occasionally get events to which you must react, and you can of course engage in diplomacy, the friendly sort or otherwise. Beyond that, there’s really very little else. Yet if you’re the type of person who enjoys the interplay of mechanics that are very obviously an earnest attempt to simulate the organic to-and-fro of state management - the sort that sees you make one decision this turn to see a butterfly effect result in three turns - then you’ll probably find yourself appreciating FoG:K, as I did to begin with. I also purchased the combo deal with a 2 dollar Field of Glory: Medieval, the tactical layer that, frankly, should probably be built in, which I found to be a huge improvement and something that really elevated my enjoyment with the ability to jump in to the really important battles and command them personally.

So far so positive, and you must be asking why is this a negative review. Well there are a number of parts of the game that I found to be a letdown, most of them are simply superficial and a few can be fixed - the UI is pretty substandard, the graphics leave a lot to be desired, the sound design is very poor, with a lack of music and incompetently mixed audio levels. Indeed there's a certain shoddiness that is usually forgiven of one-man indie devs and even, if one is feeling charitable, excused as being 'charming' or 'quaint', although since this is a grand strategy game and essentially a UI click-fest with all of the character being provided by the graphics and the sound design it can be difficult to find the magnanimity within oneself to do so. None of these things are deal breakers, though. They don't help, but there is a solid strategy game here and by golly if you're the type of person who purchases obscure titles with a heavy focus on historicity that only come with a tactical layer if you buy a separate, equally obscure, equally history focused game, then you probably aren't that bothered by naff graphics and a scarcity in background music. Neither am I. So, again, why the negative review?

It's the AI! It's brain dead. I've played a couple of games and both times I have found that it will act in the most ridiculous, often suicidal, fashion. I've seen that it will rarely care to defend its self properly and even when declaring war on its much stronger neighbour, the player or another AI, it will regularly do so without being even slightly prepared to follow up with any actual defence, much less an invasion. There are a number of posts on the forums of people highlighting these strange occurrences and, although usually admirably involved with the community, the developer will very rarely reply to these types of threads. I feel, perhaps cynically, that this is because this sort of thing might sadly be irremediable. I hope not. I very much enjoy the game and would love to come back to it, but this is a deal breaker for me and until it is fixed I see no point in playing. I will certainly keep an eye on the game and should I see that there has been an attempt to remedy the situation then I will certainly reinstall the game to see whether such efforts bear fruit. If they do I will update this review to positive.

This is a review from the perspective of a previous player of FOG:Empires, the precedessor game title for FOG:Kingdoms. Both are WEGOs, and you may dislike them, or completely fall in love with them as units go about their own all at the same time on the map. WEGO is far superior, although it can be frustrating and difficult at times making a bad move and suffer the consequences!

Disclaimer: I was a beta participant early 2023 with two builds, and lately, about a month before launch.

Bottom line: Obviously, if you liked FOG:Empires, there is no way you can be dissatisfied with FOG:Kingdom.

What is good:
Content, content, content!
If you thought that there were not many nations that you could play in FOG:Empries, hold on your shorts.
Turn time resolution has been significantly improved over FOG:Emprires. There are almost 5x more nations that are running behind the scenes, yet, its about the same time for resolving the end of turn. Great work!

Buildings/Trade/Economy...
One of the main aspects that I love from the previous title and what has been significantly improved is how trading is intertwined with the buildings your nation can pick and how you have to build up considerably your nation before you can start waging war with your neighbours, let alone stabilise your domestic trade issues you have to figure out the first 25 turns of the Grand Campaign. Later on, Tier II buildings which are unlocked via a major Tier I building, further improves on nailing down your nation's specialisation and open the door to organising Bonus Trade Good.

Easter Eggs:
Yes, there are still hidden Easter Eggs that you can only find if you open up the XML files of the game. Thanks for the dev to keep this previous feature from FOG:Empire going on. I find that the purpose of such hidden stuff in the game is what keeps player clicking the End Turn button after 200 ish turns on a Grand Campaign, you never know which chocolate youll fall on in the box! There is also quite some thought given in the Steam Achievements. Some are hard to achieve. Think of it like the hundreds of acheivements for EUIV (Paradox Studios) and some players trying to hunt them.

