Console

Sunday, 6 September 2020

Lovecraft Country: Episode 4 Review

The latest game news from IGN - one of my fave channels ever - check it out This review contains spoilers for Lovecraft Country episode 4, "A History of Violence." To see where we left off, read our Lovecraft Country episode 3 review. [poilib element="accentDivider"] There's a precipitous balancing act at the heart of Lovecraft Country's fourth episode. And no, I'm not just talking about the literal pit of death in the catacombs beneath the Boston Museum of Science. Up until now, Lovecraft Country has trod a shaky line between two narrative modes: one, an escapist horror-fantasy melodrama riffing off cosmic horror tropes, and the other an allegorical family drama exploring the subject of intergenerational Black pain and institutional prejudice in twentieth-century America.

There’s perhaps no clearer example of this uneasy divide in priorities than in the series’ overt juxtaposition of historically accurate diegetic performances of songs like Roy Brown's "Boogie at Midnight" and Louis Jordan’s "Is You is or Is You Ain't My Baby" and jarringly anachronistic needle drops like the appearance of Rihanna’s “Bitch Better Have My Money” and Jade Josephine’s “Get ‘Em” in this week’s episode.

[widget path="global/article/imagegallery" parameters="albumSlug=lovecraft-country-season-1-photos&captions=true"]

It’s been a recurring trend so far, and it’s difficult to discern what, if any, thematic purpose or aesthetic function the latter choices serve in relation to the former. It’s a creative decision that winks incessantly at the audience, as if to elicit admiration by dint of sheer recognition. If anything, the tracks themselves feel like the show signaling a subliminal message that we, the audience, should be taking what happens to these characters seriously, but not too seriously, which in essence feels like Lovecraft Country fundamentally undercutting its own emphatic aspirations to treat the real-life horror of Jim Crow-era America with as much gravitas and attention as it does its outlandish plotline of magic-wielding grand wizards and man-eating shoggoths. Of course, this isn’t all that far afield from what Misha Green has done in the past, particularly in her 2016 period drama Underground, though the assorted song choices in Lovecraft Country and the intended effect in how they are used often feel either frustratingly obtuse or entirely too on-the-nose.

Be that as it may, “A History of Violence” itself is an entertaining episode, picking up the serialized plot format last seen in “Whitey’s on the Moon,” albeit now with a far more satisfying spread of moment-to-moment plot and character beats throughout. This week’s episode features its own abbreviated take of "Abdullah's Book," one of the early chapters of Matt Ruff's original novel. With George’s death, the challenge of uncovering the arcane vault of Titus Braithwhite falls to the series’ core trio of Atticus, Leti, and Montrose, who journey to Boston with Hippolyta and Dee in tow under the pretense of a family day trip.

The episode juggles this storyline alongside Christina’s quest to challenge the Chicago branch of the Order of the Ancient Dawn, and Ruby’s seduction at the hands of Christina’s henchman William, who apparently survived the destruction of the Braithwhite lodge in Ardham. This equation of parts ultimately squares to the sum of a subterranean pulp adventure that nods to films like National Treasure or Raiders of the Lost Ark, complete with its own riff on the latter’s iconic Staff of Ra scene. The score for the episode is just as evocative as the visuals, with an ensemble of trumpeting brass horns, fanciful flutes, and lush violin swells unmistakable in their likeness to John Williams’ signature style.

[ignvideo url="https://www.ign.com/videos/2020/07/25/hbos-lovecraft-country-official-panel-comic-con-2020"]

“This is some Journey to the Center of the Earth-type shit,” Atticus utters in sheer astonishment at the scale of the underground maze of tunnels beneath Titus’ museum wing. In contrast to the series’ baffling music choices, the self-aware dialogue and jokes here are definitely one of the episode’s strong points, doubling as not only another example of Lovecraft Country playing with the affordances of pulp and genre fiction, but circling back to Atticus’ abiding love for that type of literature. “If we follow the logic of adventure novels,” Atticus announces at one point, acclimating with more visible confidence to the extraordinary circumstances of his and his family’s predicament.

