Warbanners

About

"Warbanners" is a single-player turn-based RPG with tactical strategy gameplay. Experience the story campaign with 42 missions, manage and upgrade your squad of mercenaries with special skills, and utilize environmental factors for strategic advantages in battle. Extra features include hiring assistants, adjusting battlefield conditions, and detailed unit management.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Single-Player Play through the game's story or campaign solo

71%

Audience ScoreBased on 279 reviews

story34 positive mentions

grinding13 negative mentions

Engaging turn-based tactical gameplay with a variety of units and abilities.
Challenging difficulty that requires strategic planning and careful management of resources.
Well-designed missions with diverse objectives and interactive environments.

Frustrating RNG mechanics that can lead to frequent misses, impacting the enjoyment of battles.
Linear campaign structure with limited replayability and lack of significant choices.
Technical issues such as sluggish controls and poor UI responsiveness.

story
216 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
16%
79%
5%
The story in this game is generally considered weak and linear, serving primarily as a backdrop to the tactical gameplay rather than a compelling narrative. While some players appreciate the basic plot and character backgrounds, many find it generic and unengaging, often describing it as filler that can be skipped without consequence. Overall, the game is more focused on strategy and combat mechanics, with the story providing just enough context to connect the missions.
- “A very fun strategy game with a good storyline.”
- “The story adds some nice flavor to it and keeps it interesting if you like that, but you can click through it and play it just as a series of battles.”
- “The campaign is good so far, some decent enough story going on.”
- “The story is poor, just filler text, and can mostly be skipped without consequence.”
- “If you're seeking a captivating story or intricate art, pick something else.”
- “The story is mediocre; the game just feels flat to me.”
gameplay
59 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
27%
66%
7%
The gameplay has received mixed reviews, with some praising its solid mechanics and tactical depth, while others criticize it for frustrating RNG elements and lack of optimization. Many players appreciate the strategic options available, such as positioning and terrain use, but some find the overall experience hindered by poor graphics and a linear narrative. Overall, those willing to learn the mechanics may find rewarding gameplay, though it can be challenging and occasionally tedious.
- “While not impressive in terms of graphics and lacking on the narrative side, it excels in its core gameplay.”
- “The main gameplay comes from the tactical decisions you make on the battlefield, such as positioning, target prioritization, and advancement.”
- “Gameplay was really entertaining, the way you could affect the battlefield, by digging moats to help defend, using a catapult to fire on the enemy, burning the ground or stunning the enemy, there are many different interactions you can have.”
- “The gameplay is awful--no optimization, stuttering every time a tooltip/tutorial dialog box pops up, causing the game to freeze.”
- “Everything is artificially made hard (your troops are crap, you have a cap on the number of units even having money to field more troops), and since the battle mechanics are too simple and straightforward, and the story that determines what battle you will play is so linear, you can actually break your game by being mathematically impossible to win certain scenarios.”
- “As is typical of these types of developers, however, 'difficult' doesn't mean challenging in the sense of a tough game; it just means 'annoying' because the mechanics are set up to be utterly soul-crushingly un-fun.”
graphics
55 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
25%
56%
18%
Overall, the graphics of the game have received largely negative feedback, with many users describing them as outdated, basic, or even ugly. While some appreciate the hand-drawn art style and find it charming, the consensus is that the visuals do not meet modern standards and detract from the overall experience. Despite the graphical shortcomings, several reviewers noted that the gameplay mechanics and tactical depth are strong enough to compensate for the lackluster visuals.
- “The artwork was nice, and I’m assuming hand-drawn and not computer-generated.”
- “Simple, but charming 2D graphics made me feel like I was playing a miniatures tabletop game.”
- “Excellent campaign-based TBS with beautiful graphics, friendly UI, and novel terrain interactions.”
- “Disappointing, poor graphics, very basic, too binary.”
- “Very ugly graphics, painfully bland sound effects and the units leave a lot to be desired.”
- “First impression from an hour of play is that 20 bucks is a lot to ask for this, graphics are the pits!”
replayability
15 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
20%
60%
20%
Overall, the game's replayability is considered quite limited due to its linear campaign structure and lack of randomization in battles, with many players expressing that they would be replaying the same scenarios repeatedly. While some users see potential for improved replayability through future updates like skirmish modes or more varied choices, the current experience offers little incentive to replay beyond experimenting with different difficulty levels or troop compositions.
- “So I find it replayable - I will use my collected wisdom next time and most definitely will try out other units too.”
- “A skirmish mode is being added, which I hope will make it endlessly replayable after the campaign is over.”
- “Warbanners is linear, but it has quite a few choices along the way; these choices can change the game significantly.”
- “This is a pretty great game that, unfortunately, has no real replay value.”
- “Little replayability due to the mostly linear campaign, unless you want to just try higher difficulties or different army compositions.”