RGD Regional Desicions
Also an improved mechanic. This time, each decision can be tweaked for Gold. The cost/benifit here is huge, so dont go by that one without taking some time to understand what happens. I would even say that it can be exploited a bit during the early stages of a Grand Camaing, as you can "invest" in tweaking RGD that "sells" for gold. This was added later in the beta stage development and I'm quite happy with this game mechanic.

Exporting your game in FOG:Medieval
This game wouldnt be the same with that option. I like once in a while to play that "get out of jail" free card to get myself out of a booboo I made in the Grand Campaign. WEGOs are WEGOs and unit movement can catch you if you dont understand how movement ticks occurs (to this day, I still have a hard time!). Unfortunately, there is not much demand for this feature in Multiplayer, but would greatly improve the PBEM experience, or perhaps, another game style of multiplayer games for FOG:K and FOG:M players to be more grounded on a Grand Campaign.

Other newly added features; Religion, Stewardship, Authority, Characters/Dynasty, Crusades, and other scripted events:
Great improvements on adding on these resources, currency-like elements of the game. They do all improve how buildings and nation growth organically occurs over the turns and change the flavor of the nation you have picked (merchant republics, muslim sunni or shia, christian empires).

FOG:E vs FOG:K
I wouldnt be able to not discuss about the differences and improvements!
For trade, consult my Trade Acumen guide. There are a couple of screenshots that goes over the positive and interesting changes to how Merchants now "shop" and import Trade Goods. Trade is now quantitative, and makes more sense as a limited amount of Trade Goods can be produced per structure/building.
One main aspect is the replacement of CDR (Culture Decadence Ratio) to a more time sensitive aspect of fuedalism in FOG:Kingdoms, Authority.
Its a far superior soft-currency/resource, where you both have to manage the cost-benifit of using it to improve your nation, while not falling off the tracks in how you compare to everyone else on the map and earn tokens to evolve your nation to a higher Tier. The ways of gaining or loosing Authority makes sense, as taking drastic moves have an impact at everyone present at your court, and influences diplomatic relationship to a certain extent. I would call both CDR and Authority an "anti-snowballing mechanic" and the devs have busted my expectations again with FOG:Kingdoms and how its integrated in how you play out a small merchant republic to a large ageing Empire on its last fumes.

Play-By-E-Mail PBEM Multiplayer Server
Its a game feature I largely ignored the first years of playing FOG:Empires as I really liked playing Single Player Grand Campaign, but here again devs tweaked the interface to have group/individual/public chats and keep hosting the server for free. Although games are slow, it keeps you involved and active in a game over time while the busy normal life everyone lives keep moving on. Hopefully its something that I'll be able to dedicate more time doing and perhaps start my first AAR to document my thoughts process. This is a game feature for MP that is not very much seen in large 4x titles, but perhaps only is attractive to a more mature crowd and different player base. I only wish it would get more advertised to attract more players and bring more feedback on how it functions.

What needs improvement:
MORE ART - Damn, there is just not enough. More art could be commissioned for new areas of potential updates to the UI. Its just a type of art we rarely see and from a time period that not many of us may not have studied. Its like the cherry on the sundae. Kudos for the artist(s).
Some of the interfaces, like the Regional Decisions (RGD), can be improved via a better UI. I can forsee a larger UI with a trading card feel for Regional Decisions. I perceive them as trading card like deck building games.
Other interfaces and game mechanics can be improved, like the HRE. Either there is no UI, or when there is one, its a bit bland. Many of 4x players have been accustomed to having a dedicated UI for larger nations, to have a repository of special mechanics and monitor vassals. Then more art can easily make its way into these new UIs.

What would be nice:
- PBEM is already a great MP option for anyone really, who doesnt have 5 minutes every night to get your dopamine by clicking the End Turn button?

