Age of Wonders

Pros • Overworld tactics are slightly complex • Good reference section in the manual • Dungeon exploration • Diplomatic relations between races • Play by email offers an interesting alternative • RPG style character improvement	Cons • Tactical combat isn't • Weak tutorial, that besides being short, you have to read! • Weak computer AI
Bottom Line Two steps forward and one step back in the Heroes of Might & Magic races. Imagine that the computer game market is like a day at the horse races. Under a bright and rosy sun, a series of races are run. Every publisher brings their best pound of horseflesh to the gate. From the grandstands, the gaming public watch the parade to post and plunk down their cash on their favourite. The gate's close and the race is run. Some of the races are incredible, competitive affairs. For example, to the first person shooter stakes, each publisher sends a skittery, high stepping, snorting young thoroughbred. The race is a flurry of pounding hooves, flying manes, whips and screaming spectators. 3DO, on the other hand, for the longest time has been running a one horse race. They send out their Heroes of Might & Magic sequel to trot around the turn based fantasy strategy derby, proudly waving to the cheering fans, posing for photographs and collecting the garlands in the winner's circle. Well, it's a one horse race no longer. This year, 3DO's filly has to contend with a couple of well bred young challengers. Strategy First's, Disciples: Sacred Lands and the Gathering of Developer's, Age of Wonders have both entered the race. While Disciples displayed nearly identical bloodlines to those of Heroes of Might & Magic, Age of Wonders' pedigree is more diverse.

Enough of the extended metaphor already!

OK, if the opening was too obtuse for you right brained, binary coded technogeeks to follow, Age of Wonders is a turn based strategy game set in a fantasy realm, much like the venerable Heroes of Might & Magic series. Age of Wonders does distinguish itself with some engaging additions to this style of gameplay, particularly in the overworld strategy, but it lacks the heart (there's that metaphor again) of a true champion.

Like the other games in this genre, Age of Wonders sets the player in the role of Lord of a realm, at war with, well, just about everyone. Age of Wonders has a good back story and an engaging, branching campaign that can be played from two sides. Crucial to the success of your campaign is controlling the towns on each map and the wealth that they provide. With that money, combat units, city upgrades or other useful items may be purchased. Typically, the player begins in control of one city and must explore the blacked out map (why is it that fantasy generals haven't learned to scout the territories they are warring over?) to locate and secure the other cities and special locations (gold mines, farms, etc.) worth capturing.

Also like other games in the genre, Age of Wonders keys on the heroes that lead armies into battle, except that in Age of Wonders, these heroes are not as essential. If the main, commander in chief should be defeated then the scenario is lost, but armies (which are limited to 8 units) can be sent out without the benefit of a hero to lead them. Many of the combat units, especially after they have gained experience and advanced in level, are potent fighting forces and suffer little for not having a hero around to cast spells for them. As heroes defeat enemies, they gain experience and are able to select special abilities that make them more effective. Heroes also learn magical spells that they can use to great effect. The most impressive of the spells are the global incantations that can effect the map.

It is at this, global level that Age of Wonders outpaces (there it is again, that damn horse racing metaphor) the competition. The big spells add strategy. Judicious positioning of forces is also important since, whenever a combat is initiated, any adjacent armies join in and aid their compatriots, so even if the enemy has more powerful units or a fortified position, a player may come off victor by deploying superior numbers.

Further enhancing the strategy is the fact that many of the maps have multiple levels. There is often an underworld, which may be used to travel beneath certain positions. There are also units that have special abilities such as swimming, crossing unpassable mountains or tunneling in the underworld.

There are also diplomatic concerns in Age of Wonders that add to the gaming experience. Each of the 12 races in the game has neutralities, allies and natural enemies. The diplomacy is fairly simple, pretty much limited to gifting others with gold to improve your race relations, but the extra concern of diplomacy plays well into the game. Further effecting your relations with each race is how you treat them. Capturing a Halfling city for example may not be all bad. An overlord who improves the city may be looked upon with favour. On the other hand, races that simply can not abide your rule may even rise up in revolt if their captured cities are insufficiently garrisoned. Problem cities can be razed or pillaged. The populations can also be displaced by immigrating your own people to the cities in question (hey, this is a fantasy world where the logic of replacing an entire city population in a few days doesn’t apply).

So, the overworld game of Age of Wonders is more strategic and engaging than that of the competing games, and as an added bonus, almost as a mini game, there are ruins and dungeons that can be explored in a little tactical style dungeon crawl.

The flaw:

Having already alluded to a flaw in the heart of Age of Wonders, we have reached the part of the review where I must explain. Unfortunately, this flaw lies right in the very heart of Age of Wonders. It is the combat system. All of the overworld strategy leads to the bringing together of armies in combat. Combat can be resolved either automatically, where the results are summarized, or tactically, where the player is given the opportunity to actually command the battle. The problem is that the tactical combat is stuck between simple and effective. It is neither.

When a tactical combat is initiated, the player is taken to a combat screen, where each of the units are on the map. Each turn, units may either move or undertake a combat action (attack, cast a spell, etc.). The combat has some aspects that are tactical. For example, the maps are more than just painted backgrounds. Objects such as trees or big rocks block movement and also ranged attacks. Shooting arrows through trees is difficult at best. Unfortunately, this ranged attack blocking is taken too far. Imagine that you have an army composed of six archers and two melee units facing an opposing force comprised of mostly melee units. It makes sense to wait for the enemy to come into range and subject them to a withering volley of arrows. Well, the computer AI isn’t smart enough to figure this out, but it is dumb enough to simply stand still until a unit moves into the movement range of a melee unit. Obviously, the computer is more patient than the player, willing to make the same decision and simply wait for the next turn indefinitely until the human gets bored and moves into attack range. Fair enough, that can be worked around. But, it makes sense to keep the melee units in front of the archers to try and shield them from the charging enemy. Trouble is, any friendly unit between an archer and his target is very likely to take those arrows, intended for the enemy, right in the back. Since it is impossible to move and attack, even to make a simple side step, the player is doomed to having poor tactical decisions forced upon him or her by the combat system. Email X-Com has a very similar, but better combat system.

Oh sure, you could decide to simply use the automatic combat system, but the computer AI is bad in the tactical game (employing such brilliant tactics as sending units out of a fortified town, one at a time, to melee with superior forces), and you know that you can probably do better in any combat than the automatic result. It’s like having a jar full of salty Dutch licorices beside your computer desk. You know you don’t want them, but there they are, and you with nothing in your mouth...

There are other flaws: the computer AI, as already mentioned is weak and the game uses the hidden maps and better starting positions for the computer to try and disguise its lack of intelligence. Age of Wonders is also a complex game lacking a good tutorial, so it is more difficult to learn than it ought to be.

One final note for those who may consider investing the hours at a stretch required to play a networked game: because, on their turn, players may spend time doing things like exploring dungeons, Age of Wonders requires more patience waiting for your opponents than do other games of this type, although the play by email is an interesting alternative.

So, in the end, we are left with a game that has taken two steps forward and one back in the fantasy strategy genre. Close, but no cigar.

Info & Screenshots