Songs of Conquest - HOMM2-inspired turn-based strategy adventure game

[Harthwain]

I'm talking about Tribes of the East. Which has the best homm combat, at least when it comes to the depth of mechanics and wealth of options.

It all depends on what you compare Songs of Conquest to. The game was inspired by "by 90s classics". That would make it Heroes of Might and Magic 1-2-3, not 4-5. Compared to Heroes of Might and Magic 2, Songs of Conquest is better. If you compare it to Heroes of Might and Magic 3, then Songs of Conquest is going to offer you less. That's the ballpark you should have in mind, not "the best homm combat", because that will only lead you down the road of disappointment.

Interesting, looking at user reviews and steam forums, just a couple of samey factions is definitely one of the most common complaints. I think they'd have to be really unique (like the good Amplitude Studios games level, at least) to make having only four of them defensible.

There are 8 units per faction (I don't count the upgrades) and you can mix up to 3 types of magic within these units, allowing you to unlock different spells based on your army's composition. I have to say I do like magic in Songs of Conquest. You get mana per unit's turn so you don't feel like you have to hoard your magic just in case and can instead focus on utilizing it in battle (even if you aren't specialized in using magic), and the number of units and their types (as well as your hero's skills) dictate what kind of spell you can cast (a large portion of them being universal skills), allowing for some room to decide whether you want more powerful spells or more and better units.

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

Played 2 campaign missions and two single scenarios. I might write some more detailed comments later, but eh, don't feel like it's really worth it. This game is VERY basic and very light on content. Better combat lol, doesn't even have flying units. About the only actual improvement I see is additions of zoc and maaaaybe the elevation mechanics, but they're simplistic af and don't amount to much more than dmg bonus. Factions being unique is complete fake news too, but I knew this much already.

It kinda gives a vibe of a mobile/shareware/browser-based project and is p. decent by such metric, as a full fledged game that was developed over multiple years not really.

It so happens that I got back into AoW3 recently and damn, talk about stark contrast.

 

[Harthwain]

Better combat lol, doesn't even have flying units.

Who said anything about "better combat"? Combat is pretty standard for the genre. There are units that can burrow and emerge elsewhere on the map, by the way. You can also teleport units. The game has more flexibility to it than it may seem at first glance.

About the only actual improvement I see is additions of zoc and maaaaybe the elevation mechanics, but they're simplistic af and don't amount to much more than dmg bonus.

Advanced units have an unique perk (knights deal more damage per hex travelled, archers can overwatch, etc.). It may not look like much, but it is actually a pretty big deal.

It kinda gives a vibe of a mobile/shareware/browser-based project and is p. decent by such metric, as a full fledged game that was developed over multiple years not really.

I could agree that the game might have been developed longer than it was needed to, but saying it's anything like mobile/shareware/brower-base is such a stretch that is isn't even true, considering it is more advanced than Heroes of Might and Magic 2 at the very least.

 

[Grunker]

Better combat lol, doesn't even have flying units.

Who said anything about "better combat"? Combat is pretty standard for the genre. There are units that can burrow and emerge elsewhere on the map, by the way. You can also teleport units. The game has more flexibility to it than it may seem at first glance.

About the only actual improvement I see is additions of zoc and maaaaybe the elevation mechanics, but they're simplistic af and don't amount to much more than dmg bonus.

Advanced units have an unique perk (knights deal more damage per hex travelled, archers can overwatch, etc.). It may not look like much, but it is actually a pretty big deal.

It kinda gives a vibe of a mobile/shareware/browser-based project and is p. decent by such metric, as a full fledged game that was developed over multiple years not really.

I could agree that the game might have been developed longer than it was needed to, but saying it's anything like mobile/shareware/brower-base is such a stretch that is isn't even true, considering it is more advanced than Heroes of Might and Magic 2 at the very least.

Yeah it’s that last bit that really reveals the post as the Codex edgy-posting that it is

 

[cvv]

Ok I have to try it for myself. Especially considering I bought the damn thing back when Reagan was still president.

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

Hecking "more advanced" than homm2 Shame it has much less content. And a stretch, too, there definitely are no freeware games that offer way more than this.

Why are you even defending this? Waiting for next gen flying units dlc?

 

[Anomander]

Maybe because it is a first HOMM-style game since ever.