The relationship between Atticus and his father Montrose, which could generously be described as “embattled” up to until now, is another prime point of focus for the episode. When we last saw Montrose, before his confrontation with Hippolyta, he was stewing in his heartache at the loss of his brother. “A History of Violence” picks right back up on that thread, opening with Montrose lying on his back in a stupor of grief-ridden inebriation. Everyone’s got their own way of dealing with grief— some healthier than others. Montrose’s just happens to be getting piss drunk and lighting things on fire, namely the Order of the Ancient Dawn bylaws George gave him before he died in order to protect Atticus and the rest of their family.

“Smells like Tulsa,” he mutters over a flaming trash can, presumably in reference to the infamous Tulsa Massacre of 1921 which played a prominent role in HBO’s Watchmen series last year. Whether Lovecraft Country will attempt its own exploration of that same sordid event is anyone’s guess, but what’s unmistakable is that Montrose is haunted by several traumas of his own: whether it be his emotional shortcomings as a father, his own tumultuous upbringing, or the terrible forbidden knowledge of...something that he desperately wants to withhold from his son in an effort to protect him. At any cost. The place this episode leaves his and Atticus’ relationship may not be perfect, but it’s a long-overdue step on the road to reconciliation. At least for now.

[widget path="global/article/imagegallery" parameters="albumSlug=fall-tv-preview-2020-new-and-returning-shows-to-watch&captions=true"]

Touching back for a moment on last week's episode, there's something I overlooked in my review of "Holy Ghost" that feels especially pertinent in light of the events of this week's episode. As cited by critic Joelle Monique in her review for The A.V. Club, the words spoken at the beginning of "Holy Ghost" were not originally those of Leti’s mother’s, but rather a spoken-word poem delivered by Precious Angel Ramirez in a 2017 Nike commercial dedicated to the life of trans Afro-Puerto Rican vogue dancer Leiomy Maldonado, cleverly interpolated to take on a new meaning within the context of the episode, not unlike how the late J-Dilla flipped an innocuous sample of The Singers Unlimited song "Clair" into one of the most iconic rap beats of his career. All of which is to say that the appearance of a mummified two-spirit Guyanese spiritualist in the bowels of Titus’ vault is not as far out of left field as viewers might assume at first blush. They’re a fascinating character, unprecedented in Ruff's own novel, and one whose very existence offers a new dimension to the series — their untimely death notwithstanding. Though admittedly the chances of them coming back, in some form or another, are about as good as George’s - or perhaps even better given the state in which they were found.

And then there’s the story of Leti’s sister Ruby, which we’ll probably see more of in next week’s episode. While peripheral to the episode’s A-plot of finding Titus’ vault, Ruby’s seduction at the hands of Christina Braithwhite’s henchman William sets the stage for the series’ own rendition of “Jekyll in Hyde Park,” one of the stranger chapters of Lovecraft Country’s source material. It’s been interesting to watch the series remix the elements of Ruff’s writing into a story that pays respect to the original without deferring to it verbatim. If Hippolyta’s revelation and reaction at the end of this episode is any indication, things are clearly about to reach a head for the Freeman family.



from IGN Reviews https://ift.tt/325YSSK
This could be a real lead forward for personal gaming... Revolutionise gaming

Friday, 4 September 2020

HyperX Cloud Stinger Core Wireless + 7.1 Gaming Headset Review

The latest game news from IGN - one of my fave channels ever - check it out HyperX has a new duo of affordable gaming headsets on the market now, bringing it’s Cloud Stinger series to a more budget-friendly price point in the form of the Cloud Stringer Core headsets. The HyperX Cloud Stinger Core Wireless + 7.1 is, as the name suggests, a wireless model with 7.1-channel surround sound that costs just $79.99. As far as wireless gaming headsets go, that makes it on the cheap side. So, let’s see just how well it fits into the competitive market of wireless gaming headsets. [widget path="global/article/imagegallery" parameters="albumSlug=hyperx-cloud-stinger-core-wireless-71&captions=true"]

