Kermorio S.A. is getting literal with their very first iOS release, Wars and Battles($4.99). This freshman title takes on an epoch of history much beloved, WWII. Specifically it is Normandy in 1944 that the initial spotlight is cast. While I think we can all agree that the mid-20th century has been extensively, and even exhaustively explored, W&B has a pretty unique take on the conflict and high production values also help carry this game. With an aim to roll out a huge amount of content, I have a feeling we will be talking a lot about Wars and Battles in coming months.
Like many strategy games, W&B is a turn based hex grid 1v1 affair. You take a turn, your opponent takes a turn. You move and attack with dudes, your opponent moves and attacks with dudes. This game places heavy importance on out numbering opponents before attacking, so you end up usually using 3 or more units to mob up one enemy unit at a time. There are multiple formats you can choose that apply the pattern to longer or shorter campaigns. Some follow historical accounts. Others, which I find more interesting, actually give alternate reality scenarios challenging you to bend the fabric of history as much as possible. Each campaign and mission has different victory conditions that must be met in order to proceed that usually involve capturing and holding key strategic locations.
Wars and Battles is not just an app, but the start of a platform designed to carry numerous strategy titles. Once you fire up the app, you can see small previews of future content updates, most of which are slated for 2015. The interface is smooth and minimal. I like how the game animates and flows from menus to gameplay. There was a good deal of attention and care put into the presentation of this game. Unfortunately, my appreciation for the game doesn’t go much past the glossy veneer.
In quite a few ways, I am confused by this game.
I grew up in an era when you didn’t get an explanation for why you are doing what you are doing, how you should be doing what you are doing, or even what it is that you are supposed to be doing. One thing I can say for the majority of today’s games is that they explain things very well for the most part. For as smooth and shiny as Wars and Battles is, it takes me back to the age of not knowing what is going on. The turn counter is only viewable in a sub-menu, fog of war is oddly very specific and sometimes even adjacent to your units. Sometimes you can use a unit in back to back turns, sometimes they are unusable after a turn, or after two turns, or only once a battle. Occasionally the game has a pop-up that will explain things. This pop-up is exactly 3 seconds too fast to read entirely. On some level it becomes very rewarding getting to the end of a fight and winning, because you know that you have beaten the odds but mostly its aggravating.
Another decision that leaves me baffled is the strategic approach of the game. As a game focused on the invasion of Normandy, I would expect a premium placed on flanking attacks, technological superiority and the intelligence of the common soldier. This does not, however, translate into how the game is played. I had originally written this paragraph without consulting the 51 page pdf game manual available at www.warsandbattles.com. After reading up, I still come to the same conclusion. The game focuses much too heavily on setting up 3v1 attacks. If you aren’t orchestrating a 3v1 attack, you will most likely fail against equally sized units. I can appreciate the extreme amount of detail put into each unit’s statistics and how they interact with terrain types, but at the end of the day you still need to set up 3v1 formations in order to guarantee your attack will be a victory. It’s kind of sad how so much detail was put into a game mechanic that doesn’t allow for tactical variety.
So why did this system get used for a WW2 game? Well, for one thing, from the campaign interface of the game, you can see the previously mentioned launching point for an entire host of war games. This is kind of a good thing since at least some of the eras covered will make sense with the mob em up style of strategy like a British colonial gun line, or ancient phalanx formations. Another reason this approach was chosen could possibly be because it’s easy to put AI into a game that really only requires minimal input to thwart a player. From the games I have played, the game requires you to thread the figurative needle in order to accomplish your goals in the narrow window of turns you have before a fight is over. For the most part, the AI just needs to sit like a brick and force you to figure out the correct formula(available in a pdf near you) that punishes you the least for being the aggressor. Launching attacks in this game has a larger than normal penalty attached, and an enterprising AI player just needs to sit back and wait for you to get your match ups wrong by just a little bit.
Even after reading up on this game, I have not seen much at all that touches on the strategic inter-workings and UI concerns I have. If I had a wish list for Wars and Battles, I would say the top item would be increased UI functionality. There is no reason a mobile app should include a syllabus of required reading in order to play. Following closely would be a move away from 3v1 dog piles in favor of more unit differentiation. If those two issues were addressed, we would be looking at not just an amazing game, but a potentially groundbreaking platform mobile strategists would flock to.