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

That's true? Most games people usually call homm-like are not homm-like and this one actually is, mostly. Doesn't save it from being a very limp effort after quite a lot of initial promise, but this could be a case study of how the modern early access bonanza is not conductive to proper game development.

 

[Harthwain]

Hecking "more advanced" than homm2

Uh, yeah?:

- No doomstacks. This alone makes combat way more tactical. Granted, full stacks are still powerful, but not something that is be-all and end-all, even when it comes to particularly "few but strong" unit types.

- More complex magical system. While the system isn't that deep, it opens more tactical avenues for manipulating the situation on the battlefield. I had a battle with an AI with a hero who was focused on casting. He was able to wreck my mixed ranged-infantry army with his magic despite having no real ranged units himself. It was pretty impressive.

- Zones of control and terrain matter when it comes to positioning.

- You can't build everything in a single town.

- There are different ranges for ranged units and penalty for moving-and-shooting, which force you to choose between standing your ground for extra firepower or moving to a better position for the future.

- You can set up rally points to recruit units in a single town, thereby eliminating the need to hop between cities.

Shame it has much less content.

True. My main issue is the campaigns ought to be at least twice as long. This is the biggest weak point of Songs of Conquest.

But when it comes to everything else it is not so bad. Granted, Heroes of Might and Magic 2 has slightly more units per factions and two more factions, but then again, it was made possible by building upon Heroes of Might and Magic 1 (which also had 4 factions and similar number of units Songs of Conquest has). Hopefully we will get more factions in the future. Personally, I think this is a good first step, even if it is not ideal.

Why are you even defending this?

Because I don't think your criticism is accurate. I mean, I can get your dislike for no flying units or "only" 4 factions and the like, but calling it "mobile/shareware/browser-based" is idiotic when you look at Heroes of Might and Magic 1. You know, the game that allowed the series to give us Heroes of Might and Magic 3 (considered by many the best HoMM game)? Personally I was always more inclined towards Disciples, because it didn't have doomstacks and positioning mattered, but in a different way than in Heroes of Might and Magic. Songs of Conquest does some good things in refining the formula of Heroes of Might and Magic.

Waiting for next gen flying units dlc?

I don't care about flying units. In fact, I never liked flying units. The were too strong on account of being able to get anywhere. To make it even worse, the strongest units in the entire game were capable of flying. But I admit I am interested to see which way developers will go. I think Songs of Conquest holds promise. Whether that promise will be realized remains to be seen.

 

[ArchAngel]

I've downloaded v1.0 to try it after I last played one of the earliest EA versions way back. Went to skirmish map, by chance chose same map I've played back then. And game feels the same like before except AI seems a bit smarter now.

 

[cvv]

I've downloaded v1.0 to try it after I last played one of the earliest EA versions way back. Went to skirmish map, by chance chose same map I've played back then. And game feels the same like before except AI seems a bit smarter now.

I haven't read much about the game but yeah, same here. It looked impressive at the start of EA, devs seemed enthusiastic. My guess is somewhere along the way they ran out of money, people and the will to take the game much further beyond what it was in the beginning.

 

[ArchAngel]

I noticed that the game starts running slower and slower longer it is on. I usually had to restart it every 2h or so.

 

[Harthwain]

Big news:

Of course, with over half a million players and a passionate community I’m very pleased to tell you the following: There’s an expansion coming with two new factions. There will also be four DLCs that will expand existing parts of the game.

Roadmap:

Spoiler

Link to announcement that has more details: here.

 

[vota DC]

No doomstack doesn't mean that Is like Age of wonders more than Homm?

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

No, it's a double condom thing, almost exactly like in prestigious and inclined King's Bounty 2 - you need to increase a skill to unlock unit slots, but then there are arbitrary hard caps as well. Also, no stack ganging up so nothing like AoW.

 

[Johannes]

Big news:

Of course, with over half a million players and a passionate community I’m very pleased to tell you the following: There’s an expansion coming with two new factions. There will also be four DLCs that will expand existing parts of the game.

Roadmap:

Spoiler

Link to announcement that has more details: here.

Alas, none of that sounds really stand out exciting. Just more of the same. Personally I don't care so much about having a bazillion different units or factions, the basic mechanics being good is what counts most. And in singleplayer, the AI and mission design.

