Pike and Shot: Campaigns

About

"Pike and Shot: Campaigns" is a turn-based strategy game set in the age of Renaissance warfare. Command your armies and utilize the unique abilities of battlefield generals to gain an edge in combat. The game features tactical enhancements and a new unit mix, offering a fresh take on the popular "Pike and Shot" series. Available now on Steam.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

78%

Audience ScoreBased on 412 reviews

gameplay16 positive mentions

graphics18 negative mentions

The game offers a deep and engaging turn-based tactical experience, with a focus on historical accuracy and unit dynamics.
The AI is competent and provides a challenging experience, adapting to player strategies and making the battles feel realistic.
There is a wealth of content available, including numerous historical battles, customizable skirmishes, and a scenario editor that allows for endless replayability.

The campaign mode is simplistic and lacks depth, often feeling like a series of skirmishes rather than a cohesive strategic experience.
The graphics and sound design are basic and may not meet the expectations of players looking for a more polished visual experience.
The game can feel slow-paced, with long turn resolutions and a lack of options for speeding up gameplay, which may frustrate some players.

graphics
90 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
11%
69%
20%
The graphics in "Pike and Shot" are generally considered basic and low-budget, lacking the polish and detail found in modern strategy games. While some players appreciate the historical accuracy and simplicity, many criticize the visuals as uninspiring and repetitive, with limited animations and artwork. Overall, the graphics serve the gameplay but are not a selling point, leading to mixed feelings about the game's value relative to its price.
- “Despite the low-level graphics, the game is good and pulls off a decent representation of the battles of that era.”
- “The graphics aren't amazing, but they work perfectly well for this game.”
- “While it lacks a lot of the polish of the Total War titles, and has fewer sandbox campaign mechanics, the battles (while graphically simple) are supremely well done.”
- “The game is overpriced - the graphics and sound are poor, with not much invested in them.”
- “The battle graphics are just so lifeless, I just cannot get into it.”
- “Graphics are quite poor for such a pricey game.”
gameplay
70 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
23%
71%
6%
The gameplay is characterized by a mix of engaging mechanics, particularly in battle dynamics such as flank attacks and infantry pursuits, which create a fluid and realistic combat experience. However, the campaign mode is criticized for being lackluster and slow-paced, with some players noting that the AI can lead to frustratingly long turns. Overall, while the game offers a solid foundation with accessible mechanics and extensive content, it may not appeal to those seeking a fast-paced or polished experience.
- “The mechanics of logistics are just simple enough to not be brutally tedious, but also to make the act of raising armies rewarding and make you feel smart.”
- “This game is great because there is that complexity (at both the campaign and battle level) in mechanics, yet everything still feels intuitive and easily understood, and very few games really manage to walk the line between complex and confusing.”
- “While it lacks a lot of the polish of the Total War titles, and has fewer sandbox campaign mechanics, the battles (while graphically simple) are supremely well done.”
- “My playing this game for this long is nothing but a testament to my deep-seated problems and how I take the flawed, unfair, clunky mechanics of this travesty of a good wargame and use them to punish myself.”
- “If you want a ton of different things to do in your game, or you are looking for a lot of special and unique mechanics to diversify playstyles and factions, this is not your game.”
- “The gameplay is not what I thought it would be.”
music
26 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
15%
69%
15%
The music in the game receives mixed reviews, with some players enjoying the soundtrack while others criticize the limited number of tracks and weak sound effects. Many recommend using mods to enhance the audio experience, as the base music and sound effects are considered repetitive and lacking. Overall, while the soundtrack has its fans, it may not meet the expectations of all players without additional content.
- “I very much enjoy the soundtrack to this game.”
- “The soundtrack alone makes me want to run out and buy a pike or maybe an arquebus and declare war.”
- “The tutorials are clear and helpful; the sounds, gunfire, and music both are excellent.”
- “The base sound effects and music are really weak.”
- “The sounds are repetitive and the vanilla music is not that great (but there are mods that fix this; right now I'm using the period music mod and it is much better).”
- “Music: not much of a music score to it.”
story
12 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
8%
67%
25%
The game's story is delivered through numerous missions and campaigns reminiscent of classic modes like Galactic Conquest from Star Wars Battlefront, providing a mix of challenge and emotional engagement. Players experience a variety of unit types, including historical figures like the winged hussars, which adds depth to the narrative. However, the storytelling is hampered by technical issues, such as an auto-play feature that can disrupt gameplay if a mission is abandoned.
- “It's not super pretty and the modes are relatively lacking, but you get numerous missions as well as campaigns that I liken to the old Galactic Conquest mode in Star Wars Battlefront.”
