War of the Roses is medieval combat game set in the 1400s in
a war torn England,
as the House of York and the House of Lancaster battle it out. The devs claim historically
inspired warzones, weapons, and the like, and while everything is certainly
old, my knowledge of English history, battles, and military equipment from this
time period can be summed up in one word - nothing. In fact, the only time I've
even heard anything about period accuracy mentioned outside the game, it's been
in flame wars over which game is better - this or Chivalry: Medieval Warfare.
What I do know is that they had swords, axes, and blunt weapons during the 1400s, so at least that part is accurate. |
Generally I'd play Assault or Conquest, with much more of my
time being spent in Conquest since Assault was only introduced in the Kingmaker
update in March 2013, or roughly as the group of friends I was playing this
game with began to migrate to other titles. The interesting thing with Conquest
is that you don't win simply by controlling all the points, but rather by
controlling the most points the longest, as you'll see there is a sliding scale
at the bottom of the screen that pushes from one side to the other as a team
continues to hold points. However, to make things really interesting, if you
capture all the points, that bar pretty rapidly shifts, enough so that, while
you may not get a clean win, your team will still maintain a majority at the
end of the round. I've been in quite a few battles where, while our team had
been steadily loosing for the first 25 minutes or so, holding only 1 point out
of 3, we made a sudden comeback, captured all three points, and watched as the
final score ended up in our favor by 51 - 49.
The combat in this game is interesting, though your
experience will depend on what route you decide to take. Melee combat can be a
bit tricky to really get a handle on, because it isn't the simplest thing to
accomplish, mostly because there are plenty of things going on besides just
swinging your axe that determine what kind of damage you'll end up doing. First
up is simply attacking. All you have to do is press and hold mouse 1, determine
your attack direction by moving the mouse accordingly, then release it to
attack. In this way you charge up an attack by holding down the mouse longer,
as well as select between a left, right, overhead, or uppercut swing. Charging
up an attack will deal more damage, but can take enough time that you'll be
open to an attack by a faster enemy. Now say it's time to block an attack. If
you've got a shield, you just use that, otherwise you'll have to match the
direction in which you block with that of the incoming attack. So if your enemy
is doing a side swing from your left, you must block left, while an uppercut or
stab requires you to block down. Your HUD helps with this by giving you a clue
as to which direction your enemy is preparing to attack from, though I will
admit that I initially mistook this for the standard "receiving damage
from this direction indicators" in most first person shooters.
Those are just the basics of melee combat. To really get
good at it, you'll need to figure out how to follow your parry with a riposte,
feinting when attacking to lure your opponent to over committing to a block.
There are hitboxes on weapons to consider, such as a longer axe that only does
damage out at the blade, rather than along the shaft. Momentum is also a factor
in determining how much damage you'll do, such that if you flip your mouse to
pick up extra speed you can end up taking a so-so attack and turning it into an
instakill. There are also penalties for missed attacks, and much, much more. It
is recommended that you take some time to practice this, either by heading to a
duel server, or trying the new practice mode that launched in June 2013.
Ranged combat is a bit different, and up until June 2013
only came in two flavors - bow or crossbow. Each has it's benefits. Bows are
fast, and you can pepper a target with arrows very quickly, such that if you're
a good shot, or using the right arrows, you might even be able to down the
murderous brute with a long sword before he closes the thirty yards to your
perch. The downside is that bows generally don't do as much damage as
crossbows, and that you can only keep them drawn for a limited time before you
need to relax again. It's sort of a bow minigame, where if you release the
string at the right time, you'll deal some good damage. Crossbows on the other
hand are slow, and their minigame comes in when you attempt to reload them,
since they have both an active and passive reload stat, and you can make them
reload faster, but generally never fast enough to get more than one shot at
someone charging at you. The advantage is that crossbows are powerful, and deal
substantial damage. Even better is that they stay drawn, so can take your time
and pick off someone, often at a great distance, making crossbows the sniper
like weapon of this game. The final ranged weapon, though they are short range, are handgonnes, which were
just added in June 2013. I'd like to tell you about them, but unfortunately they
are extremely expensive to purchase (more on that system later), so I've never
actually gotten to use one.
The final setup you can mess around with is Cavalry. It's
pretty much what you would expect, as you're on top of a horse, armed with a
lance and your secondary weapon, and you're allowed to use either while riding.
Cavalry has an interesting role, though it depends on how well coordinated your
team is, and how good you are at lining up your lance on someone's head. Things
I've seen accomplished in this capacity: flanking the enemy and taking our
archers or crossbowmen covering the point; taking the really long way around
while both teams are fighting over point C, and instead heading to your next
point, since you own C but haven't made progress towards B yet, thus allowing
your squadmates to spawn on you and quickly force B to neutral, and then
capturing it for your own team; epic horse battles; harassing people, including
your own team, by running over them, at least, that is, until someone gets a lucky
shot off at your horse, sending you flying.