Played the frog campaign during EA not too long ago, wasn't that impressive, most of all I remember the collecting of these +1 bonuses across the maps that carry over between missions, giving you a huge force multiplier by the end of it.
Not sure how things have changed since, maybe I'll try the Barya campaign sometime now, with the release version, before writing the game off. Or if there's an actual active mp scene online try that, the mechanics don't look great for functional mp but maybe I'm wrong (was there any simultaneous turns option?).

 

[Feyd Rautha]

 

[Tavar]

Big news:

Of course, with over half a million players and a passionate community I’m very pleased to tell you the following: There’s an expansion coming with two new factions. There will also be four DLCs that will expand existing parts of the game.

Roadmap:

Spoiler

Link to announcement that has more details: here.

Glad to see that this is doing well, but fuck this roadmap bullshit. This game was in development for more than five years and they are still not done. No way in hell will they deliver two new factions and two new campaigns by Q2 2025. Anyone who takes this seriously hasn't been paying attention.

 

[Cyberarmy]

but fuck this roadmap bullshit.

Yeah, nowadays games take forever to get finished while there were 3 years between HoMM2 and 3...

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

but fuck this roadmap bullshit.

Yeah, nowadays games take forever to get finished while there were 3 years between HoMM2 and 3...

How long HoMM 1 took to make?
It's not like HoMM 2 or 3 we're re-inventing the feel.

 

[Harthwain]

but fuck this roadmap bullshit.

Yeah, nowadays games take forever to get finished while there were 3 years between HoMM2 and 3...

Won't it be easier now because they don't have to make the game from scratch?

 

[Cyberarmy]

You guys are dense, I was speaking about the uneding roadmap things after the games got released but taking years to nu-devs complete their game while older devs are creating huge similar expansion packs and games in a much more smaller time window.

 

[man-erg]

but fuck this roadmap bullshit.

Yeah, nowadays games take forever to get finished while there were 3 years between HoMM2 and 3...

Yeah, that's the added burden of modern 3D photoreal graphics over the quick-and-easy-to-produce 2D pixel art of HOMM2 and HOMM3....

That's what I don't get about SoC. Goes back so retro, it's even more pixelated than HOMM1. Why use pixel art, which has exactly the advantage of being able to produce more graphic assets quicker, but not exploit that with many more races and biomes? End uo with a map that's harder to parse than HOMM1. But only 4 factions. It takes them longer to deliver less these days. No idea why. Is it developed by a couple of part timers fitting it around day jobs?

 

[Blake00]

Yeah something tells me they won't need those timelines lol, but meh as long as they get there eventually. Nice to see it doing well post release!

 

[thesheeep]

I've put about 30 hours in and just can't be assed to continue.
Not that I think it's a bad game, I'd say it is probably by far the best HoMM-like and I'd go even further and say I like it more than HoMM1-2.

But it falls into the same scenario/map design traps as all the originals (and most similar games) do.
The game knows no chill, no exploration, you always have to rush, rush, rush, rush the optimal path and if you fail to do that you can just repeat the scenario until you find the exact way you are meant to play the entire map. And the optimal path is always the same, an optimal build/walk order per map and race.
You didn't know that at turn 23 there will be an army attacking you from this or that direction and you didn't prepare for that? Too bad, get rekt son, the last 3 hours you played were wasted. Ugh.
And of course, the only real strategy is to beeline for the highest tier units and just spam those, if you keep lower tier units around, you'll just die as even a full stack of them will be wiped turn 1 by enemy magic. That bonus to low tier unit X your character has? It's a trap. Ignore it.

I'm just not a fan of that kind of game design as it combines two things I don't like:
- Lack of player choices (I mean, there ARE choices, but all except one are usually wrong)
- Requiring prior knowledge of a scenario in order to play well

I know they tried to limit the doomstack somewhat in this game by having max amount of units in a stack, but all that did is make magic even more insanely OP.
Have fun being forced to fight the main enemy army with one trash army before your main one, because the enemy army consists of the 6x highest enemy ranged stack + turn one/two doom spell, because the enemy somehow has more bonuses than exist on the entire map and WILL defeat any army you send at it so you'll just have to send multiple ones to wear it down. You basically need to drain the enemy's single-fight bonuses before fighting it

This puzzle-like approach is fun for some time (as I said, took me 30 hours to be fed up), but I have no idea how people get so hooked on doing the exact same thing every time, or repeat a map as often as needed until the optimal path is found, that they spend hundreds of hours in these games.