Matrix’s EIA clearly is built with PBEM play in mind. After all, one of the drawbacks to the boardgame is the difficulty in getting a dedicated group of souls together. The PC version offers several innovations to give virtual groups the boardgame experience. One of the great challenges of multi-player PBEM games is how to keep it going when someone drops out, or is holding the game up. EIA has tools that allow for a moderated game, where players can be replaced, and assigning players to major powers is done fairly. The only issue with PBEM is that because EIA requires that each player complete their phase before moving to the next, one turn still requires a great deal of emails back and forth.

Subscribe Today

• Subscribe to Armchair General Magazine
• Subscribe online and save nearly 40%!
 

Many players will undoubtedly be looking to feed their EIA passion solitaire. Unfortunately, their appetite will not be sated by the AI’s capabilities. While the robo-Bonapart can certainly hold things together while an inexperienced player learns the ropes, it does not really do well when the player has some experience under their belt. For example, AI Britain seems to have a penchant for marching a handful of troops off to Paris early in the game. This inadequate force is quickly defeated by a human French player, and this can leave Britain open to invasion if something happens to their fleet. In the diplomatic phase, the AI players also seem to follow the herd when courting minor powers. If France is courting Sweden, it seems like everyone else is as well. Part of the AI’s challenge has to do with the fact that the game is so deep that the robo-opponent really does have a difficult job. But for a game where hot-blooded diplomacy and conquest go hand-in-hand, the AI in EIA just seems cold and robotic, and most players will find themselves gravitating to PBEM play.

Empire in Arms is not the kind of game you can just jump into and start playing. The game is complex and deep. Unfortunately, to make gameplay even more difficult, EIA also has some self-inflicted wounds in the user friendliness department. For new players, there is no tutorial, and the manual doesn’t help much either. The documentation, while comprehensive is more useful as a reference for someone who already knows the game. Another issue making the game difficult, is that the interface is very quirky and takes time to learn. For example, key events are listed on a long log along with many other minor messages and there is no filter. The player then spends a great deal of time sifting through dozens of messages to find the ones that concern him. Feedback to the player is often cryptic, and even moving to the next phase can sometimes be frustrating. In the setup phase for example, the player is not allowed to move on without all factors being placed. The frustration starts when the player has to find, then understand the enigmatic information on what is left to deploy. Even unit movement is not easy, and simple functions like assigning a leader to a corps takes a few tries to get the right combination of clicks. All of these interface issues are minor once the player knows what to do, but getting to that point sometimes feels like that long march back from Moscow.

In the final evaluation, Matrix Games has given the wargaming world a meticulous PC adaptation of Australian Design Group’s classic boardgame. Empires in Arms is an easy recommendation for veterans of the boardgame and those who want to learn. Those wanting to play via PBEM will be giddy. EIA does require commitment however, so casual strategy gamers will do better getting their Napoleonic gaming fix elsewhere. But for those who want to fill the Little Corporals boots, dominate Europe, and stab a few backs along the way, Empires in Arms is just the ticket.

Image Gallery

Game Intel

Empires in Arms (Matrix Games)

Australian Design Group

Pages: 1 2

Help Armchair General by bookmarking to