Winter Is Knocking At The Door: War Of The Roses

“Winter has arrived”, says the press release for War of the Roses next batch of free content, and here was me thinking Old Jack Frost would turn out to be the Godot of seasons. December 19th is the date that winter officially arrives in the multiplayer stab ’em up, bringing “new armor and weaponry, plus two brand new snow-covered maps based on the historic battles of Wakefield and Towton.” There’s also a balance patch on the way, which appears to be primarily targeted at armour tweaks. Sandal Castle, on the Wakefield map, may also be the focus of a new game mode, although that addition won’t be in the initial download. You can see a brief glimpse of snow and blood below, and there will be a livestream of the maps on December 20 at 7pm GMT on the Paradox TwitchTV channel.

I’m a Chivalry man myself, but I think I’ll dip back into War of the Roses in a couple of months to see how much difference the updates make.


  1. Carbonated Dan says:

    I picked this up in the steam sale, but the tutorial gave the impression I was controlling someone drowning in a treacle sea. I didn’t want to go online in such circumstances.

    Is it worth a second chance?

    • codename_bloodfist says:

      I played it recently myself. It doesn’t control well. Even worse, it doesn’t perform well.

      I think they’ve got a solid foundation to build upon, more so than Chivalry with its engine limitations, but it’ll take more than free content.

      • Snakejuice says:

        Chivalry would be (even more) awesome if it used the WotR engine!

      • aldrenean says:

        It controls precisely as well as Mount & Blade, and I don’t hear anyone complaining about that…

        • RichardDastardly says:

          Mount and Blade a pretty dated game with a focus on single player though. WoTR should be more refined in its controls, but instead it controls a bit worse to be honest. Everything feels floaty.

        • Mattressi says:

          COmpletely false: WotR controls signficantly worse than M&B. About the only things they have in common are the mouse movement to direct a swing. Blocking in M&B involves moving the mouse in the desired direction and then clicking block, while WotR is the reverse. WotR is sluggish and floaty, with your character feeling like he’s wearing his plate cuirass on his feet when you try to start moving, then slowly accelerates to world-record speeds. The swings take ages to charge up, but then instantly swing (making blocking-based combat awkward); the game has clientside hit detection making vsing anyone with a ping over 50 require no-block combat (your blocks won’t work) and the game seems to randomly ignore blocks anyway (usually with fast, small swords).

          M&B feels very skill-based, while WotR just becomes a giant melee of people randomly swinging.

  2. MrLebanon says:

    I don’t own this game, but the main reason I am completely held back from buying it is one small thing:

    The finish/revive system.

    A finisher may be cool the 1st time, but 200 times later it’s quite bland. Also, the revive concept is ridiculous

    (apologies for the obligatory complaint)

    • Snakejuice says:

      The finish/revive system (and the bandage/bleeding system) was one of the few mechanics I really liked about WotR, made for some interesting fights/decisions like “do I try to finish him before his friends show up or do I try to kill all his friends?” and “do I try to stop my bleeding before he catches me or do I try to kill him quick enough be able to bandage after the fight?”

      I’d take the bandage system over the health regen system in Chivalry any day, it’s one of the few things I don’t really like about Chivalry.

      • MrLebanon says:

        I find the regen in Chivalry is to slow to be noticed – and hardly makes a difference for most classes other than the knight – as everyone else is quite squishy anyways.

        Regening an inch of health isn’t going to do much for my Man-at-Arms when he gets 1 hit by a 2 handed axe either way

    • Vorphalack says:

      I have a similar problem with the squad spawning mechanics, and not from an immersion breaking standpoint (although watching guys warp in out of thin air is always odd). In a game with fairly intense and protracted combat, and game modes that use territory control, it makes no sense to let people just respawn right on top of a fight. If they ever sort that out i’d give this game a shot.

  3. Gap Gen says:


  4. ar3ani says:

    I’ve not bought this game out of the principle that it A: Isnt actually developed by anyone English. B: Seems to favour the Lancastrians, Yorkshire4life. C: Dont see the point

    • Gap Gen says:

      The sequel, where they combine forces to fight Quality Street, is pretty good.

    • Tams80 says:

      I’m sorry, but Lancashire is just far superior. Your tea is better though, much better. Have you ever even heard of Lancashire Tea? I hadn’t until recently. The box art alone is a blatant attempt at a rip off and it has a foul miasma compared to Yorkshire Tea.

  5. The Random One says:

    Wakefield: Medieval Warfare

    So it turns out all that ‘winter is coming’ thing I’ve been hearing has been leading up to this? Disappointing.

    • dE says:

      You sure you’re not talking about that Game of Thrones Meme?

      • zbeeblebrox says:

        To be fair, Game of Thrones IS loosely inspired by the War of the Roses

  6. SocraticIrony says:

    Why is that heavily armoured knight floating?

  7. Lanfranc says:

    Well, it’s no wonder Duke Richard got killed at Wakefield if he only had 15 men with him. Someone should really have seen that coming.