Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
However, there are some features that are only present in the first game, such as raisable heroes and reanimation of dead enemies (you get to raise dead enemies as they were, instead of creating monsters of your own choosing). Some people find these features crucial, and thus prefer the first game. Some people prefer to build the army by themselves, and thus prefer the second version.
The story is similar, yet disconnected between the games. You don't have to play the first part to understand the second one.
Based on the feedback I've read, the first one might be bit easier and simpler. There are few challenges in the second one that are quite difficult and require a specific approach in order to overcome them.
As someone who's played the first, nah, you're 100% fine to skip it unless you gravely (oh god that was an unintended pun) dislike being able to choose what you raise enemies as vs. having to just roll with whatever you killed being what you raise, like killing chickens = you raise chickens, etc. whereas in this one you can kill chickens and raise whatever you want from them
The first one's a lot more "win via sheer numbers" and this one's got more strategy to it, also just more meat on the bone in general!