Armies of Exigo

The only thread I found related to the game was about the demo.

I’ve seen Tom Chick in RTS threads talk up the game. I was interested in it because I love Warcraft III, and I didn’t care if the game was a Warcraft clone as long as there was some good gameplay in it. But then the game was really badmouthed for ripping off a lot of Warcraft III features, but few people had criticisms for the gameplay.

Anyway I was planning on getting Warhammer 40k, but didn’t because I mainly buy fantasy RTS games for their single player campaigns, which in Warhammer 40k was short and let you play with only one side (might get it when the expansion comes out, though). Maybe Reign of Chaos and Frozen Throne spoiled me. And the occasional MP game with some friends.

A friend is buying me Kohan II next week, so I won’t be buying that myself.

I played BFME, Rome Total War, and Act of War as well, so those are done with. I wanted to pick up another RTS though, and I still wanted to get this one, but there were few people who actually played the game to give any recommendations on it.

So any opinions on this one?

I thought it was OK at least for the few levels I played. Not particularily original, but well-made. As for beeing a blatant War III rip-off, War of the Ring was far worse in my opinion.

There’s a demo out there that should give a little indication of how this game plays. Because of the demo, I ended up purchasing Armies of Exigo a few weeks ago but have not yet had the chance to spend any significant time with it. But the demo led me to believe it’s a very solid RTS.

I had a chance to demo this at the EA offices in a community event with representatives from about 16 other sites.

The game itself wasn’t really anything revolutionary. The things that stood out were: The graphcs engine was gorgeous, but really required some good hardware to show off (at one point, during the multiplayer fun, we browned out the electricity for the meeting room – and, I imagine, part of the EA offices); The upstairs/downstairs game-play was interesting to the point where you could have multiple fronts for your battle; The editing engine was phenomenal (and I only got a look at the alpha build).

Other than that, another WC3 clone, yes.

I didn’t know there was a demo out. Thanks for the tip.

Ever consider the nickname Senility instead of Tranquility? :P

lol you know the fact that there was a thread screaming out “Armies of Exigo demo” never induced me into thinking there is a demo. How terribly retarded :lol:

Both Armies of Exigo and Act of War are a couple of clone RTSs that are far better than you’d expect. Unfortunately, I think they got lost in the shuffle underneath higher profile titles.

Armies of Exigo, BTW, isn’t just a Warcraft/Starcraft rip-off. It’s got some very solid gameplay mechanics anchoring each of the races. I really like how differently they play, using concepts like experience, pop limits, and tunnels to subvert turtling. As for the micromanagement, there’s a fair bit of fiddling required to get the most out of the spellcaster units (isn’t there always?), but there are much more robust formation controls than you ever had in Warcraft III.

We still play it at Shoot Club, but I imagine the online community is an absolute ghost town by now. This showed every sign of EA wanting to dump it on the market and move on.

-Tom

Part of the problem is that there are just sooo many RTS games out in the market, including many very good ones, that it’s hard for some of them to get noticed and generate a player base. I would imagine this is especially true if the general buzz is that the game is “derivative.”

I don’t mind really the micromanagement in battles with multiple spellcasters. I thought that was one of the big plus points for Warcraft III, I enjoyed setting up different groups of units and micromanaging them and their spells in combat. It just felt more involved, and I felt it was one of the bad points in Kohan II that you can’t control the individual spellcasters when I played the demo.

I agree with you on Act of War as well. I didn’t think it would be so overlooked because Atari announced the number of downloads were massive, and it’s been a while (and its going to be a while longer) since the last good modern warfare RTS. Too bad because it’s a pretty good game.

Does anyone know if this game has a decent co-op mode? Basically multiplayer with two allied players vs. a number of comps. My wife and I like to play RTS coop and we are looking for a new one (new to us at least).

Apparently there’s also a multiplayer demo you can check out. Saw the link on Gamespot.

Both Armies of Exigo and Act of War are a couple of clone RTSs that are far better than you’d expect.

In the case of AoEx it certainly seems that way. I never tried it out since it seemed like another WC3 clone and I was somewhat tired of fantasy-RTS. Still, one of the guys I’m working with absolutely loves the game. He also thought that the AI was quite good.

-Julian

So I got the game and have been enjoying it but I have a question… does the Beasts side have an air transport unit or any way to get to resource nodes that are only accessible by flying units? I can’t seem to find a way for them to get there which seems like a horribly imbalancing disadvantage on certain maps.

Eric, your witches can cast a spell that turns units incorporeal. This lets them fly over obstacles and reform on the other side, effectively serving as air transport.

It’s also a handy way to keep your herds of Boron safe. Just turn them to ghosts and keep them off to one side. Voila! Inviolable farms!

-Tom

Thanks Tom! I was reading that as a witch self only buff for some reason, that makes sense.

I must be missing something…

Armies of Exigo was boring. It was Warcraft III without the Blizzard UI that goes along with it. I didn’t really notice the fun. Maybe it was just the demo (as that’s all I played), but I had no urge to play it further.

Same thing with the Act of War demo. I’ve seen people here talk it up, but I found no enjoyment in what felt like a buggy clone of C&C Generals.

Matt, I’m not sure how to handle your complaint that Armies of Exigo and Act of War are “boring”, other than to say I thought they were “fun”. But you’ve already headed me off at the pass by saying you didn’t “notice the fun”. Rats. Foiled again! :)

At any rate, I think they’re both great RTS designs doomed to mediocrity by a lack of branding. I’d be happy to elaborate if you like, but it might be easier to just direct you to reviews I’ve written for CGW: Armies of Exigo and Act of War. I still play both games.

As for your assertion that Act of War is buggy, that’s not something I’ve encountered. What bugs did you notice?

-Tom

P.S. I almost made a snide remark about you giving Empire Earth II a 94% in PC Gamer, but I wanted to be sure first. So I looked it up and realized I was confusing you with Matt Peckham! Oops.

I’m having a lot of “fun” with armies at the moment, it’s no Kohan (greatest. RTS. ever.) but I am finding it quite enjoyable. The thing I like most about the game is how out of balance many of its parts seem to be, i.e. there are a lot of things that seem super powerful and “fun” to use in the game. My friends and I often refer to this as “Samurai Shodown” balancing which is a game where every character seemed really cheesy and wrong while you were playing them. The fact that there are so many extremely effective strategies that you can enact is what keeps any single one from dominating.

It’s notable that the upcoming Warhammer RTS is being done by the Armies of Exigo guys, if that hasn’t been mentioned yet anyway.

–Dave