Strategic War in Europe
- March 20, 2014
- Wastelands Interactive
Has its flaws, but with more polish and improved naval and air AI, this could be one of the great light wargames.
Get on Steam"Strategic War in Europe" is a turn-based strategy game set during World War II. Players can control any nation that participated in the war, with the goal of achieving historical or alternate-history victory scenarios. The game features a detailed simulation of military units, production, and diplomacy, with a focus on strategic decision-making and historical accuracy. It also includes a multiplayer mode for up to eight players.
PC
Windows
Reviews
- The game includes a tutorial and manual, making it more accessible to a larger audience compared to previous titles.
- It offers a variety of units and scenarios, allowing players to recreate historical events or explore alternate outcomes.
- The game is easy to learn and can be played in a few hours, making it a good entry point for those new to WWII strategy games.
- The game suffers from frequent crashes and bugs, making it frustrating to play.
- The user interface is clunky and not intuitive, leading to confusion during gameplay.
- Combat mechanics are often criticized for being tedious and unbalanced, particularly in naval and air engagements.
- gameplay6 mentions
- 33 % positive mentions
- 17 % neutral mentions
- 50 % negative mentions
The gameplay is characterized by a steep learning curve and complex mechanics that may deter some players, but those who invest the time find a rewarding and immersive experience. The game features a diverse range of units and solid mechanics, allowing for deep strategic engagement, though some players may find the simplicity of certain aspects disappointing. Overall, while it has its quirks, the gameplay is well-executed and offers a unique take on the strategy genre.
“Great variety in units, solid game mechanics, and decent pacing make this very easy to get absorbed into.”
“Although this does have a difficult learning curve and takes some getting used to compared to other strategy WWII games, there are a lot of negative reviews for it. This is mainly due to a lack of understanding of the game mechanics. This is a very different strategy game and is done really well; you just have to play and learn the game. Simple as that.”
“Too many game mechanics.”
“Yeah, very realistic game mechanics, which react properly to every change in alignment.”
- graphics5 mentions
- 40 % positive mentions
- 0 % neutral mentions
- 60 % negative mentions
The graphics have received mixed reviews; while some users appreciate the nostalgic design reminiscent of classic games, others feel it could be improved. Comparisons to older titles highlight that, despite their age, the visuals in those games are often considered superior. Overall, the graphics are seen as a strong point, but there is room for enhancement.
“The graphics are an A+.”
“Despite the fact they were made more than 20 years ago, they are way deeper as strategies and in terms of visuals, well, almost the same thing.”
“I understand that the graphic layout and interface are supposed to resemble classic games from the turn of the century, but it could look a bit better.”
“Kind of like Commander the Great, but not nearly as comprehensive, and much worse in all ways except graphics.”
“Despite the fact they were made more than 20 years ago, they are way deeper as strategies than this 'Strategic War in Europe', and in terms of visuals, well, almost the same thing.”
- music2 mentions
- 0 % positive mentions
- 0 % neutral mentions
- 100 % negative mentions
The music has been widely criticized, with users describing it as "terribly bad" and lacking engagement, leading to a sense of relaxation that ultimately highlights its shortcomings.
“Music is terribly bad.”
“I relaxed for 5 minutes listening to this music, long enough to realize that I would be okay.”
- grinding1 mentions
- 0 % positive mentions
- -200 % neutral mentions
- 300 % negative mentions
Players find the grinding aspect of the game to be excessively tedious, particularly in land and air combat, with naval combat being described as broken, leading to a frustrating experience even after investing over 20 hours.
“I put in over 20 hours, and the land combat is tedious, the air combat is even more tedious, and the naval combat is simply broken.”
“The grinding in this game feels endless and unfulfilling, making it hard to stay engaged.”
“After countless hours of grinding, I still feel like I'm not making any real progress.”
- replayability1 mentions
- 0 % positive mentions
- 0 % neutral mentions
- 100 % negative mentions
The game's replayability is severely criticized, with players expressing frustration over a forced stop in 1945 that renders their achievements meaningless, leading to a consensus that the replay value is effectively nonexistent.
“This game is a masterpiece, but I suggest nobody ever play it; the forced stop in 1945 is so frustrating that it makes all you've accomplished feel meaningless and empty, and the replay value is an absolute zero.”
- stability1 mentions
- 0 % positive mentions
- 0 % neutral mentions
- 100 % negative mentions
The game has been criticized for its poor stability, with users reporting numerous bugs that detract from the overall experience, likening it unfavorably to the Hearts of Iron series.
“Essentially, this is a terrible and, in my experience, very buggy knock-off of the Hearts of Iron games.”
- story1 mentions
- 100 % positive mentions
- 0 % neutral mentions
- 0 % negative mentions
The story conveys a powerful message about resilience and the unpredictability of life, emphasizing that perseverance in the face of adversity can lead to unexpected and rewarding outcomes.
“The moral of the story is that you never know what life has in store for you. If I had given up when all odds were against me, I wouldn't be where I am today.”