However, as other players suggested, there is a minority of us that would like to discuss the possibility of having Battles exported to FOG:M and the results back in the PBEM server for the Grand Campaign. It could present more long-term content for streamers where they could duke it out on the map or for more engaging AARs.


- FOG:Empires future updates: I hope that some of the engine improvements gets itself thrown in FOG:E, as I probably will continue playing both games (for MP mostly) in the future. Now im just too sucked in FOG:Kingdoms and on Easter Eggs hunt mode! It was hinted on the Forums that there are plans to do so, pending on resource allocation and sales of FOG:K.

Ending:
All I can hope and wish for this game title is to have enough sales to develop new DLCs to keep on clicking the End Turn button and cross my fingers when my units move on the Grand Campaign map.

Again, a masterpeice that evolved from a "diamond in the rough" with the initial release of FOG:E to a nicely polished game with really nice art and more engaging mechanics, mini-games and resource gathering/spending with very flexible and different play styles from Faction to Faction.

Kingdoms shares considerable DNA with its predecessor, Empires, but has changed enough of the underlying mechanics to require a fresh set of strategies. If you liked Empires, you'll probably find Kingdoms initially frustrating, but also better balanced and more flexible in terms of strategic options.

One of the weaknesses of Empires was that it strongly rewarded using diplomacy in unrealistic ways. The best way to win was almost never conquest, but simply buying up territory using a surplus resource (gold for Greeks, manpower for barbarians). Kingdoms has brought conquest and diplomacy back into better balance with one another, so that neither approach strictly dominates over the other.

The resource system has gotten more complicated and opaque, which is initially frustrating but ultimately creates a deeper game. The "culture" resource from Empires is now split into "Piety" and "Stewardship", each of which have additional functions beyond simply scoring victory points ("Legacy"). Piety is used to win converts from other religions, and Stewardship is necessary to hold the loyalty of remote regions of your empire. This also creates natural checks on ahistorical expansion into distant regions of the map.

Progression is slow and *very* random, in contrast the way Empires allowed for advancement into higher tier governments by conquest of objectives. A faction that starts small will struggle to advance to a large empire before the game ends. This creates even more asymmetry in multiplayer, where some factions have substantial advantages that amount to "easy mode" (hello, Seljuqs) and others (like the tiny taifas in Spain) are tough to run. This feels more realistic from a simulationist standpoint, but also means that in multiplayer some players will be out of the running just by virtue of picking an underdeveloped faction that will might a couple hundred turns to progress beyond holding a handful of regions. (The new Authority system punishes rapid expansion.)

Gone is the Empires concept of old factions "aging out" and falling into decadence, and in this game you're more likely to see a methodical blob expansion that slowly captures large chunks of the map and holds them. This makes for less dynamic play, and feels less revolutionary. I still wish some aspect of the rotating cycle of power being driven by age had been included in the game, maybe as an optional difficulty flag. I liked the feeling in Empires that staying on top was hard, and that old factions would fall into crisis while new ones emerged to challenge them.

Another big change won't be obvious until hitting the endgame. Christian and Muslim factions are very different! Muslims have a much larger set of endgame victory-point structures, and will easily win a full campaign by building multiple Science Academies and ornate tombs. Christian factions are bit better militarily, due to tougher infantry types, and will absolutely need to support a crusade strategy of striking hard at any powerful Muslim nations in the midgame, especially in multiplayer against competent opponents. Only a few factions (like the Byzantines and maybe the Rus) are well-positioned to stop the remote Persian-based Seljuq Turks, and if a competent player isn't running one of those factions, the game can feel like a race for second place.

Sussing out how certain game mechanics work can be a matter of hundreds of hours of experimentation, and there are still events that leave me feeling confused. Why did my authority suddenly jump by 10 points due to "events"? How does character loyalty affect coup probability? You'll get a rough idea of how this works by reading the manual ("a governor with Loyalty under 75 risks a coup"), but it won't help much with precise details ("How much higher is the risk of a coup for a loyalty of 25 vs 75?")

