Warhounds

Read some negative reviews and people are honestly nitpicking about weird things. At least the game launched fully instead of sitting in early access for years and ending up nowhere! Played a couple missions, noticed a few bugs and a slopy camera, but it is still a very enjoyable experience because the core tactics are simple and fun at the same time, so it definetly works for me

Feels like a 15year old game got an asset flip on an unpatched release. Plus it has some sketchy Russian goverment backing. If you're into tactical strategy Warhounds feels instantly familiar but that ends up being a massive double-edged sword. On one hand it tries hard to capture that XCOM vibe with squad management and base building. The issue is that the actual gameplay doesn't back it up. They make a deal out of having "no fake RNG" and relying purely on "true ballistics" but in practice the hit or miss stuff feels just as arbitrary and broken as anything else. Trying to run it on a Steam Deck is pretty rough too. The framerate is constantly choppy. The controls feel like an afterthought making menus and movement super clunky. Honestly once you get past the store page it genuinely feels like some modders reskin of an unpatched game from 15 years ago. On top of all the performance and gameplay issues there's the offshore publishing shells in Dubai and the US (Everplay DMCC and Brightika) being used to thwart sanctions. this is actually Sparta 2035 under a different name built by a Moscow dev team (Lipsar Studio) using state media grants from Russias Institute for Internet Development. Buying it just funnels cash and taxes back, into that economy. Skip this one. Spend your money on a tactical game that actually works, isnt state sponsored and doesn't try to sell you a game that before the war was on sale for $2 in some places.

Honestly speaking - there is nothing genuine to this copy cat of a game. For the price tag given, you should be able to expect more than an audacious conmixture of, say, "borrowed" concepts and ideas. It is literally nothing more than a blunted mash up of Jagged Alliance 3 and XCOM 2, both of which do so much more gameplay-wise. I ended up missing some aspects of these two that did not make it into the plagiarization - more than enjoying this game. The shallow presentation, and the secrecy about it's original name and the funding do the rest to give me an uncomfortable feeling even playing this game. If the devs weren't that open of where they stole the ideas, I'd call it an unapologetic scheme. Don't get me wrong - it's not a bad product. It's just not living up to the standards of it's obvious sources. After all, the price inflated for export tips my scale not to recommend it. Just play the originals or wait for an offer if you still want to support this.

Instead of traditional percentage-based hit rolls, the game emphasizes actual ballistic calculations, positioning, line of fire, cover and elevation. This makes tactical decisions feel more consequential than simply hoping that a 75% shot connects. Between missions you manage your mobile base, recruit personnel, improve equipment, negotiate contracts and make decisions affecting the campaign. This gives [b]Warhounds[/b] a proper strategic layer rather than making it nothing more than a sequence of tactical battles. However, this is also where the game feels most derivative. If you've played [i]XCOM[/i], [i]Jagged Alliance[/i] or [i]Phoenix Point[/i] extensively, much of the campaign structure will feel familiar. The alternative-future [i]African[/i] setting is an interesting choice, and the developers are going for an intentionally exaggerated old-school mercenary/action-movie atmosphere. Visually, it is competent rather than spectacular. The game is clearly more interested in tactical readability than visual spectacle. [b]Warhounds[/b] is a solid tactical RPG for players who want more [i]XCOM[/i]-style combat but dislike artificial hit percentages. Its true-ballistics approach is its biggest selling point. Positioning, cover and line-of-sight matter in a way that makes firefights feel more physically grounded. The mercenary management and base layer provide enough strategic depth to support the tactical missions. But don't expect an [i]XCOM[/i] killer. Its overall structure is very familiar, and much of the game feels like an extremely polished interpretation of ideas that [i]XCOM[/i] and [i]Jagged Alliance[/i] established years ago. [h1]8/10[/h1] DISASTER | BAD | MEDIOCRE | OKAY | GOOD | [b][u]GREAT[/u][/b] |AMAZING| MASTERPIECE [quote] Reviewed on: Win11 Home 64-bit, Intel i5-11600K, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16GB PRIME, 32GB DDR4-3600 RAM, 2 x Kingston NV1 1TB M.2 NVMe SSD, Internet Broadband 1000/1000 Mbit[/quote] [quote] If you like this review, then please consider giving it a thumbs up. I've also reviewed other games that you might find interesting. If so please follow [u][url=https://store.steampowered.com/curator/27418263/] Top of the Chart.[/url][/u]

Dev is trying to sell a different game under a new title, I don't know the exact details but feels really scummy when this is exactly Sparta 2035. Not to mention the lack of an AI disclosure despite a lot of AI art assets and what isn't AI generated at-least some of them appear to be directly lifted from Xcom 2. I could be wrong but that Civilian scramble animation is suspiciously close. Frustrating, bones are solid if only the devs cared enough to put in the work. AI Gen is lazy plain and simple.

The immediate reaction on hearing about this game was "Cool, a new iteration of Jagged Alliance 3!" And it sounds very similar, on paper: run a mercenary company in Africa, with a game loop alternating between strategic decision-making on the overworld and tactical grid-based combat where a small OP squad overwhelms superior numbers. In practice it is in fact very like JA3, with quite a lot of modern XCOM mixed in. The problem is that it mimics its influences very strongly, but somehow manages to be worse than either of them in every respect. Soldier customization is limited; you make a decision about once every 2nd level. They each have a voice and a few lines, but most of those lines are annoying. The marketing suggested that each would have unique personal skills, but in face only a few of them seem to. The maps are very pretty, I have to admit. Overall if you're considering this, I'd strongly recommend just getting Jagged Alliance 3 or XCOM (2012) instead. You'll have more fun.