Design and Features

The HyperX Cloud Stinger Core Wireless 7.1 is nearly a facsimile of the HyperX Cloud Stinger Wireless, which we found to be generally favorable. The Core model trades off a few design features in order to go lower on price, but makes up for a bit of that with improvements. The Core headset opts for mesh ear cups that only have a few degrees of swivel, and the padding in the ear cups and headband is fairly light. The negligible weight of the headset (just under 244 grams) keeps it feeling comfortable for long play sessions though. HyperX’s_Cloud_Stinger_Core_Wireless_+_7.1-3 The Core model maintains the 17-hour battery life of its predecessor, but now it can charge using a USB-C connection, helping bring it in line with the modern era of ports. The headset also continues to connect using a small wireless dongle for lossless and lag-free audio over a 2.4GHz connection. The dongle is about the size of a typical flash drive and connects to a USB-A port. The audio on offer comes through 40mm neodymium directional drivers with support for software-enabled 7.1-channel surround sound on Windows PC. The headset offers a frequency response range from 20Hz to 20kHz. Dialing in the volume is also easy with a volume wheel on the left earcup. Surprisingly, the microphone also offers a considerable frequency response range from 50Hz to 18kHz. It also maintains the flip-to-mute function of its predecessor, alongside a unidirectional pickup pattern, noise-cancelling, and a fabulously flexible boom arm.

Software

HyperX’s_Cloud_Stinger_Core_Wireless_+_7.1-1 HyperX’s NGenuity software is a fairly simple app for controlling settings of the headset. That is to say, it’s rather barren. It has a basic volume control for the speakers and microphone, and a toggle for 7.1-channel surround sound. Given the software is required to enable surround, it’s disappointing to not even see custom EQ or any sidetone settings.

Gaming

Few wireless gaming headsets come into this price ballpark, so it would be fair to expect less from them on the audio front – but the HyperX Cloud Stinger Core Wireless + 7.1 holds up well. HyperX’s_Cloud_Stinger_Core_Wireless_+_7.1-2 The drivers can sound a little bass heavy, but that bass-forward sound manages not to muddy the audio. Not only does it succeed in delivering low booms, but it can keep bass, mid, and high-end sounds fairly clean. I took the headset through well over 20 hours of Overwatch, which not only has excellent audio but also supplies a great deal of information through its audio. Amid frantic combat and plenty of gunshots ringing out around all sides, I could still hear clearly enough to pick up major warning signals like the sounds of a lurking Reaper, the approach of Roadhog looking for a pick, or the all-too-alarming callouts from D.Va or Pharah popping their ultimate abilities. The ability to hear those audio cues clearly and with directionality was enough to maintain my usual level of play. So, I give the headset credit there. That said, the 3D audio comes down to the game, as I couldn’t spot the slightest difference between having the 7.1-channel mode on and off. HyperX’s_Cloud_Stinger_Core_Wireless_+_7.1-4 The microphone is perfectly serviceable. It’s a bit on the mellower side, and doesn’t seem to pick up as much on the low end. With the mic positioned close to my mouth, my voice sounds a bit fuller but with occasional clipping. However, positioned further away, the microphone can occasionally miss the first sound it hears when trying to cut down on noise. My teammates never complained (even though the lack of sidetone leads to more shouting than I’m used to), but it’s not a mic I’d try to start a streaming channel with. I’ve found the ClearCast microphones on SteelSeries’ headsets and the impressive Sennheiser GSP 370 headsets’ mic far more lifelike. The wireless connection is perfectly stable while in the same room as the receiver. Putting a couple walls between quickly sees the signal spot out, even while under 20 feet away. The battery life also met HyperX’s advertised 17 hours, though the low-battery alert always felt much too early for me to anticipate the eventual shutdown, leading me to frantically swap headsets on several occasions. There are only a few serious competitors for the HyperX Cloud Stinger Core Wireless + 7.1 in its price ballpark. The PDP LVL 50 is a match on price, but doesn’t have as good a build. However, for just a little more, HyperX is outclassed by the Corsair HS70 Pro (read our review of the original Corsair HS70) and the SteelSeries Arctis 1 Wireless.

