Field of Glory: Kingdoms Review Summary

Improved, deep empire-building experience: The game is praised for improving upon its predecessor, Field of Glory: Empires, with better balance, more strategic options, and refined mechanics. It offers a deeper and more nuanced empire-building experience compared to similar titles, with engaging systems and mechanics that work well together.

Seamless Field of Glory integration: A key feature is the seamless integration with Field of Glory: Medieval for resolving battles. This allows players to engage in tactical combat directly, influencing the outcome of wars and adding a unique dimension to the grand strategy experience, reminiscent of Total War but with greater historical authenticity.

Addictive, 'one more turn' gameplay: The game has an addictive quality that keeps players engaged for extended periods. It strikes a balance between planning and opportunistic responses, creating a compelling "one more turn" feeling.

Historically accurate and immersive: The game is praised for its historical accuracy and immersive feel, replicating historical sources and creating an authentic medieval atmosphere. This attention to detail enhances the overall experience and appeals to players interested in historical strategy games.

Unique mechanics, enjoyable multiplayer: The game offers unique mechanics and enjoyable multiplayer, with support for up to 16 players. The random building system is appreciated for breaking the meta and requiring players to adapt.

Steep learning curve, unintuitive UI: The game suffers from a steep learning curve due to unintuitive UI, lack of in-game information, and complex mechanics. Players must rely on external resources like the manual to understand basic gameplay. This complexity, combined with some clunky elements, can make the game overwhelming and frustrating for new players.

Slow pace, tedious mechanics: The game's slow pace and tedious mechanics detract from the overall experience. Players report long turn times, slow progression, and an overabundance of provinces to manage. The 'Authority' system, in particular, is criticized for feeling abstract and hindering expansion, especially for smaller factions.

Underdeveloped, convoluted diplomacy system: The diplomacy system is underdeveloped, convoluted, and disorganized. Players report that it lacks depth, relies too heavily on random outcomes, and requires excessive clicks to navigate. The AI's behavior in diplomatic interactions is also criticized for being illogical and frustrating.

Lacks character/dynasty depth: The game lacks depth in character and dynasty management compared to titles like Crusader Kings 3. Players find character interactions shallow, family/court aspects minimal, and the overall experience less immersive. The game also lacks unique features to distinguish it from other grand strategy games.

Confusing, unenjoyable building system: The building system is confusing and unenjoyable due to a lack of in-game information and unintuitive UI. Players struggle to understand building chains, prerequisites, and resource utilization. The randomness of building options and the complexity of the trade system further exacerbate these issues.

Grand strategy with tactical elements: The game combines grand strategy and tactical elements, drawing comparisons to both Total War and Crusader Kings. Players manage a medieval nation, focusing on diplomacy, nation-building, and military campaigns across a map spanning Europe, Africa, and the Middle East. Warfare involves strategic thinking about terrain and unit composition.

Authority system limits rapid expansion: The game features an authority system that replaces decadence, which governs expansion and actions within the realm. Authority is spent to declare war and make decisions, with the cost varying based on factors like claims and religion. The system punishes rapid expansion, forcing players to carefully consider the costs of their actions.

Complex, deep gameplay mechanics: The game features a complex economic and stat system that requires dedication to fully understand. This includes managing resources, trade, and various unit stats that affect combat outcomes. The game has a somewhat stiff learning curve, requiring time spent in the tutorial and game to understand.

No player control in battles: The game lacks user control during battles, which are resolved automatically. This design choice moves away from traditional turn-based strategy and towards an auto-chess style system.

Simultaneous turn-based gameplay: The game uses a WeGo style turn system where all player orders are executed simultaneously. Army movement is simultaneous, with all nations setting orders that are then carried out together.

Turn times have improved: Turn times have improved since launch, now being comparable to similar games. This indicates ongoing efforts to optimize the game's performance.

Broken impediment removal mechanic: Some game mechanics, such as the removal of impediment structures, are reportedly not functioning as intended. This indicates potential bugs or unimplemented features that affect gameplay.

Bugged or unimplemented achievements: Some achievements are bugged or refer to unimplemented gameplay elements. This suggests a lack of polish and potential issues with the game's design or implementation.

No bugs encountered: One player reported not encountering any bugs during their playthrough. This is a positive anecdote, but may not be representative of the overall player experience.

Highly recommended strategy game: Many reviewers recommend the game, praising its depth, complexity, and engaging gameplay. They consider it a worthwhile experience for strategy game enthusiasts, especially those who enjoy historical settings and grand strategy mechanics. Some call it a must-buy or a true gem.

Better with Field of Glory II: Several reviewers highlight the enhanced experience when "Field of Glory: Kingdoms" is paired with "Field of Glory II: Medieval". Exporting battles to "FoG Medieval" is recommended, and some consider the combo a must-have for hundreds of hours of entertainment.

Requires time to learn: Several reviews mention that the game requires an investment of time to fully appreciate its depth and intricacies. It's not an 'easy' play, but it becomes very enjoyable once you learn all the mechanics.

Compared to other strategy games: Some reviewers compare the game to other strategy titles like EUIV and CK3, with some preferring it. One reviewer expected a color scheme similar to Empires or EU4.

Unrecommended due to flaws: Despite its potential, some reviewers cannot recommend the game in its current state due to flaws, bugs, or unfun mechanics. Some reviewers express disappointment, citing issues like brain-dead AI, unrealistic mechanics, or a feeling that the game is unfinished.

Extensive game documentation included: The game features extensive documentation, including a comprehensive manual (325-400 pages) and a quick reference guide (163 pages). This suggests a complex game with a lot of depth that requires detailed explanation.

Medieval setting, similar mechanics: The game is a medieval-themed iteration of Field of Glory: Empires, with an option to export battles to Field of Glory II: Medieval. The setting differentiates it from previous titles in the series.

Authority resource requires careful management: Authority is a key resource that players must carefully manage. Strategic use of Authority impacts a nation's development, diplomatic relations, and overall standing, adding a layer of complexity to decision-making.

Tactical battles may be slow: One reviewer dislikes the tactical battle integration due to lengthy turns and prefers real-time gameplay. This suggests potential issues with pacing and player engagement in tactical battles.

Certain factions initially unplayable: At the time of release, some factions like Finland and other pagan tribes were not playable. This limits the initial player choices and historical scope.