There are a handful of bugs in the game. Several impediment structures (like bandit lairs) are supposed to be removed by basing armies in the region, but this never seems to work even after hundreds of turns, despite the claim that it should be a 20% chance each turn. Some achievements seem to refer to elements of gameplay that were never implemented or are bugged out of the current. I've yet to see a "Master Ratcatcher", or have one of my Storytellers craft an epic tale. But nothing is game-breaking.

Overall, this is a better balanced game than Empires with a deeper and more complex set of strategies to discover, if you're willing to invest the time to figure out all its new quirks.

If you regularly play games like the Paradox map games, especially EU4, or Total War Games, or you just play a bunch of different 4X games, this is a great 'alternate' game to those, maybe not to permanently swap to but to have as something you can mix up with. Compared to the previous title, FoG Empires, this game simultaneously has a bunch of cool new features which I enjoy as a returning player from that game but also simplifies things. To be able to play that game at all, on any nation, I had to read the whole manual, this time around I only played through like some of the tutorial and mostly got what I needed to.

There is the opportunity for intensive micro and optimization which if you want to do goofy stuff like do big migrations, 'funny' nations, alternate religions, challenge runs, speedruns, etc. you can get super deep into *if you want to*, but importantly there are ways of basically ignoring those micro mechanics, playing a standard nation in a more normal way, and having a good time without needing to understand how complex everything is.

Also, being able to bring your units into combat via owning FoGM2 is great, you can basically play smart and never need to do this but it's fun to do something ballsy and bring your units into an even odds battle and then see what they are actually capable of. The autoresolve system is in a good place now so it's not a mandatory purchase, it's just something which is cool. It feels very different to have an army of units where you know what all the individual unit types actually do in battle than just having a big army with a big pow number, and it also makes certain events like the military reform decisions plus unit upgrade events feel more impactful because you can imagine yourself actually using those new and improved units in a battle and having it make the strategic difference.

The reworked Authority system, which replaces the decadence system, makes a lot more sense and to me is a lot more stomachable when you understand it. The decadence system was kinda neat in encouraging players to actually invest in culture and providing direct benefits to your economy and military in making more art, but also, the historical concept behind it, though I understand many historians do advocate for it, just seems kind of gross to me and adjacent to social commentary on today which I don't find applicable. "le west has fallen" etc etc. The Authority system this game has makes a lot more sense to me as a history fanboy, it's a gauge of how authoritarian your government is, which you can compare to absolutism in EU4, and also to what degree the subjects of your domain feel compelled to listen to its head, that makes sense and fits in well with the time period and a conception of history I think most map gamers will jive with without being too gross ie the decadence system.

Overall, it's a good game and worth both the price of the game and the price of the bundle with Medieval, if it's your first from this series you only need to have the patience to follow the tutorial closely and maybe read the manual, which for this publisher is honestly a really low bar, and if you're familiar with similar games already you can probably get going immediately. Buy it.

Has potential but currently feels like a downgrade from Empires. Empires had the brilliant culture/decadence system where you felt like you were constantly balancing building a huge empire wide trade newwork with new resources you managed to conquer with trying to develop enough culture to keep your Empire from falling in to decadent ruin. It's tense, involves a lot of tradeoffs and made conquering some barbarians exciting because you went in to a rush to develop their lands so they would actually contribute to your empire.


Authority just doesn't cut it the same way, as it feels meta and abstract rather than a function of your realm. Your main ways to impact it are to just either stay below your size limit or get RNG events from your castles, which make it feel more like an explicit expansion slowdown mechanic rather than a hurdle you take in to account and interact with while expanding.



And frankly building just isn't fun currently. I enjoy the "random building" system, but it's obnoxious when the game provides no database to actually learn building chains and prereqs. Yay I got a province with tin, what can I do with that? No way of knowing until you're randomly offered a building that needs tin, at which point you can say "oh neat, I guess I could have build my province around that had I known." Now extrapolate that for tens of resources and over 600 buildings. Combine that with the fact that the world feels "built up" already (most slots on most nations are filled at the start) and instead of a cool economic minigame you get "Who cares about the 16th building in my province, I'll just grab whatever looks best." On top of that, just spamming buildings that produce the most cash seems about 10x more useful and practical than actually trying to build a trade network with a connection of goods.


