Realpolitiks

There are several things that set apart Realpolitiks from other games in the genre. Many of the mechanics are greatly streamlined and simplified, which might not be good for everyone. But in the other hand, it's very nature allows you to take a lot of more freedoms in the way you play. In my current game as Turkey with a couple of decades in, I've seen quite a lot going on in the war, Russia annexing it's neighboring countries, a ramp up of nationalism in latin america, Mexico attacking the US and North Korea seizing the opportunity to make an attempt of unification (which failed). I also went to war, although my attempts of expanding through conquest met a sudden stop with US intervention after the UN denounced my country, however I managed to take Chipre, and after recovering from the war I begun the slow process of becoming a first world superpower. Now in a more subtle way I finance wars that match my interests while keeping the "developing nation" facade to the UN. I make my markets more profitable and stimulate my stock market by inviting strong regional associates. In Realpolitks, proxy wars, espionage, strengthening regional power is the way to go. Realpolitiks is less realistic than your average GSG, you will also find it's mechanics quite simplified, specially when comparing it with other titles. However it's systems are quite believable, and even though some of the conflicts and crises that arise are crazy for today's world they build up in the game in a very convincing way and are very fun to watch. Even though warfare is perhaps the least interesting part of the game, I like that it's not just a matter of blobbing and spamming troops. Many times some wars get into a stalemate (In my game Iran and Germany have been at war for years) even when one side has been steamrolling the opposition, smaller states sometimes get a chance to fight back. People who want a lighthearted, dynamic GSG or that never played the genre before should play this.

Realpolitiks is an interesting contribution to the genre, but one that is filled with limitations and too much waiting around, to genuinely keep me interested. That's even taking into account that patience is a virtue with games of this nature. Having had to search the Steam (*spits*) forums for any meaningful information or chatter about this game, it came to my attention both in various threads there and playing through the game itself, there's still a lot of work to do with balancing. I've experimented with lots of various in-game options that seem to be either too overpowered in their effects, or that don't provoke strong enough reactions and outcomes. Other countries also don't seem to be limited by "action points" as much as the player does, either. One thing that stood out glaringly was trying to forge alliances. You can't really do that. You can form blocs, but they don't really appear to achieve anything. Playing as one country with a bloc of three other nations, I was attacked by another. There was no military support from any of my bloc countries. No sense of alliance, because as the player they don't seem to exist, where as AI controlled countries seem to be forming alliances all over the place. Forging a coalition of nations under one banner as the player? I've yet to see it happen, but always see blocs of AI controlled countries in various continents doing so, particularly in Africa and Central America. Never invited to participate as a player, can't find a way to initiate such myself. Other reviewers may have been able to do that, but I've not seen any examples, or ways to do it myself. This leaves me feeling that such alliances and merging between other countries are scripted, as I've seen them happen in pretty much every save so far, without any real means to influence them. Overall, I'm left with the impression of being a "passenger" watching events unfold, than actually being a genuine "participant" in the game.

Some bad things in this game can be excused - after all, it's Jujubee's first game. However, even though I desperately wanted to, I simply couldn't like this game. Right from the start, you get surrounded by mediocre music and aweful, tasteless art. While music can be disabled, and art doesn't really matter in such games, it instantly makes the game feel cheap - not what I expect from a grand strategy game. UI is terrible. I can appreciate the simplicity, but in this case it's so basic it hurts the players. You have to scroll through a long list each time you want to see your relations with some country. Scroll to see your GDP. Scroll to see how much military units you have. Scroll to get to basically any important information you might need. Sometimes you can't access this information at all. AI is bad. Sometimes it makes no sense but it's fun (for example, Brazil starting a war with Russia), but usually it's ridiculous: China having a very high Warmonger level and proposing a UN resolution to allow anyone to start wars with high Warmonger countries, and then geting nuked by Russia and India. But the worst thing is: the game fails to entertain the player, it's not interesting. No matter what country you chose, most of the time you simply select the laws or programs and wait until they get implemented. Sometimes events happen, but most of them don't even give the player a choice (or the options are so biased that essentially players still have no choice). Most global events chains are very basic and always unfold the same way. Russia and US will always try to claim the North Pole, and will always get interrupted by Denmark. Turkey will always choose pro-European approach. I've played 5 games and every time I got the same event chains. Don't expect Europa Universalis levels of quality from it. If you're looking for a casual strategy game, play something else (something that doesn't pretend to be a grand strategy); if you want something complex - play EUIV.

The game does a good job at abstracting and streamlining important aspects of managing modern nation-state. GDP, HDI, population, unemployment are all there and make sense. However, it completely fails at making them interesting and gameplay consists of waiting until your next project gets implemented. International politics is completely separated from any factors we recognize, as geopolitics or common interests, and instead consists of single concept of relations that you can influence, and thus be an ally or enemy to anyone. Wars are only somewhat interesting, you send your troops to and abstract "operations" on a strategic level that can achieve their goals or not. Overall, this will probably be more interesting to fans of economic sims than strategy games.