Purchasing Guide

The HyperX Cloud Stinger Core Wireless + 7.1 is available on Amazon with an MSRP of $79.99.

from IGN Reviews https://ift.tt/3jN9yLZ
This could be a real lead forward for personal gaming... Revolutionise gaming

Netflix's Away: Season 1 Review

The latest game news from IGN - one of my fave channels ever - check it out This is a non-spoiler review for all 10 episodes of Netflix's Away, which are currently available to stream worldwide. [poilib element="accentDivider"] As the second "voyage to Mars" series in the past two years (the other being Beau Willimon's shortlived drama The First on Hulu), Netflix's Away succeeds in many areas. Firstly, unlike The First, half of it actually takes place in space on the way to Mars. On top of that, Away delivers compelling drama, Hail Mary thrills, and captivating characters. But it also lags a bit while struggling to balance the trials and tribulations of the characters left back home on Earth, and the five astronauts risking their lives to make history and advance humankind. The series, especially if binged (as intended), falls into a rut of recycled beats - a lot of which are kind of "techno garble gazpacho." The crew faces equipment blunder after equipment blunder - such as an important component on the outside of the ship detaching, the water system goes kaput, their rendezvous resupply ship may have exploded, etc -- and the geniuses down on the ground then must figure out a way to MacGyver it. [poilib element="poll" parameters="id=7f38322c-7eda-4903-9937-bf1eacb81a6c"] It's the most gripping elements of Ron Howard's Apollo 13 replayed over and over. And after the first few times, the stakes lose their sting (a problem that Netflix's catastrophe-prone Lost in Space also suffers from). When the same ripcord is pulled more than once -- and yes, there are numerous times a character gets a bolt of inspiration from a random line or occurrence that helps them immediately think of a solution -- the danger tends to deflate. Fortunately, Away has its characters to fall back on. [widget path="global/article/imagegallery" parameters="albumSlug=away-season-1-photos&captions=true"] Sure, at first glance the international crew of Away's Mars-bound Atlas feels like a winking gathering of tropes. And maybe that's the point. The cranky Russian (Mark Ivanir), the man of faith (Ato Essandoh), the dashing doctor (Ray Panthaki), and the cold scientist (Vivian Wu) all initially feel egregiously thin when compared to series lead Hilary Swank and her nicely flawed Commander Emma Green. At first, it feels like Emma might be the only one on the Atlas with a pulse, and textbook TV insecurities, but as the series and the mission pushes on, you get to know the other characters well enough to care about their pains, pleasures, and life regrets. By the end of this first season, you'll come to very much enjoy the five as a complex crew that often struggles under the weight of their enormously risky endeavor. Whether it be physical or emotional, they all have their limits and breaking points, and because the crew experiences each other at their most vulnerable, they bond in unexpected ways that make for some pretty good TV. And  As the months aboard the spacecraft stretch on, Emma's pain and longing feel real and palpable. [poilib element="quoteBox" parameters="excerpt=Hilary%20Swank%20is%20excellent%20as%20Emma%2C%20whose%20Atlas%20life%20is%20the%20heart%20and%20core%20of%20the%20series."] In the first episode, Emma is already on her ship, docked at the moon, and coping with a couple of crew members who feel she's unfit to lead them. Back at home, Emma's husband Matt (Josh Charles), dealing with the stress of not only raising their teen daughter Lex (Talitha Bateman) alone but also being the chief brain at NASA in charge of his wife's mission, suffers a stroke that leaves him in a wheelchair. At this point, the series asks us to invest heavily in Emma and Matt as she considers returning home while he insists she keeps going. [ignvideo url="https://www.ign.com/videos/2020/08/24/amazons-the-boys-season-2-review"] It's a crucial moment because the rest of the season (and series presumedly) will live or die based on how much we care about Emma and Matt's bond. Can it withstand the vast expanse of space? Can it endure loneliness and hardship and feelings of abandonment and guilt? At the midpoint of the season, the Atlas crew reaches their own mission's halfway mark. After this, the astronauts can no longer connect to their loved ones via video call and it's when things start to get dark for Emma. Whereas the other crew members either have no family or are simply resigned to the fact that their family hates them because of their devotion to space, Emma, unable to fully compartmentalize, is emotionally torn and it makes for some good, grounded drama. The story back on Earth feels best when it's tethered to Emma's experiences up in the Atlas. On its own, however, it slouches under a touch of tedium, as Matt crumbles more and more, sidelining his own recovery, and his acceptance of possibly never walking again, by investing in Emma's technical conundrums in space. And the series even - ugh - teases possible romantic betrayals on both sides of the cosmos. Away, though much better, shares a few elements with fellow Netflix sci-fi series Another Life. Both involve a wife and mother leaving their family for space (and being doubted by their crew) while the husband/father stays behind to solve space problems. In both cases though, the homefront storyline, which takes up a good 50% of the runtime, is the weakest link.