And it kinda goes without saying for this series but you'll need to use the manual as a reference. This isn't a deal breaker for games of this genre but it also just feels absurd that they can't just display information in the UI.


Long story short I hope that more work finishes this game because the setting is awesome, but right now it just feels like a way less interesting version of Empires, and I'd honestly just prefer a mod of Empires.

This sounds counterintuitive but this review doesn’t mean I hate the game.

Actually I “like” the game, it brings many unique mechanics that I love and I am glad other publishing studios are making grand strategy games. What this review means is that I personally can’t recommend the game even for people who like complex slow games like this as in my opinion some of the mechanics are so unfun that they take away from the experience.

My main gripes boil down to War, Territory Control, Loyalty, and Regional Decision.

War. There is a 10 turn timer before a peace negotiation can even begin. This means that if you take over half of their country as well as wipe their army by turn 5 and just want to white peace this is impossible. I can only describe this as simultaneously boring and infuriating. This ties into my other biggest gripe with the game.

Territory Control. So you took over half of your opponent's country. Awesome! Now for the next 5 turns you will have to wait while these territories sap your Authority. Putting you in a worse position than when you started. I completely understand how this prevents blobbing but it also prevents having fun, you have to baby these provinces you never even wanted just because someone declared war on you.

Loyalty. Truthfully I am just complaining because I don’t understand it, I don’t even know how I can increase loyalty so let me know.

Regional Decision. I like Regional Decisions, I don’t like the thought of spending 5-10 minutes min-maxing the advanced screen to get what I want.

There are solutions to these issues already present in the game. You can constantly send gifts to your neighbors to try and prevent war. You can probably do some weird Vassal tricks to make occupying easier and I think that there are some decisions that can let you give land away. I don’t know but there has to be some crazy strats for loyalty. My main argument is that these make an already slow game unbearable where sometimes you face a problem that you know the solution of, have the resources to solve but still feel confined to the system.

How I would personally fix these issues

War: 

- Before anything, have a prompt that your relationship with your neighbors is bad and you should sign a nonaggression pact with them. They can then demand lots of your money for you wanting to be in peace.
- Before war is declared, have the enemy demand their clauses. You can give them what they want or find some other way (money, metal, manpower) for them to accept the treaty. No matter what though you transfer some of your legacy to them.
- Once war starts, have it like most other strategy games where the length of the war is simply a modifier that becomes closer to 0 over time.

Territory Control:

- Always have the option to release land that you own. They can turn back into neutral/wild states. 
- Have an option to do “bread and circus”. You spend LOTS of money to basically bribe them into not being dissatisfied and affect Authority. 
- Have an option to do “Martial Law”. It is one further than simply putting units on the province. They literally occupy the province and can’t leave until it is pacified. Depending on the loyalty of the troops or commander they might even form their own country. When they are occupying you don’t get any resources but you also don’t get Authority penalty. 

Loyalty:

- Make it more obvious how to fix Loyalty? Put it into the tutorial?

Regional Decision:

- Maybe you could have the nobles at court work toward these decisions?
- Have the option to play a Decision you don’t own for 5 times the cost?



I hope that this review helps someone. I hope that even if they don’t implement my exact solution they find some way to address these grievances; even if it is just adding a section in the manual called “Frequent Pitfalls”.

If you love the game and think I am a stupid poppy head, tell me how you deal with my problems so I can pick the game up again!

This game, while being actively tweaked by the devs continuously, is sheer genius. While it looks simplistic at first glance, there is a LOT going on under the hood. If you like games with a lot of complexity and requiring some deep thought and contemplation, then you want to pick this one up even at full price. If you have played its predecessor, Field of Glory: Empires, you will notice a lot of new changes that will increase your interest in the game. Trade, Prestige, Dynasties, have all been either introduced or improved upon. This is not just another "Map Painting" quest as smaller nations can win the game, even if they remain small. I say give it a go, but when you do..........give it a chance. Engage in the discussions because what might first seem like a bug, or poor design, will probably be more than likely a misunderstanding and miscalculation of the depth that has gone into this design.

