Age of Rivals

About

Age of Rivals is a single player and multiplayer casual strategy game. It was developed by Dark Inertia Studios and was released on June 21, 2017. It received positive reviews from players.

Deep civilization-building strategy in a fast-paced boardgame!

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Skip User Reviews

83%

Audience ScoreBased on 334 reviews

gameplay46 positive mentions

grinding12 negative mentions

Engaging gameplay with a mix of strategy and luck, allowing for various win conditions and tactics.
Quick matches (10-15 minutes) make it ideal for casual play, with a strong online community for multiplayer.
No microtransactions; all cards are unlocked through gameplay, providing a fair experience.

High reliance on randomness can lead to frustrating experiences, especially if luck doesn't favor the player.
The AI can feel unbalanced, often getting optimal cards while the player struggles with weaker options.
Limited content for single-player mode, with some players feeling the grind to unlock cards is excessive.

gameplay
102 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
45%
52%
3%
The gameplay is characterized by a unique card drafting system that combines elements of civilization-building and strategic decision-making, reminiscent of games like "7 Wonders" and "MTG Arena." While the mechanics are praised for their depth and replayability, some players find the complexity and randomness can detract from the experience, particularly in single-player modes. Overall, the game offers engaging and meaningful choices, though it may require a learning curve to fully appreciate its intricacies.
- “This is an excellent drafting game with strong mechanics, enough randomness, and a very hard campaign.”
- “The game is intuitive, invites deep gameplay, makes thematic sense, and offers multiple paths to victory.”
- “Here's a great example of an easy to learn, hard to master game - gameplay involves little more than choosing a card each turn, but it takes some time and experience to be able to choose wisely.”
- “However, the poor AI mechanic is what mostly ruined it for me.”
- “The user interface is low-grade and the mechanics are overly and overtly dependent on math, which is not what I was expecting.”
- “The difficulty in the game lies in keeping an overview of both your own and your enemies' options; however, I wouldn't call it a mostly skill-based game because the randomness of the choices you're offered for card selection plays a big part in your gameplay.”
story
26 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
15%
70%
15%
The game lacks a substantial narrative, which may limit long-term engagement for some players, despite the presence of daily quests and card unlocking mechanics. While there are only six campaign missions, players can create their own imaginative stories based on gameplay dynamics, though the campaign's difficulty may be unbalanced for less experienced players. Overall, the absence of a compelling story could detract from the experience for those seeking a deeper narrative.
- “Each game feels quite unique due to the cards that come into play making reappearances later on - I think it is fun to imagine a story to go along with each game and strategic play, as towers crumble to angry mobs, trade routes form and gain monopoly on desired resources, and empires resort to thieving and over-taxation out of desperation.”
- “I wish the story mode was for more skill levels.”
- “There is no story as far as I can tell, which means long-term interest might be a problem for some people (including me). The unlocking of cards mitigates this a bit, albeit not too much.”
- “The story fights appear to be tailored for veteran players.”
- “Graphics could be improved; there are only 6 campaign missions.”
graphics
24 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
17%
70%
13%
The graphics of the game are generally considered its weakest aspect, with many reviewers noting a generic art style and a lack of variety in card designs that detracts from the overall experience. While some appreciate the clarity of icons and the slicker interface in the Steam version, the artwork fails to engage players, leading to a perception that it may hinder the game's appeal despite its solid mechanics. Overall, the visuals are seen as mediocre, which could prevent the game from gaining the attention it deserves.
- “Sure, the art style isn't the clearest in the supporting art/backgrounds, but the mechanics and how they play work extremely well.”
- “It's nice, solid graphics, solid sound.”
- “I've played this earlier on Kongregate for free... the Steam version is similar, but has slicker graphics and interface and a bunch of extra features and missions, and is well worth it if you want a less cluttered, ad-free version.”
- “I think the graphics is what turns most people off, but this is an extremely well thought out game that is worth playing if you are a card game fan!”
- “The graphics are by far the weakest point, both in style and in variety.”
- “Solid game that unfortunately might not get much attention because of the mediocre graphics and generic sounding name.”
replayability
20 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
70%
15%
15%
Overall, the game is praised for its high replayability, with many reviewers highlighting its engaging mechanics and strategic depth that encourage multiple playthroughs. While some players found it lacking in depth compared to similar titles, the consensus remains that the game offers significant opportunities for inventive strategies and enjoyable experiences across various sessions.
- “Great mechanics and huge replayability.”
- “Simple and elegant rules with great depth and replayability behind them.”
- “Really wanted to like it, but found it very shallow with limited replayability compared to similar titles.”
- “Replayability is very high - a majorly important factor to me.”
- “The end result is an engrossing card drafting duel game that has massive replayability and plenty of opportunities for inventive strategies.”
grinding
14 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
14%
86%
The grinding aspect of the game has received mixed feedback; while some players appreciate that the backend shutdown has eliminated the need for grinding and unlocked all content, others criticize the repetitive nature and significant effort required to earn card packs, which can feel tedious. Although daily quests are present, they are not seen as punishing, and the Steam version reportedly offers a less grindy experience compared to the original. Overall, players should expect a considerable amount of grinding, especially when trying to unlock content.
- “And the biggest problem, outside of the large amount of grinding to unlock the content, is the sheer repetition of it all with huge swings due to randomness.”
- “Trying to get packs is very grindy as you get few gold (mostly 20 - you pick a chest out of something like 30 chests with only a small few being 30, and one 50, with the rest being 20 - higher difficulty only increases this marginally) for a card pack that costs 100 and only contains 3 cards.”
- “So expect a great amount of grinding.”
monetization
6 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
33%
67%
The monetization model of the game is generally well-received, with players appreciating the absence of microtransactions and expressing willingness to pay the full price. However, there is significant criticism regarding the presence of in-game advertisements, which detracts from the overall experience.
- “The game is fun and completely free of microtransactions.”
- “I really enjoy the game, especially since there are no microtransactions.”
- “But my most pressing reason for disliking this game is the in-game advertisements.”
- “I was happy to get the game at half price, and considering the lack of microtransactions, I would likely still pay the full $10 for it.”
music
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The music in the game is characterized as catchy and relaxing, enhancing the overall experience for players.
- “The music is catchy and relaxing.”
- “The music is catchy and relaxing.”
- “The music is catchy and relaxing.”
stability
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The stability of the game is criticized due to a notably buggy user interface, which has been a recurring issue for users.
- “The UI is very buggy.”
- “The UI is very buggy.”
- “The UI is very buggy.”
emotional
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The emotional aspect of the game is characterized as wholesome and suitable for children, promoting positive feelings and experiences during play.
humor
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The humor in the game is highlighted by the hilarious and often devastating interactions between cards, providing both comedic and competitive moments for players.
- “Some of the card interactions are hilarious and devastating to both you and your rival.”
atmosphere
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game is noted for its promising and enjoyable atmosphere, though it is marred by frustrating RNG mechanics that detract from the overall experience.