from IGN Reviews https://ift.tt/2QUbdTw
This could be a real lead forward for personal gaming... Revolutionise gaming

Thursday, 3 September 2020

Iron Harvest Multiplayer Review

The latest game news from IGN - one of my fave channels ever - check it out

[Editor's Note: This review and score cover only the multiplayer of Iron Harvest; you can read our review of the single-player campaign here.]

Iron Harvest's multiplayer is a unique take on the tactical real-time strategy game. It tries a new mix of balance of strategy, tactics, and speed that works in some ways, but is frustrating in others. Like I said in the single-player review, this is a very ambitious game, and the multiplayer has that same ambition – but it’s not quite as well realized here. There are only six maps at launch, for example, though more are promised in the coming month. As it stands at launch the bigger ideas are fun, but the deliberate balancing just isn't there yet.

There are three factions: Light, fast, harassing Polania with its long-range units; fearsome Saxony with its damage-resistant mechs that rarely give up ground; and Rusviet, the fierce, close-range fighters who specialize in finding and exploiting an enemy's weak points. The balance between the factions is pretty good, though some factions suffer in specific ways more than others. Rusviet, for example, has to rely on infantry or heroes for anti-armor since their mechs aren't very good at it.

[ignvideo url="https://www.ign.com/videos/2020/09/01/iron-harvest-single-player-review"]

Iron Harvest's basic rules are familiar: You build a very simple base composed of only three kinds of buildings. You must capture points to get resources, and can win the game by getting enough victory points or by destroying the enemy base. Defense is far less important than offense, and though you can build bunkers and mines they're too static for the fast-moving matches and rarely see play. The adage that "the best defense is a good offense" is well-used here.

Iron Harvest has the appearance of a highly tactical RTS, rather than a strategic one, but it's really somewhere in between. The tactical elements are there: Flanking, cover, and positioning matter quite a bit in individual battles. However, the interactions between units are ultimately too simple, and almost any form of defense requires you to babysit your units. The outcome of a fight between any given pair of units is simple enough that the importance of strategic actions, like economic management, is greater than in other tactical games because each spare unit of iron or oil could mean victory or defeat.

[poilib element="quoteBox" parameters="excerpt=The%20adage%20that%20%22the%20best%20defense%20is%20a%20good%20offense%22%20is%20well-used%20here."]

In fact, if you're an RTS fan, you probably already noticed that Iron Harvest looks a lot like Company of Heroes. It draws a lot of inspiration from the first Company of Heroes game, and from Relic's first two Dawn of War games, but much less from the more nuanced, granular upgrades and combat in Company of Heroes 2.

Many of the things I spoke about in the single-player review carry over to the multiplayer: Iron Harvest looks good in motion, it's fun to control, the terrain destructibility is unparalleled. But here, there are more interesting differences between the factions than you see in single-player. Take the differences between basic troops: Polanians have rifles, Saxonians have SMGs, and Rusviets have shotguns. This means that, in the early game, the Rusviet benefit from aggressive rushes, the Polanians want to set up defensive ambushes from cover, and the Saxonians want to keep their enemy at mid-range.