It's a really good game. It feels like a mix between MEIOU and Taxes and EU4, while being much more accessible than either (but seriously read the bloody manual, just take an hour and read).

Pros: The system for building up a region or a province is great. More control over the pops is nice, as compared to EU4, and the quantity of diversity of buildings creates a situation where you will actually have a series of distinct provinces without it feeling tedious. Having a direct impact on the units you can recruit, fort level, garrisons, etc while also having indirect impacts or RNG-impacts (conversion chance) is a great balance.

Battles are pretty decent, if you get the battles game. Again, comparing it to EU4, the extra control is nice but also not necessary. It's not Total War, but it's also not charging you for Total War and it's not making you deal with the awfulness that is basically everything but battles in that series (the modern iterations).

Cons: Loading times are similar to what you can expect for any other comparable game (EU4, Vicky, etc. etc. etc.). Does it suck? Yeah, but it's not the sheer pain of an EU4 one-faith run or anything close to that. It's annoying, not game-breaking. The AI really likes to pile on when it thinks you're weak. Or, when it feels desperate. Honestly I'm not always sure. But it can be somewhat frustrating to chase the AIs little derp armies around because they refuse to build a full stack. This is partially just the reality of needing to balance a conquering army vs garrison(s) army, but I felt it challenging to get an idea of what that split should look like and ended up with lots of overkill.

I really don't know why you wouldn't get the game if you're a fan of this genre, it fills a nice niche where I feel there really isn't a whole lot, particularly with Total War basically abandoning any pretence of strategy. The price is more than reasonable, the dev is active and responsive and stays in touch with the community. If you want less of the PDX/Sega nonsense, supporting these alternative games is a no-brainer.

Tl, dr: get it.

FoG Kingdoms is a great grand strategy game, an evolution of what has been laid down with FoG Empires a few years ago.
It's different from other Grand strategy. Less memey than CK2/3. Less arcady than total wars, more historically grounded than KoH.
Kingdoms is a somewhat slow paced game, with lots of depth and clever "anti-snowballing" mechanics that force the player to think and plan for decades. Forget the "let's conquer the map in 20 years" of other games. This one does not work like that as you have to husband your provinces (with building, pops, game concepts like loyalty, piety & intendance) and your realm with the ever challenging authority question that will keep you prudent.

The game quickly gets addictive with a "one more turn" syndrom ever present. When the swords are out, you can even fight your battles in the FoG medieval game (not included, but cheaply available on steam or elsewhere with frequent discounts) and there, the game shines as YOU fight that decisive battle that decide the war.

Also, great dev support regarding bug fixing and tweakings, and lots of potential for future content if the game is successful.

So, if you like historical grand strategy and want to try something different, try this! The combo with FoG medieval is a must and will provide for hundreds hours of entertainment.

The game presents itself in the tutorial as a super complex and intricate game, but when you actually start playing, there's so few levers that you can actually interact with that it basically just boils down to 'bigger numbers are better'.

Some of the mechanics of the game are also just absurd, such as authority. Basically, your authority score gets compared to other countries (yes, even countries on the other side of the world), and depending on how high you rank (yes really), your country will slowly fall apart or grow. As if fairies from the worlds beyond are judging your or something. It's a strange complaint, perhaps, but it really ruins my immersion when I'm running things well and yet the country starts falling apart 'because authority ranking'. Feels like something out of a mobile game.

Being a vassal in this game is leaps less fun than in just about any other title I've played. Namely because you can't wage war, full stop. Not sure if this is a thing specific to France, because I only played one run of the game in the French area, but it does seem like that's just how vassalage works. Which is a shame, because I like building myself up from a small province into a big time deal, and vassalizing myself is usually a key part of my strategy in games like these. Just not viable here. I can't help but think I missed a button somewhere in the UI, because this really, really sucks.

The relatively lacking complexity in the game also means that every AI will just kind of grow and grow, unveiling that yeah, this game really is just a 'big numbers better' game.

Overall, a disappointment.