Flashpoint Campaigns: Southern Storm

About

Flashpoint Campaigns: Southern Storm is a single player and multiplayer strategy game. It was developed by On Target Simulations and was released on April 20, 2023. It received positive reviews from players.

DESCRIPTION Flashpoint Campaigns: Southern Storm is a grand tactical wargame set at the height of the Cold War, with the action centered on the year 1989. As the force Commander, you will plan and then issue orders and Standard Operating Procedures to your battalion, brigade, or regimental forces shaping the fight by maneuver and your intent. The game engine is based on asynchronous WEGO turns. T…

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Flashpoint Campaigns: Southern Storm screenshot

Skip User Reviews

87%

Audience ScoreBased on 85 reviews

story3 negative mentions

The game features a unique WEGO system that enhances strategic planning and execution, making it engaging and immersive.
It offers a deep and detailed simulation of Cold War combat, with a wealth of unit data and a clean, intuitive UI that aids in gameplay.
The tutorials and extensive manuals help players overcome the steep learning curve, allowing for a rewarding experience once mastered.

The game suffers from balance issues, particularly favoring NATO forces, which can make playing as the Warsaw Pact frustrating.
There are reports of AI behavior being subpar, with units sometimes acting irrationally or failing to execute tactical maneuvers effectively.
The game has a steep learning curve and can feel overwhelming for new players, with some finding the documentation and UI cumbersome.

gameplay
14 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
21%
58%
21%
Gameplay is characterized by a wealth of options that can initially overwhelm new players, but offers a rewarding learning curve as players encounter various scenarios. The mechanics are meticulously designed, reflecting the intricacies of 1980s warfare, and while the asynchronous "wego" system enhances strategic planning, it can also lead to frustration due to its black box nature. Despite occasional bugs and mixed feelings about certain mechanics, the developers are responsive to community feedback, which adds depth to the overall experience.
- “You will keep learning as you play scenarios; nothing really 'new', but the experience of facing different situations during gameplay will make you aware of those and feel like you learned a new layer of depth of the game (like paying attention to the heavy rain, making your units' sight very limited!).”
- “Hard, rewarding, asynchronous wego mechanics are great and force me to work on the plan to the right details.”
- “Planning and giving orders, then having to wait to see how they pan out as they clash head-on with your enemies' plans is a very engaging style of gameplay I find.”
- “There are a ton of options, probably not as many you'd like to have once you master the gameplay, but more than enough to overwhelm new players at first.”
- “Once commands are issued, the player watches the gameplay progress without the ability to interrupt those actions (just a pause function) until the turn is over.”
- “I always play it for a while and then drop it - its mechanics are made black box, either intentionally or unintentionally, and there are always situations where it can be frustrating.”
story
11 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
18%
55%
27%
The game's story is centered around dynamic battle scenarios where players must adapt their strategies based on the AI's unpredictable tactics, leading to varied and engaging experiences. While the missions can be intricate and require careful planning, some players note a lack of depth in the campaign options, particularly for certain nations. Overall, the narrative unfolds through tactical gameplay that emphasizes strategic decision-making rather than a traditional storyline.
- “I ran the 1st tutorial mission a few times with small changes to my plan, and every time the AI has taken slightly different approaches that have made every one of them different enough that I can already see this game will provide me years of entertainment.”
- “You have to plan thoroughly, consider every angle and try to judge how best to achieve your mission, which may not always involve destroying every enemy on the field.”
- “The other side is doing the same thing, so the bloody story of a battle unfolds and your plans sometimes are executed as intended, but frequently they go very wrong.”
- “It sat in my library for a while, as I 'armored brigaded' and 'combat missioned' myself to exhaustion.”
- “The same comment applies to Combat Mission, where we players play not as any commander, but as all the units on the battlefield!”
graphics
7 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
43%
14%
43%
The graphics in the game are generally praised for their crispness and visual appeal, particularly in comparison to its predecessor, offering a noticeable improvement in fidelity. However, some users find the battle graphics underwhelming and the art style somewhat cartoonish, which detracts from the overall experience. Despite these criticisms, the user interface is well-received, contributing to an enjoyable visual experience for players.
- “As far as war games go, this one has a nice UI and lovely graphics.”
- “Graphics are crisp and enjoyable, at least to us old-timers who played the likes of Napoleon at Waterloo and Rise and Decline of the Third Reich back in the 1990s and earlier.”
- “The battle graphics are a bit underwhelming and the audio is just serviceable, but both get the job done.”
- “If only the graphics were just slightly less cartoonish... this is the sim I have been waiting for since ArtBas.”
- “It is a very noticeable step up from its predecessor in both fidelity and graphics, yet it is an easy (relatively) game to get into but has a lot of depth to master.”
optimization
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
67%
100%
The optimization of the game shows a clear distinction in performance between Soviet and NATO tanks, with Soviet units excelling at medium range and NATO units at long range. However, users report significant performance issues, particularly when utilizing terrain tools, which can lead to system hangs and near crashes.
- “In practice, Soviet tank units have the best performance at medium range, as they can withstand enemy fire with their armor at an acceptable level of loss and can deliver a relatively accurate volley.”
- “NATO tanks have their best performance at long range because their aiming sights are better, allowing them to knock down enemy vehicles from a distance.”
- “The only negative I have right now is performance-related: turning on any of the terrain tools or using them in addition to moving a unit nearly crashes the client due to a system hang.”
- “The optimization is severely lacking; I experience frequent frame drops and stuttering, making gameplay frustrating.”
- “Even with a high-end system, the game struggles to maintain a stable frame rate, which is disappointing for an experience that should be smooth.”
grinding
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players find the grinding aspect of the game to be both immersive and intense, as they face relentless waves of enemies that create a nail-biting experience. The challenge of defending against an overwhelming horde adds a gratifying layer to the gameplay, despite the repetitive nature of the encounters.
- “The result is defending against an endless red horde, with a kill/death ratio of 10/20/30:1 (I'm not even joking), with an endless stream of enemies just eventually grinding into your front lines.”
- “At the same time, it’s immersive, and when the crap hits the oscillator (and it will), it’s nail-biting and teeth-grinding and gratifying by turn until you can get back into the command loop.”
stability
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
300%
The game suffers from significant stability issues, with numerous bugs making it nearly unplayable for users.
- “The game is so buggy that it is almost impossible to play.”
- “Frequent crashes make it frustrating to enjoy the gameplay.”
- “I encountered numerous glitches that ruined my experience.”