[widget path="global/article/imagegallery" parameters="albumSlug=iron-harvest-screenshots&captions=true"]

The tactical RTS is a subgenre where the majority of your time is spent telling units what to do, as opposed to base building, and Iron Harvest definitely focuses on fighting. Because of that, 1v1 matches usually take a little more than 20 minutes to play out, and generally you can just add 10 minutes per extra pair – up to 3v3 matches at 40 minutes. With such short matches, the sheer speed of your actions provides an advantage over others, and all else being equal, in my experience a faster player will usually beat a more strategic player.

Heroes, in particular, are not new to RTS games but are a neat addition to the tactical RTS formula. Iron Harvest's range of characters fills a variety of roles across every faction, enabling strategies that wouldn't otherwise work for that group. Polania, for example, has a powerful harasser in the early game with its sniper Anna on the field, as she can hit hard at a distance and her bear Wojtek carries supplies to heal friendly infantry. Take Michal Sikorski's cavalry unit instead and Polania's speed comes to the fore, with Sikorski leading flank attacks to devastate slow enemies. Or maybe you'd prefer Lech Kos in his gorilla-like mech, a powerful mid-to-late-game melee combatant that’s able to take down all but the largest enemy mechs on his own.

[poilib element="quoteBox" parameters="excerpt=In%20my%20experience%20a%20faster%20player%20will%20usually%20beat%20a%20more%20strategic%20player."]

Taking flags gives you victory points, while taking iron and oil mines gives you resources. Because static defenses are so weak, no source of resources is ever secure, so you must constantly move to either defend your refineries or threaten your opponent's. Here's another key difference from Company of Heroes: Resource points can be taken and exploited at any time – they're not attached to distinct map areas that can be cut off. Weapon ranges are quite short, and maps are very small, so nearly everything is under threat at all times. In contrast to that, the time-to-kill, and expense, of a unit is quite high, so retreating from a bad fight is often the best option.

There is a retreat button which sends units right back to your base, but it’s important to note that retreating doesn't make your units faster or confer any protection from damage as it does in Company of Heroes, and you can't cancel it once you start, but it does allow them to ignore suppressive fire from automatic weapons. It's not very intuitive, but if you're fast enough to micromanage it then manually retreating is best. (Unless you're using retreat to escape from machine guns!) Mechs can retreat too but it's risky: Most mechs take extra damage when hit from behind, and with no speed boost slow mechs are just lumbering targets. Again, it's not very intuitive, but you're often better off using C+Right Click to force a mech to move in reverse.

[ignvideo url="https://www.ign.com/videos/iron-harvest-trailer-join-the-polanian-resistance-and-their-1920s-mechs"]

The early minutes of each match are vital, as you skirmish with the enemy for resource points, victory flags, resource caches, and equipment crates around the map. Resource caches give you either a fast burst of the resource in question, allowing for early game strategies at the cost of long-term income. Crates drop a weapon system so your infantry can change type – the same way they can change type by picking up a fallen enemy's weapons. Crucially, picking up a new weapon changes the entire infantry squad to the new kind of weapon. If an engineer squad picks up cannons, they lose all their building powers and become anti-armor soldiers.

On some team maps the speed of your scouts practically determines the match's outcome: If your opponent gets to the crate with machine guns before you do then there's nothing to be done about it. (Infantry picking up new weapons aren't stopped by being shot.) Since resource income is rate-based over time, if your team can't hold or contest at least half the resource points on the map you'll fall unrecoverably behind. It means the start of a match is tight and tense, but not so chaotic that you lose control of what's going on.

[poilib element="quoteBox" parameters="excerpt=On%20some%20team%20maps%20the%20speed%20of%20your%20scouts%20practically%20determines%20the%20match's%20outcome."]

As a match goes on the pace of Iron Harvest picks up rapidly and the number of units in the fight grows significantly. Many will die simply because you can't order them around fast enough, and the UI for controlling more than 10 or so at a time is cumbersome. Once the leader gets ahead there's very little an opponent can do to catch up 1v1, barring a slick tactical coup (which is possible but difficult given the unit balancing).

