Intro The creators of Cossacks have returned with another epic
historical RTS, this time the setting is in the Americas from 1492 to the war
of 1812. Fans of the gargantuan battles found in Cossacks will be pleased
with the refinements made in this version, but I myself found the gameplay rather
tiresome after extended exposure.
Gameplay: 6/10 I'd
honestly have to say the best description of a standard battle in American
Conquest is "meat grinder". Of course, since the game tries hard
to mimic the tactics and scenarios of, brutal and inefficient fighting is par
for the course. History buffs will delight in the amount of detail in the game,
from the details of the soldiers to the incredibly longwinded mission briefings
that double as an excellent history lessons. The missions are long, the battles
huge and bloody, and the tactics are for the most party historically accurate.
This is probably as close as we're going to get to accurately depicting combat
without going to a turn-based combat system. The
problem is, after about ten hours of gameplay, I started getting bored with it.
Defeating missions was formulaic: build lots of soldiers. LOTS of soldiers. Send
them in waves after the enemy buildings, rushing them inside to capture them.
From there it's a matter of "building hopping" until the base is yours.
This plan starts with heavy, heavy casualties on the attacker, but eventually,
after a few buildings have been captured, the steamroller affect cannot be stopped.
It doesn't help that the AI isn't smart enough to try to take back their own buildings
or kill the shooters inside. It's possible to take a building, tell the captors
to shoot at the windows of the adjacent building until most are dead, then just
waltz a few soldiers in and take it over. Rinse, wash, repeat. I'd
like to think that open field combat was better, but it usually devolves into
an orgy of color and sound, and it's pretty much impossible to tell what's going
on, even in the zoomed out view. Units do not stay in formation, and although
the formation/squad/army interface seemed simple, it rarely worked. In the end,
the side with the most units or support from captured buildings wins. Slightly
related to this problem are the missions themselves. I never really found myself
all that interested in what I was doing, or why. In fact, usually the briefing
itself, with its meticulous historical detail, was much more interesting than
the mission itself. Graphics:
7/10 Not much has changed from Cossacks to American Conquest
in the graphics department. Things look good up close, with lots of little details.
The zoomed out view isn't quite as pretty, though, and a lot of the detail that
distinguishes one unit from another is lost in this view. This makes battles particularly
difficult, because the only way to really get an idea of what's going on is in
the zoomed out view, but at the same time you can't tell who's who.
Sound: 6/10 The sound effects are
particularly good, especially the booming thunder of cannon fire and the loud
crack of a formation of rifleman firing in unison. The music d didn't fair quite
as well, however, as it quickly became repetitive and annoying.
Control: 8/10 I must say that I really did enjoy the control setup
for American Conquest. There are lots of controls options, lots of things
can be automated or adjusted quickly, and there are a lot of small innovations
in the controls that make things go very smoothly. In a game this huge, this is
probably the only thing that saves it from the muddy annuls of mediocrity.
Overall: 6/10 Overall my opinion
of American Conquest is simply "bleh". History buffs and fans
of Cossacks should find enough here to keep them entertained, but joe-average
gamer will probably find his time better spent on Age of Mythology or WarCraft
III. [
top ] |