- “There are campaigns to follow, but these missions can be appropriately challenging. Do not expect to win a battle like Edgehill as the Royalists easily.”
- “If you ever have to leave the game mid-mission, the 'quit button' just auto-plays where your units are, and you have to watch the whole mission carry out unless you want to hard crash the game.”
- “Each of the four tutorial missions were themselves emotional rollercoasters of 'I got this' to, 'oh crap, I'm screwed' to, 'oh my god, I might just pull this off.' No, I'm not being sarcastic.”
grinding
8 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players find the grinding aspect of the game to be a mixed experience; while the logistics mechanics are engaging and rewarding, large-scale battles can become tedious due to the inability to move multiple units at once. This can lead to repetitive matches, particularly in scenarios where unit differentiation is minimal, detracting from the opportunity to showcase tactical skills.
- “Large-scale battles become incredibly tedious because there's no function to move multiple units simultaneously.”
- “The English Civil War units start off largely identical (with the Royalists having better cavalry), and this can lead to grinding matches rather than games where you can show off your tactical flair.”
- “The mechanics of logistics are just simple enough to not be brutally tedious, but also to make the act of raising armies rewarding and make you feel smart.”
stability
8 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
13%
38%
50%
Overall, the game's stability is mixed; while some players report a polished experience with no glitches or crashes, others have encountered significant issues, such as unexpected outcomes in battles and exploitable AI glitches. These inconsistencies suggest that while the game may be stable for some, there are underlying problems that need addressing.
- “No glitches, bugs, or crashes in the quickly passing 3 and a bit hours I have played.”
- “An example I recently experienced was during a battle where my unit charged into the flank of the enemy. The odds were 92% in favor of my troops, yet they lost and suffered 92 casualties, which was the same as the odds number. The enemy only took 5 casualties. If these are glitches, they need sorting; if this is correct, then the RNG is broken.”
- “There are some AI glitches that can be exploited.”
- “The game is very polished, with no glitches or bugs.”
optimization
8 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
50%
13%
38%
The game's optimization is praised for its well-executed system and user interface, which is considered superior to many in its sub-genre. However, players note that mastering the intricate mechanics—such as battlefield tactics, unit performance, and historical accuracy—requires significant learning and practice. Overall, the depth of content and tactical layers contribute to a rewarding experience, albeit with a steep learning curve.
- “The game models various intricacies of battlefields, including a plethora of weapons and their varying usefulness at charge impact and prolonged melee, unit facing and firing arcs, tactics such as flank and rear attacks, evasions, fortifications, terrain type and elevation, and unit cohesion. All of these factors affect the performance of your soldiers in the field, adding layers upon layers of tactics to consider.”
- “This is a good, well-executed, optimized system, with a decent UI (better than most in this sub-genre) and lots of content.”
- “There is a lot to learn, and a good amount of mastery and optimization to be accomplished.”
- “The optimization in this game is severely lacking, making it difficult to fully enjoy the intricate battle mechanics.”
- “Despite the game's depth, the performance issues detract from the overall experience, leaving players frustrated.”
- “The game has potential, but the optimization problems hinder the strategic elements that should shine through.”
replayability
6 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
33%
33%
33%
Users highlight that the game offers significant replayability, drawing comparisons to chess in terms of its enduring appeal. The polished mechanics and varied scenarios contribute to a rich experience that encourages multiple playthroughs.
- “+ tons of replayability.”
- “I don't like to use the term 'endless replayability,' but that's how a lot of people describe chess, right?”
- “Alternatively, look at Field of Glory II (same makers), which is the same engine but has a bit more polish and is more playable, but set in the ancients era.”
monetization
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Reviews indicate that Slitherine has a reputation for overpricing outdated games, drawing comparisons to notorious cash grab companies like Paradox. This has led to significant dissatisfaction among users regarding the value for money in their offerings.
- “Slitherine has a history of massively overcharging for obsolete games, rivaling the worst cash grab companies like Paradox.”
- “Slitherine has a history of massively overcharging for obsolete games, rivaling the worst cash grab companies like Paradox.”
emotional
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players find the tutorial missions to be intense emotional experiences, characterized by a range of feelings from confidence to panic, ultimately leading to a sense of triumph. This emotional rollercoaster enhances the overall engagement and investment in the game.
- “Each of the four tutorial missions were themselves emotional rollercoasters of 'I got this' to, 'oh crap, I'm screwed' to, 'oh my god, I might just pull this off.' No, I'm not being sarcastic.”