good
Ithaught it was original, but easy, if you spent all your money on infantry you'll win every time, but the games not fun.
Reviews for "Invasion 3"
Nice graphics & some good ideas, but needs variety
Good concept. (The inspiration is "Defend Your Castle", I suppose, except with the player's role reversed -- or did that happen the other way around?.)
The graphics are most well done, and are fun to watch, other things notwithstanding.
Play gets boring before long, because tactics are too limited. It's the same thing every round -- just keep sending out enough infantry to give enough cover to a modest squad of archers and cannon. I easily got to level 30 with that approach. The other units don't seem to be much use, although knights can cover a mis-estimated cut-off of the infantry stream, so that the missile troops don't get cut down.
I could not make much sense of the buildings and upgrading. What effect does having, for example, a barracks have on infantry? What effect does having more than one have? What effect does the upgrading have? Is it effective more than once? One can incur the COST any number of times, as far as I could tell, but there is no indication of the up-grade level increasing. For that matter, I could not discern any effect of upgrading at all.
A few assorted other suggestions, in no special order:
1) Veterans of a round should carry through to the next round. As it stands, those survivors are lost by the player along with the casualties, and only undeployed units carry through.
1a) Maybe those veterans should come back tougher or more effective.
2) I think the toughness of the units needs adjusting. Rams are way too fragile. Knights, in their "shining armour", also should be harder to kill. Infantry, who would also be armoured, should be tougher than archers, who would be very lightly armoured, at most.
3) On the other hand, knights don't really charge castle walls (except in Monty Python).
4) More variety in the defense, perhaps with increasing potency and more kinds as the levels increase -- flaming oil, heavier kinds of counter-fire, like arbelests or cannon, and especially...
5) Sorties by defenders. (This would be the thing for the knights to charge against!) You could make them look like saracens, if don't mind being non-PC, or just give them evil-looking black uniforms.
(I'll send you my bill.) ;-)
This game is shit
all you have to do in this stupid game is get a bunch of archers and then leave for 20 minutes, and youll have won. this game is garbage. i sat in front of it for hours trying to beat it and the stupid thing just kept going. its boring, stupid, and shittily made. dont waste your time.
:-/
This is kinda boring after some time.... really slow framerate when you have many soldiers on the field + same scenario over and over.... definitely could and should be improved....
Good concept, bad execution.
While it's a nice twist on the "Defend your castle" genre, I don't think that in reality, it works well because you have that many units on the battlefield that the framerate is just too slow and therefore not worth playing.
Also of note is the fact that any other unit besides the archer is fairly unuseful, as they will undoubtedly get stopped by the arrows, which means that while it's nice to have such variety in the game, ultimately, it's useless.
Since this is version three of Invasion, it must mean that you're willing to listen to feedback you get and make a new version of it. I'd quite like to see version four and sort of the importance of each type of unit, along with solving the framerate problem, when there are 100+ units on the battlefield, along with some other features, such as the ability to "Unleash All" units with one click, for example.
I look forward to seeing V.4