Warlord: Awaji Review Summary

Engaging Sengoku warfare with rewarding army management and an immersive atmosphere, though poor optimization, a repetitive loop, and missing tutorials hold it back.

Gameplay is engaging and fun: Players consistently describe the game as fun, immersive, and satisfying, with a simple yet engaging loop. The overall experience is praised for being enjoyable and easy to get lost in for hours.

Progression and army management are rewarding: The sense of progression, including promoting units, tracking performance, and equipping soldiers, is highly praised. The new army method and feudal promotion system are seen as major improvements that make the game fulfilling.

Immersive Japanese Sengoku atmosphere: The game successfully creates a Japanese feudal era atmosphere, with well-designed terrain, thoughtful placement of shrines and villages, and a tone that makes players feel like real samurai warlords. The setting is well achieved and historically accurate.

Camp building is enjoyable and flexible: Building and developing the camp from a tent city to a fortified palace is described as fun, satisfying, and freeform. The system is detailed, flexible, and allows for different patterns, adding depth to the gameplay.

Combat is simple and satisfying: Combat is repeatedly highlighted as simple, accessible, and rewarding, with a solid feel and satisfying blood and gore effects. It adds to replayability and allows players to fight alongside their soldiers effectively.

Poor optimization and performance: Multiple reviews report severe performance issues, including lag, FPS drops, and instability. The game can become unplayable, especially in the late game, and may freeze or appear unresponsive.

Repetitive gameplay loop: The core gameplay is described as repetitive, with players capturing settlements, setting up camps, and moving to the next area. This loop quickly becomes dull and lacks variety.

Tutorial and tooltips missing: The tutorial is bugged and may not trigger, and there are no tooltips or encyclopedia to understand game mechanics. This makes the game confusing, especially at the start.

Lack of depth and variety: The game is criticized for lacking depth and variety in gameplay, with few mechanics and little strategic choice. Many systems from the previous title were removed or simplified, making the experience feel shallow.

Loading and stability issues: Loading is unstable and can freeze, making the game seem hung. The game is also unstable overall, requiring frequent saves, and there is no autosave option.

Army management and formation systems: Players set up army formations, manage soldiers, and promote individual characters to mold them into legendary troops. This core loop is central to the game's strategy experience.

Camp building and management: Players build and expand camps using resources from captured outposts, with the ability to relocate the camp. Camp construction includes tents, resting pads, and other facilities to support soldiers.

Conquest-driven progression: Troops and bases are upgraded by conquering locations, and new equipment is obtained through conquest. The game revolves around expanding territory and building power through military victories.

Open world without overworld map: The game features an open world with no separate overworld or campaign map, played in real time in first person. This creates a seamless experience but may lack strategic overview.

Diplomacy and faction relations: The game includes a diplomacy system with limited options, such as looting coins to pay for relations, peace, or alliances. Faction relations and alliances are present but not deeply developed.

Severe optimization issues: Multiple reviews describe the game as one of the worst optimized titles ever seen, with poor performance and low FPS on various settings. This is a widespread and critical complaint affecting overall playability.

FPS drops in combat: Players frequently experience significant FPS drops during battles, especially with larger armies or in heavy rain, with drops to 40-50 FPS on lowest settings. The performance degrades notably when the army size reaches around 40-50 units.

Unstable loading and freezing: Loading is reported as unstable, with long waits, potential freezes, and campaign startup taking 2-4 minutes. Some players note small loading issues, while others report the game runs well once loaded.

Lag spikes and stutters: Players encounter sudden lag spikes, stutters, and random chugging, particularly during rain or large battles. These issues disrupt gameplay flow and are noted as frequent occurrences.

Performance degrades over time: FPS gets worse the longer a play session continues, and RAM usage increases from 7GB to 11GB. This suggests potential memory leaks or resource management problems.

Recommended for army management fans: Players who enjoy building up an army and camp while managing logistics will find this game highly recommended. It also suits those who like kicking back and managing soldiers.

Recommended for first game fans: Fans of the first game will likely enjoy this sequel, as it delivers a similar experience. The recommendation is strong for those who liked the original.

Game is worth the money: Reviewers state the game is well worth the money and worth the wait. This indicates a positive value proposition for potential buyers.

Learning curve for newcomers: Players who have never played anything like this game should expect a learning curve. This may be a barrier for some, but it is not necessarily negative.

Not recommended at current stage: One reviewer does not recommend buying the game at this stage, suggesting it may be incomplete or have issues. This is a cautionary note for early adopters.

Community fair range: $19.99 - $24.99.

Session length: 1.3h.

The game starts with a learning curve and initial confusion, but once players get past that hurdle, the progression and gameplay become highly enjoyable and addictive.

Friction: learning curve; initial confusion; repetitive early loop; tutorial issues (restarting due to premature actions); lack of early equipment options; no clear incentive early on.

Unlock drivers: passing the learning curve; getting used to the UI; progression and unlocking more items; getting past initial confusion; understanding the gameplay loop.

Disappointed Series Veteran: Strategic, focused on optimization and meaningful choices; critical of mechanics that lack consequence. Motivation: Seeking a worthy successor to Warlord: Britannia with meaningful strategic depth. Stance: no buy.

Learning Newcomer: Trial and error, learning from mistakes, exploring systems. Motivation: Overcoming the learning curve and mastering the game's mechanics. Stance: buy.

Loyal Series Fan: Similar to the first game, likely strategic and immersive. Motivation: Continuing the experience of the first game and enjoying the sequel. Stance: buy.

Performance is generally acceptable on 12-15GB and <8GB VRAM systems, though with optimization caveats, but the 8-11GB VRAM cohort reports severe performance issues that dominate the experience.

Windows 12-15GB VRAM: positive. Mostly positive with some optimization concerns; FPS drops and RAM growth over time are noted, but the game is generally playable and recommended by most.

Windows <8GB VRAM: positive. Positive overall, but performance is subpar on lower VRAM, with stutters and low FPS on medium settings; still recommended by all reviewers.

Windows 8-11GB VRAM: negative. Negative; performance tanks in combat and on the map, with multiple reviewers calling it poorly optimized and unplayable at scale.

Sequel improves on predecessor: Multiple reviews note the game is a major overhaul and step up from Warlord Britannia, with improved mechanics and systems. It is seen as a better game in every way compared to its predecessor.

Compared to Mount and Blade: Reviewers compare the game to Mount and Blade: Bannerlord, describing it as an indie version that runs better, though lacking tactical and strategic depth. Some expect a different flavor with new ideas and smaller scope.

Lacks depth compared to predecessor: Some reviews compare the game to Britannia, noting it is a shell of what it was and lacks depth. The previous title had more features and is considered better by some.

Developed by one-person studio: The game is made by a one-man crew, which is a notable point for players. This small team size may influence expectations for updates and support.

Suggestions for future features: Reviewers suggest more building options, instant action, and assigning soldiers to rest tents or beds. These are potential improvements for future updates.