Flow Of War Review Summary

Fun and unique RTS tower defense mix that welcomes newcomers, though missing hotkeys, weak unit control, and clunky worker AI hold it back.

Game is fun and entertaining: Multiple reviewers describe the game as fun, interesting, and possessing a weird charm that keeps them engaged. General sentiment is highly positive regarding overall enjoyment.

Suitable for RTS newcomers: The game is friendly to players without an RTS background, with a suitable difficulty level and a focus on resource optimization rather than APM-heavy micro. This makes it approachable and reduces frustration.

Unique traits compared to genre: The game stands out with unique traits, such as automated logistics and tower repositioning, which differentiate it from other RTS titles. These features are praised for adding freshness and strategic depth.

Easy to learn and play: The game is praised for its simple controls and easy-to-learn mechanics, making it accessible to a wide audience. It is also friendly to players without an RTS background.

Satisfying RTS and tower defense mix: The game successfully blends classic RTS mechanics with tower defense elements, scratching an RTS itch while introducing unique ideas. It is noted that the RTS plus TD gameplay is decent and interesting.

Lack of hotkeys and shortcuts: Many players complain that the game lacks essential hotkeys for building, production, and unit control, forcing inefficient mouse clicking. This makes gameplay tedious and contributes to hand fatigue, significantly reducing the desire to continue playing.

Poor unit control and management: Players report severe limitations in controlling units, including no control groups, no 'select all', and difficulty splitting forces. Units often act stubbornly, require repeated commands, and cannot be managed effectively, frustrating RTS players.

Workers and resource AI problems: Workers exhibit poor AI, such as ignoring fields in favor of wood, not returning to mines consistently, and aggroing enemies to the base. This disrupts resource gathering and construction efficiency, leading to gameplay frustration.

Missing RTS standard mechanics: The game lacks common RTS features like hold position, squad formations, and pause, which are expected by players of other RTS titles. This makes the game feel clunky and un-intuitive, alienating genre fans.

Unit pathfinding issues: Units often take crooked paths, get stuck on walls, or make detours, leading to losses and inefficiency. This is particularly problematic during combat and when navigating complex maps.

RTS and Tower Defense Hybrid: The game is frequently described as a blend of real-time strategy and tower defense, with some calling it a simplified RTS closer to tower defense. This hybrid identity is a defining characteristic mentioned across multiple clusters.

Base Building and Defense: Base building is a crucial aspect, where players design layouts, construct walls and towers, and set up defenses. This strategic building is central to the gameplay experience.

Classic RTS Feel: The game evokes a classic RTS style reminiscent of Warcraft 2 or other old-school RTS titles, with a 90's-2000's feel. It is described as a classic RTS with RTS-style gameplay and distinct mechanics.

Automated Workers and Economy: Workers automatically gather resources, build, and repair, with the economy fully automated. Players note that they don't need to babysit harvesters, and resource management is handled by AI-controlled workers.

Wave-Based Campaign Gameplay: The campaign centers on surviving increasingly difficult waves of enemies, with players needing to adapt to each wave. The next wave starts only after the current wave is cleared, and the core loop revolves around wave survival.

RTS fans should try it: Multiple reviewers suggest the game is a good fit for RTS enthusiasts and those new to the genre. It offers a classic strategy experience with a sandbox feel, appealing to players who enjoy that style.

Good value at discount: One reviewer recommends buying the game at a discount rather than full price, while another states it is worth the money. A third reviewer does not recommend it, suggesting mixed opinions on value.

Improvements through updates: A reviewer notes that many updates have improved the quality of life, leading to a recommendation. This indicates the game has evolved positively since launch.

Decent with understanding systems: The game is described as decent if you take time to understand its systems and work around them. This suggests a learning curve but a rewarding experience for patient players.

Medium rating as dessert game: One reviewer calls it a dessert game, giving a medium rating. This implies it is a side experience rather than a main course, suitable for casual play.

Game completion: 30.0h.

The game starts with a learning curve and some UI friction, but players who persist through the campaign find the core loop surprisingly addictive, so the fun typically clicks after overcoming the initial challenges.

Friction: Steep learning curve for buildings and units; Excessive tutorial restrictions between missions; Tedious repetitive clicking for unit production; Waiting periods before waves may feel boring.

Unlock drivers: Understanding building and unit mechanics; Progressing through the campaign; Reaching the addictive core loop.

Traditional RTS Control Seeker: Attempts to micromanage units and use hotkeys; focuses on battlefield control at the unit level. Motivation: To achieve precise unit control and familiar RTS command efficiency. Stance: no buy.

Strategy Depth Enthusiast: Plans base layout and unit composition ahead of time; relies on pre-set defenses and macro decisions rather than unit micro. Motivation: To enjoy deep strategic puzzle-solving within a relaxed tower-defense environment. Stance: buy.

Comparisons to classic RTS games: Players frequently compare the game to classic RTS titles like Warcraft 2, Rampart, Stronghold Crusader, Age of Empires 2, and They Are Billions. These comparisons highlight the game's old-school design and mission structure, which some find nostalgic while others consider dated.

Developer actively engages community: Multiple reviewers praise the developer for being active in community discussions, responding to feedback, and releasing patches that improve quality of life. This responsiveness is seen as a positive and has led to fixes for reported issues like the unclear tech tree.

Large content volume and length: Reviewers mention that the game includes around thirty levels, three tutorials, and roughly thirty hours of content. This offers a substantial amount of gameplay, plus there is still more to discover.

Potential for expansion and updates: Reviewers express hope that the game will receive continued updates that remove annoying aspects and expand the experience to better match games like They Are Billions or Age of Darkness Final Stand. This suggests a desire for more depth and polish.

Level editor and demo available: The game includes a level editor and offers a demo alongside the full version, providing players with tools for creativity and a chance to try before buying.