I only ended a handful of my matches through victory points – most came from destroying my opponent's base by either pulling off a key counter-play after seeing their strategy or denying them resources through superior micromanagement. That's mostly how I lost, too. For example, I liked to make lots of infantry to bait out an anti-infantry mech purchase from my opponent, but keep enough in reserve for a surprise anti-armor mech myself… and that was often enough to decide the game. It's another big departure from Company of Heroes, and I don't think it's a good one.

Another other significant change from the Company of Heroes formula is much more fun: Melee combat. When ordered to, Infantry – and a few mechs – can engage each other using fists, bayonets, and blades. It's a neat tactical option that can be used to lock down enemy units and prevent them from shooting at crucial allies. For example, engineers and medics only have pistols, but if backed up by regular infantry they can charge and distract an enemy in melee while their allies do the real damage. Plus, you can use Wojtek the bear to kill an enemy mech, and there are few things better than a bear taking down a mech.

Units are one of four "weight" classes: Unarmored, Light, Medium, or Heavy, and each unit deals a varying amount of damage to each other class. So a heavy machine gun does good damage against an Unarmored or Light target, but barely scratches a Medium or Heavy one. Damage is also flat, with practically no randomization involved. Additionally, there aren't many soft-counters, like an anti-tank weapon in a larger infantry squad or mixed weapon types on a single walker. That means the majority of units, especially the infantry, are so single-purpose that combat feels deterministic. You can often tell how a fight would play out absent tactics, and if you don't have the right counter available no amount of tactics will save you. That’s true to some extent in almost every RTS, but it’s even more pronounced here.

It's all a bit rock-paper-scissors, and just too simple for a game that's about combat over economy and building. Infantry and light mech battles can be interesting because each does good damage to the other if the infantry is making good use of cover and swapping weapons  – at least situationally.

[poilib element="poll" parameters="id=d6114dc3-91ac-4b19-a467-32ba8678c9cc"]

Once machine gun teams, anti-armor cannons, and high-tier mechs come out, though? Well, suffice to say that combat gets far less interesting in the back half of a match. For many of the units the only way to win is with a bigger mech or a much larger force, with combat devolving into a brawl determined by whomever has bigger guns rather than brains. It's an environment where variations of a "death blob" strategy of throwing everything you have at the enemy, with minimal micromanagement, thrive. It's not just boring to play, but actively demoralizing to play against when you think your idea should turn the tide… and has no impact.

This is the biggest place where strategy outshines tactics, and neglecting it can easily be a game-ending mistake. Putting together the right unit composition lets you shut your opponent down so effectively that they'll never recover... because they simply can't. The maps are small enough, and captured quick enough, that you can exploit a significant enemy defeat to seize half the map or more, which gives you all the resources they’d need to come back. Likewise, if your timing is off, or you spend resources on the wrong unit, the pace is so fast that you can't easily recover. High game speed puts an emphasis on overall strategy. This is supposed to be a tactical RTS, right?

[poilib element="quoteBox" parameters="excerpt=Combat%20gets%20far%20less%20interesting%20in%20the%20back%20half%20of%20a%20match."]

Well…  it is. It's just unforgiving. It's a clockwork of game systems that are wound so tightly they get caught on the loose bits, and that doesn't feel like purposeful design.

What is innovative game design, and what saves Iron Harvest’s multiplayer from stagnating into an obvious metagame, are the hero units and the reserves system. At the start of each match you choose a mix of units and a single hero out of three for each faction, to appear across two waves of reserves. These waves are purchased from HQ for large chunks of resources, and they can include stuff you don't even have the required buildings to create yourself yet. It's a source of units you can base your entire strategy around, and getting a hero out early or deploying a wave of super-heavy armor in the mid-game can shut your opponent down hard.



from IGN Reviews https://ift.tt/3lYdOdI
This could be a real lead forward for personal gaming... Revolutionise gaming