Strategos
Last updated: 2026-01-22
- Unique real-time wargame mechanics with delayed orders
- Historical authenticity and autonomous unit behavior
- Reduced micromanagement enhances gameplay flow
- Limited campaign and sandbox options available
- Poor UI and visual polish detracts experience
- Balance and mechanics issues present in combat
Emotions
Players express satisfaction with the game's historical authenticity, tactical depth, and immersive gameplay mechanics, including the courier system and faction variety. The smooth gameplay, improved pacing, and overall positive experience with UI, sound, and real-time combat further contribute to this emotion.
Excitement stems from the game's strategic depth, realistic melee combat, and unique mechanics like the courier system, which enhance immersion. Players also anticipate future expansions, historically accurate battles, and the potential for the game to evolve into a niche experience distinct from competitors like *Total War*.
Frustration arises from issues with unit control, such as troops acting autonomously or not following commands, as well as sound design and AI limitations. Players also criticize the confusing UI, incomplete translations, lack of multiplayer, and the game's slow-paced nature, which clashes with expectations for arcade-style or customizable gameplay.
Disappointment is caused by the game's lack of polish, unappealing visuals, and underwhelming combat mechanics, which fail to meet expectations set by hype or comparisons to *Total War*. Players also express dissatisfaction with the limited unit selection, lack of sandbox customization, and the absence of dynamic campaign features.
Enthusiasm is driven by the game's unique mechanics, such as the courier system and troop autonomy, which offer a fresh and realistic approach to strategy gaming. Players appreciate the tactical depth, historical immersion, and the developer's commitment to supporting and refining the game.
Verdict
Mostly positive
Summary
Positive 87% · Negative 13%. Score: 13 / 100
Positives:
- The game introduces a real-time system with delayed orders via couriers, unit autonomy, and morale/cohesion mechanics, offering a fresh take on historical wargaming. This system reduces micromanagement while adding tactical depth, appealing to fans of *Field of Glory 2* and *Total War*.
- Units act autonomously (e.g., retreating, flanking), reducing the need for constant oversight. Players highlight this as a major improvement over games like *Total War*, allowing them to focus on strategy rather than unit control.
- Despite being in early access, the game is feature-complete with fair optimization and a promising roadmap. Players appreciate the developer’s responsiveness to feedback and the game’s potential for future improvements.
- Players recommend the game as a worthwhile purchase, especially on sale under $20. The current price is justified by the content and the developer’s active engagement with the community.
Negatives:
- The campaign is criticized as dull, stale, or missing key features (e.g., large maps, animations). Players express disappointment over the lack of a freeform campaign, customization options, and sandbox-style gameplay akin to *Total War*.
- The user interface is described as dated, unclear, and in need of modernization. Visuals and animations are criticized as basic, low-quality, or unappealing, with limited zoom and speed settings exacerbating the issue.
- Numerous balance problems are reported, such as overpowered melee infantry, weak ranged cavalry, and morale mechanics that feel underwhelming or inconsistent. Terrain penalties and tactical depth are also underutilized due to AI limitations.
- Players expecting a *Total War*-style experience are disappointed by the lack of flashy battles, unit variety, and customization. The game’s focus on military logistics and historical accuracy may not appeal to fans of arcade-style combat.
- The game is criticized for its price (R$ 60,00) given its pre-alpha state, limited content, and numerous bugs. Players feel the value does not justify the cost at this stage.
Gameplay:
- The game emphasizes real-time strategy with a unique courier-based command system, where orders take time to reach units, adding realism and requiring strategic foresight. This mechanic is frequently highlighted as a core feature, distinguishing it from traditional RTS or turn-based games.
- Flanking maneuvers and formation advantages (e.g., testudo, shield walls) play a critical role in combat, with units responding dynamically to terrain and enemy positioning. These mechanics are frequently cited as key to the game's tactical depth.
- Combat resolution relies on unit morale and cohesion rather than direct damage, with units automatically retreating or disengaging based on battlefield conditions. This system is praised for its historical realism and tactical depth, often compared to tabletop wargaming.
- The game features historically accurate unit compositions, faction variety (100+ factions), and fixed army rosters for battles like the 1st Punic War. This focus on authenticity is a major draw for fans of historical wargames.
- Units act with partial autonomy, such as archers retreating behind infantry or skirmishers chasing enemies, which adds realism but can frustrate players expecting direct control. This feature is central to the game's tactical complexity and historical simulation.
Performance:
- Players report poor performance but acknowledge it is expected to improve with future updates. Gameplay remains smooth without crashes, and optimization is considered fair for early access.
- Several bugs affect unit behavior, including issues with routing and abnormal walking speeds, which impact tactical gameplay.
- Players experience extended loading times, particularly during large battles, which disrupts immersion and gameplay flow.
- The 2x speed feature in battles is not functioning, limiting players' ability to control the pace of combat.
Recommendations:
- The game is highly recommended for fans of realistic battle simulations, tactical planning, and historical strategy games, particularly those who enjoy titles like Total War or Field of Glory II. It is not suited for players seeking arcade-style combat or empire management.
- While some players feel the game is worth its current price or a sale purchase, others caution against buying it now due to balance issues. Many see it as an investment in the game’s future potential.
- Players frequently request modernization of the UI and enhancements to the campaign map for better usability and immersion. These improvements are seen as critical for long-term enjoyment.
- Feedback suggests adding dynamic music, adjustable combat speeds (2× or 3×), and options for map selection and weather effects to improve engagement and replayability.
- Players want better tools for customizing scenarios in the editor, allowing for more creative and personalized gameplay experiences.
Miscellaneous:
- Players acknowledge the game is in Early Access and anticipate improvements over time. This reflects an understanding of the development stage but also highlights areas needing refinement.
- The game draws comparisons to tabletop strategy games like *Field of Glory*, suggesting its mechanics or style resonate with fans of that genre. This may attract players seeking a digital adaptation.
Similar games
Blend with other games
97%Master of Command
96%Hegemony III: Clash of the Ancients
96%Fire & Maneuver
96%Shieldwall
96%Total War: PHARAOH
96%Ancient Warfare: The Han Dynasty
96%Rising Front
96%SOVL: Fantasy Warfare
96%Field of Glory: Kingdoms
96%Kingdom, Dungeon, and Hero
96%Ultimate Epic Battle Simulator 2
95%Knights of the Crusades