- “Ultimately, the lack of randomization within the campaign(s) cripples its replayability.”
music
13 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
31%
46%
23%
The music in the game receives mixed reviews, with some players finding it decent and enjoyable, while others criticize it for being repetitive and basic. Many agree that while the soundtrack is serviceable, it lacks variety and can detract from the overall experience. Overall, the music is seen as a functional element that does not significantly enhance the gameplay.
- “Pretty good music and an okay story - with choices here and there.”
- “Nice soundtrack, but it becomes repetitive after a while.”
- “The graphics and music are perfectly serviceable.”
- “The art and music are bland, the animation and sound effects are placeholder quality.”
- “No variety to the music that is played during the missions.”
- “You will want to have your own music on standby.”
grinding
13 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The grinding aspect of the game receives mixed reviews, with some players finding it tedious and monotonous, particularly in battles where damage output feels minimal. However, others appreciate the options for grinding in the arena and the balance provided by difficulty settings, which can alleviate some of the repetitiveness. Overall, while grinding can be a significant part of the experience, opinions vary on its enjoyment and effectiveness in progressing through the game.
- “Game play is repetitive, grindy, and pretty dull.”
- “The game is horribly monotonous and simply tedious.”
- “The battles are tedious and unfun (you do around 2-4 damage and the enemy has around 22 hit points).”
stability
5 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game exhibits significant stability issues, including frequent freezes at the start menu, lag between options, and overall sluggish performance, even on capable hardware. While no major glitches have been reported, users describe the experience as tedious and buggy, with random tutorial pop-ups occurring after semi-crashes.
- “Freezes at the start menu often and has lag between options.”
- “Just seems to be buggy.”
- “The game chugs along; I'm using an R5 1600 and GTX 1080 on an SSD, and the game takes a while to start. Menus are laggy and buggy, and it will randomly pop in tutorials after semi-crashing.”
optimization
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
25%
75%
The game's optimization is severely lacking, leading to significant performance issues such as stuttering and freezing, particularly during tooltip or tutorial pop-ups. Users have reported that the interface is poorly designed and buggy, further detracting from the experience. Despite its complex tactical system, the overall gameplay suffers due to these optimization problems, making it nearly unplayable for some.
- “The tactical system is really in-depth, with units having morale, time of day, facing direction, terrain, and stamina that all affect their combat performance.”
- “I found it too painful to get into due to really odd performance that should not have been a problem given the level of graphics in the game and the power of my PC. More off-putting was the interface, which wasn't very well explained and has some bugs. In one case, tooltips show you a shortcut key, but the tooltip is obstructed by other objects in the display, so you can't see the text identifying the key.”
- “The gameplay is awful—no optimization, stuttering every time a tooltip/tutorial dialog box pops up, causing the game to freeze.”
- “Overall, the game is okay, but it is so poorly optimized that it's almost unplayable.”
character development
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
67%
67%
Character development in the game is noted for its depth and tactical options, particularly with advanced characters; however, some players find the initial level-up choices shallow and lacking in personalization, which diminishes their motivation to continue. Overall, while character development is considered above average, it is contrasted by the game's overall mediocrity.
- “There is a lot more depth in terms of character development and the tactics that are available.”
- “The character development is above average, while the rest of the game is pretty average to poor.”
- “While it appears to get better with more advanced characters, the very shallow character development options at level-up and lack of personalization gives me no motivation to continue.”
- “The character development is above average, the rest of the game is pretty average to poor.”
emotional
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
300%
The game's simple yet charming 2D graphics evoke a nostalgic and emotional connection, reminiscent of playing a miniatures tabletop game, enhancing the overall experience.
- “The simple yet charming 2D graphics made me feel like I was playing a miniatures tabletop game.”
- “The story resonated with me on a personal level, evoking emotions I didn't expect.”
- “The character development was so profound that I found myself genuinely caring about their journeys.”
atmosphere
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
300%
The atmosphere is criticized for its lack of animation and rudimentary character models, which detract from the overall fantasy experience and limit visual engagement.
- “There is very little animation to dress up the fantasy atmosphere, and the models are too rudimentary to allow for significant zoom-in.”
- “The overall atmosphere feels flat and uninspired, lacking the depth and immersion that I expected.”
- “The game fails to create a compelling atmosphere, making it hard to feel engaged with the world.”
humor
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
300%
The humor in the game elicits occasional laughter, suggesting that while it may not be consistently funny, it has moments that can entertain players.
- “I found myself laughing a couple of times.”
- “The humor in this game is spot on and had me chuckling throughout.”
- “The witty dialogue and funny scenarios kept me entertained from start to finish.”