I've already talked about how War of the Roses contains
three classes. What I haven't talked about is the number of ways you can
customize those classes. Basically, there are a ton of options. You've got
plenty of choices from the weapon you use, the material it's made out of, the
edge, fighting style, and more. Some weapon options change things like the
active versus passive reload on crossbows, or change your bolts or arrows to
add a temporary bleed when you hit someone. The customization can be a bit
overwhelming, but it does allow you to tailor your character to the way you'd
like to play. If you want a fast character, stick with the lighter armors,
maybe a one handed weapon, and possibly a shield. Or maybe you are okay with
dealing a little less damage, but decreasing the time it takes to prepare a
swing, so you change your fighting style. Ultimately you'll find that the game
is about trying to strike the perfect balance between speed and power, which
comes down to an item's encumbrance stat. Basically, the more of it there is,
the more it will slow you down. For example, I once played a crossbow sniper in
full plate with a heavy shield, witch allowed me to aptly handle anyone who
thought they could circle around and harass the ranged guys, only to find that
when I switched to leather armor and a lighter shield I was able to reload
twice as fast.
You may be wondering just how it is you go about unlocking
all of these different weapons, options, perks, and so forth. Well, that's the
rub. You see, you have to buy these things with in game coins. You'll gain
coins anytime you also game experience, though sometimes you might need to be a
certain level to unlock certain perks, such as officer buffs, no matter how
many coins you have. The good stuff is quite expensive, as you might expect,
such as the best plate armor, which was 100k when I bought it (guns are
currently the same). At a handful of coins for a knockdown, 200 for actually
finishing off an enemy (an execute, which locks you into an animation for 5
seconds, making you very vulnerable), 300 for reviving a teammate that's been
knocked down, and bonuses for other actions, including being on the winning
team, healing another player, longshots, headshots, kill streaks, and instakills,
it can take quite a bit of time to get the coins you'll need, especially since
you'll also need to buy the new blade, fighting style, weapon material or
crank, bolt type, and so forth for each
weapon you unlock. This is where the game tries to tempt you into
purchasing coins with real world dollars (or your currency equivalent), in a
near pay-to-win moment.
Still, you have to be able to use the expensive weapon well if you want to beat me on the field of battle! |
War of the Roses is certainly an interesting game, but it
does depend entirely on who you are playing with. The game certainly encourages
squad gameplay, since squad members can spawn on the squad leader, and the
squad leader can issue two different buffs, such as one that increase the
current health, or another that acts as a small heal over time, that scale
based on the number of squadmates in close proximity, and there is an objective
tagging system, and bonus experience and coins for both the person issuing the
order and the one following it out. Taking advantage of things like that, when
combined with someone riding a horse to sneak behind enemy lines, and a group
of friends all using a third party voice communication software, well, let's
just say it's fun to catch an entire team off guard, and then slaughter them
with some extremely well place axe slices as they attempt to reclaim the point.
That's how I played it - for 58 hours. The lowest I've seen it on sale for was
at the $5 mark or so, unless you picked up a four pack for $15. There are
certainly fun times to be had, though sometimes the best strategy seems to be
swing wildly while in a group of enemies and watch them injure each other more
than they hurt you, rather than the precision based mechanics the game claims to
require. If you're interested, I highly suggest the demo, which allows full
access to the game types, but does limit you to the default 4 classes, so no
horses, crossbows, or handgonnes for you. Still, that will give you an
opportunity to see how War of the Roses is a good game - 7 out of 10.
So, the final breakdown:
Score: 7/10
Suggested Price: $5
*****
For more War of the Roses, check out this collection of
various screenshots otherwise unused in this review. Click any one for a full
sized image.
why don't you do multiplayer?
ReplyDeleteA couple of reasons really.
DeleteThe experience is usually entirely dependent on who you're playing against. Sure, that keeps things fresh, but at the same time you can get really fed up with a game full of hackers or a poor community of players. Similarly, a good group of people can make an okay game very enjoyable. Either way, since I'm writing from the point of view of how good of an experience I'm having, and basically attempting to convince you that you should or shouldn't buy a game because I want you to have the same experience, well, that is a very difficult sell when each time you load up a game it's wildly different.
Another issue is that I've had sort of a falling out with multiplayer games. I used to play an MMO quite heavily, but when it wasn't a raid night several of us would get together and play any one of a number of multiplayer games (I put over 115 hours into Left 4 Dead for that very reason). Then we all got older and found we couldn't play together as much, so the people who would have gotten me into new games weren't there.
The final reason is that I generally don't have the time, which goes back to getting older. If you only have 30 minutes or an hour of free time a night, maybe you're not so interested in hopping in a game that is ruined by some jerk with autoaim. You might argue that multiplayer is great for short bites, which is true, but I've found that I would rather take that time and invest it in a game other people can't ruin for me, and that preferably has measurable progress so I can eventually wrap it up and try something new - so, single player.
Long story short, it's just a matter of preference in what I play, which ultimately determines what I review.
Also, sorry about the late reply. Apparently the gmail app on my phone get messed with and it hadn't updated any "social" notices.
Delete