Alright. [i]Warhounds[/i] is done and dusted. This is very much a modern world tactical turn-based strategy game ala XCOM2 (and Jagged Alliance 3), which the developers proudly list as their main influences. I've played XCOM2 extensively, and I'd say it definitely has a lot in common with that game, without an alien invasion of course. Instead, this game focuses on a civil war getting out of control in Africa. A (mostly) benevolent warlord is usurped by a group of fanatics with mysterious backers and your PMC is hired to both end the insurrection and also investigate who the mysterious backers are. With that in mind, there is a decent selection of maps and variations of those maps to keep the main missions from getting boring. Side missions on the other hand do repeat their basic formats pretty strictly, and map variation is far less... varied. Each map makes great use of terrain and verticality to create fun playscapes within which to conduct operations and engage in (mostly) urban warfare. Cover and destructible environments are also key design additions within the maps, and obviously this is hugely impactful during combat. Within your PMC, you have a small selection of classes: grenadier, specialist, assault, machine gunner, and sniper. I've seen a lot of talk of this or that class being useless. I didn't find that to be the case at all. Actually, I thought all classes had a well-defined role in your PMC. You get to bring four soldiers into each full mission, and at no point did I feel like any class was weak. Snipers are obviously going to have an advantage in games like this, but really, I enjoyed what each class brought to the table, and I used them all throughout the campaign. https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3797669309 In addition to main and side missions, you also have passive missions, where you send one to four soldiers (typically two) to resolve missions automatically. At a certain point, you also will unlock missile launchers and drones, adding another layer to these passive missions. Regardless of the type of mission, your soldier will become fatigued and need to rest. Additionally, if they are wounded, they will have significant downtime. Now, on the flipside of this, there aren't timers on any of your main missions until you reach a certain threshold, and side/passive missions will be generated consistently, so I found there to be no harm in skipping days so my troops could rest and heal properly. The one caveat being that your have to pay your troops and maintain your base (a ship) every month, so you will need to earn enough cash via missions to at least do that. There are limited skill trees for each class, and gear will be regularly upgraded via special gear contracts and loot found during missions. You can also buy stuff via the black market; and also purchase any unlocked items via a merchant option in your ship's hold. It's pretty important, especially mid to late game, to properly equip your soldiers with the best gear. There are also three factions you can ally with, each of whom have their own gear that will unlock if you befriend them. That inarguably the best gear in the game, so definitely strive to befriend all of them. Balancing faction relationships can be tricky since a lot of your missions pit one faction's objectives against another, lol. But eventually, the common enemy will unify these groups to some extent, at least through your PMC and its activities and diplomacy. I personally thought the bulk of the game on default settings was pretty easy, and I only lost three soldiers throughout my playthrough outside of a party wipe I'll talk about a bit below. None of the three soldiers were Veterans. Veterans being the top tier mercenaries with special abilities beyond their class abilities. They're the same characters in each playthrough. You'll want to prioritize recruiting and leveling up all of them. Anyway, once the game introduces the shadow faction, a lot of these battles get more difficult, and the first time you have to fight them, you may end up having to replay the mission(s) at least once due to the potential necessity of drastically altering your tactics and potentially having a party wipe until you figure it out, lol. A party wipe during main story missions requires a restart rather than just permanently losing your soldiers. Other than party wipes during main story missions, permadeath is a thing. So, in a weird way, a party wipe can be better than simply having one or two soldiers die. https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3795273778 The story is very socially conscious but also doesn't shy away from having you make difficult decisions. The devs did include some fun and often humorous dialogue and news stories though to break up the seriousness here and there. I enjoyed all that. Additionally, the quips and banter was also fun overall. The graphics weren't amazing, but they were very appropriate to the setting. Voice acting was pretty decent overall, with some actors definitely leaning into being intentionally a bit over the top. https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3799323664 So, NPC AI was generally decent and at times really effective. However, there were also times where they'd get into these weird movement loops or would make odd decisions outside the purview of their class tendencies. I would also say that there is in fact wonky RNG at times. When you miss three shots in a row with 80% success odds or make three in a row with 20% odds, you know that probably should be dialed in a bit better. I think the problem percentages were mostly in the 55-70% range where the failure rate was greater than that 55-70% would suggest. Overall, it wasn't a significant issue IMO, but it's worth noting. Yeah, I had a fun time with this game. The gritty, (mostly) urban warfare was compelling, the setting was cool, the story was pretty decent, and I found it to be a pretty addictive gameplay loop. The price seems pretty competitive for the game you're getting, and I think it's worth a look. [b]The developers reached out via email to see if I'd be interested in reviewing this, which I was, and provided a key for the game.[/b] [code]If you found this review helpful and would be interested in supporting my Curator group, [url=https://store.steampowered.com/curator/32549618/]Robilar's Reviews[/url], it would be appreciated. Cheers.[/code] [code]Also follow [url=https://store.steampowered.com/curator/32732116-IndieGems/]IndieGems[/url] for more reviews like this one.[/code]

The technical state is probably the biggest problem. For a 1.0 release, crashes shouldn't be happening. Simple as that. But after the initial frustration, I found myself enjoying the actual game. here should be “yellow finger” :-)