In Stone: King Arthur: Fallen Champions

By Jim Rossignol on September 30th, 2011 at 1:55 pm.

Lovely champions. Don't fall!
Ah, I had become a bit lost on the King Arthur release timeline. I thought Fallen Champions was King Arthur II, but not so. It’s actually a standalone expansion for the first game which bridges the storyline between Arthur I and Arthur II, and it came out earlier this month! Sorry, I missed that entirely. It has its own timeline, map, quests, heroes and so on. You can see all that in action in the gameplay trailer below.

I have to say that I rather like the King Arthur games. They are a sort of Total War-lite with more RPG stuff for your heroes and a good dose of fantasy nonsense. Honestly, I don’t know how Neocore are churning out all these games.

, , .

12 Comments »

Sponsored links by Taboola
  1. Reivles says:

    Does it still have the rather irritating ‘hold three randomly placed strategic objectives’ bit? It always got in the road of my glorious setpeice battles. :(

    • bigdeadbug says:

      There still on the mini map of the linked video so I guess there still in. They were by far the most annoying aspect of that game. I hope at least they removed the whole “capping more than half means you auto win a battle” part. I can’t express the amount of rage I have for that mechanic.

    • Inarborat says:

      Ruined the game for me and I was really, really enjoying it. I got to a point where I needed to win a certain battle yet all the enemy was mounted and would capture all three points before I’d even get a chance.

  2. Alistair says:

    The game is three sets of three missions, plus a finale, which are generally a bit more puzzle-like than the tactical battles from the earlier game. The morale mechanic you refer to has gone.

    Worth $10 to fans of the main game, but I struggled with 1 or 2 of the missions. They do change the ‘rules of the game’ – you can’t treat it you would any old 10 battles from the first game.

    Personally I think the victory location mechanic was what made the game, as it gave meaning to different places on the battlefield. I suspect Neocore will listen to you and remove the distinctive elements from KAII and produce TW lite.

    • wiper says:

      Aye, it’s quite a bit different. I did like the focussed, puzzle-like battles though – they helped what is otherwise a bit of a limited combat engine (though, like you, I was sad to see the objectives removed entirely).

      The removal of the overarching strategy elements was an interesting decision too – and one I found actually worked. There’s a place in my heart for a short (~8-10 hour, in this case) campaign-based single-player strategy game, particularly one like this which had every battle prefaced with a multiple-choice adventure to play through, allowing you sculpt the three main characters’ armies, equipment and personalities through them. A really nice, charming little game.

    • Torgan says:

      I’ve been playing it off and on and it’s alright, more of the same but with some gimmicks to the battles. I found the first shaman battle where you had to keep running your undead army back to safety from sunlight every 5 minutes pretty annoying rather than fun.

      There’s still a lot to be said to using lightning bolt on a clump of knights and seeing them blown apart though! Bring on KA2.

    • Danarchist says:

      The only time I ever had an issue with the Morale thing was when I was having a great, fun, and epic battle raging across a couple of valleys or something. Suddenly I have to retreat my cavalry and send them racing to recapture a point that was just taken by the last 3 archers in an enemy unit I had sent running. I do appreciate that the AI was smart enough to use his ineffective units effectively, but man that was freaking annoying! Especially traumatic when it was at the end of a long battle where I had a couple strong units left and the enemy had 3 or 4 groups nearly empty running around raising hell.

    • Torgan says:

      That’s why you always have at least one light cavalry unit in every army, at the start of the battle you send any mounted troops out to take the close control points, bring the knights back to the army and send your light cavalry haring around the map taking over points. To be honest I found the AI pretty poor at retaking control points once it had lost them. The light cavalry should just be continually capturing points, they are too weak to be effective in combat I found.

  3. jti says:

    I really wanted to like King Arthur, but the battles just worked all wrong. Huge disappointment. :(

  4. mbp says:

    I played quite a bit of the original King Arthur and I loved it for a while. The atmosphere and gameplay were really enjoyable. Unfortunately the difficulty level ramps up at an unfair rate and some time around mid game I found myself overwhelmed by enemy armies spawning in my territories. I could have restarted and played again more cautiously but I just lost heart.

  5. kingvogc says:

    Top sex films, Sex tool for sell that you will like them ,welcome to http://url7.me/5ph4

  6. Navagon says:

    I loved the first one, but for me King’s Crusade is still unplayable. That makes me pretty wary of this game, which is a shame. Especially given the stellar support they gave the first game.