Field of Glory: Empires
Field of Glory: Empires
Game
Game2024
Field of Glory: Kingdoms
Developer AGEOD
Field of Glory is a series of turn-based strategy games published by British company Slitherine Software for personal computers. The series is based on a 2008 miniature wargame. From Wikipedia (CC BY-SA 4.0)
225 reactions from 3 sources (Steam reviews, Bluesky, Lemmy) · newest Nov 5, 2026 · last updated Nov 5, 2026 · How this works
Audience score
79
LovedLoved
153 positive · 40 negative
95% range 73–84%
| Source | + | − | = |
|---|---|---|---|
| Steam reviews | 153 | 40 | 0 |
| Bluesky * | 5 | 1 | 23 |
| Lemmy * | 0 | 0 | 3 |
* shown, not counted in the score (label accuracy below our 85% bar or not yet audited).
Steam's own rating
Very Positive
218 of 265 reviews positive (all languages, per Valve)
What players are saying
79% recommend · 151 yes, 40 no
Counted from the reviewers’ own thumbs up/down on the 191 English Steam reviews we collected, not by the AI. Valve’s all-language rating: Very Positive (288 of 350 positive).
Players praise the game's depth and complexity, calling it a thinking person's grand strategy game. [1][2][3] Some reviewers find the learning curve steep and the tutorial lacking, but rewarding once mastered. [4][5][6] A few players criticize the Authority system and repetitive gameplay for certain nations. [7][8][9]
Liked
Representative posts
- [6]
This sounds counterintuitive but this review doesn’t mean I hate the game. Actually I “like” the game, it brings many unique mechanics that I love and I am glad other publishing studios are making grand strategy games. What this review means is that I personally can’t recommend the game even for people who like complex slow games like this as in my opinion some of the mechanics are so unfun that they take away from …
- [1]
Kingdoms shares considerable DNA with its predecessor, Empires, but has changed enough of the underlying mechanics to require a fresh set of strategies. If you liked Empires, you'll probably find Kingdoms initially frustrating, but also better balanced and more flexible in terms of strategic options. One of the weaknesses of Empires was that it strongly rewarded using diplomacy in unrealistic ways. The best way to …
- [2]
This game, while being actively tweaked by the devs continuously, is sheer genius. While it looks simplistic at first glance, there is a LOT going on under the hood. If you like games with a lot of complexity and requiring some deep thought and contemplation, then you want to pick this one up even at full price. If you have played its predecessor, Field of Glory: Empires, you will notice a lot of new changes that …
- [4]
I tried several times to get into this game but got frustrated with something or other and gave up. But I kept coming back. One time it just clicked, I finally understood the mechanics enough to enjoy the game, and really like it now. They're a small studio, so quality of life and transparency are a bit lacking but the depth of the game more than make up for it. What I like most: - Mechanics that make it harder to …
- [3]
This is the thinking man's Medieval: Total War Excellent game....systems and mechanics that all work together and over the course of play are very satisfying. It's a slow burn; have patience, and read the manual even if you've played Empires.
Summarised from 34 of the 225 public posts collected about this game; every point cites the posts behind it ([n] opens the post) and the split is counted from the posts’ own ratings. Updated Oct 13, 2026. How summaries are made
RottenBot@rottenbot · automated account
Players who liked Field of Glory: Kingdoms talk about deep and satisfying strategic mechanics; those who didn't talk about steep learning curve and poor tutorial. Which matters more to you?
Critics, per Wikipedia
Field of Glory: Empires received generally favorable reviews upon its release. It holds an average of 76/100 on aggregate website Metacritic. The game was often compared to Imperator: Rome, another 2019 strategy game about the Roman Empire. Strategy Gamer said that "Empires lacks the breadth Imperator has striven for and is a few years behind what Total War is doing these days, but it's a smartly made game and gives a deeper military experience for those who prefer those aspects. It's definitely one to consider and an excellent new contender in the grand strategy space." Bill Gray of Wargamer gave the game a positive review and called it "one of the best ancient grand strategy games on the…
From the “Reception” section of Wikipedia, CC BY-SA 4.0. Critic context only — not part of the audience score.
Reactions
60 of 225 · most liked firstA wise man once said that an idiot admires complexity while a genius admires simplicity and I'm inclined to agree and so, I feel, does the creator of Field of Glory: Kingdoms - a game which, at first, appears to be as basic as they come, but with time reveals its depth through systems that have been carefully crafted to intertwine delicately, forming a synthesis that culminates in an addictive and interesting grand strategy game. There are very few levers with which you are able to manipulate…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →This sounds counterintuitive but this review doesn’t mean I hate the game. Actually I “like” the game, it brings many unique mechanics that I love and I am glad other publishing studios are making grand strategy games. What this review means is that I personally can’t recommend the game even for people who like complex slow games like this as in my opinion some of the mechanics are so unfun that they take away from the experience. My main gripes boil down to War, Territory Control, Loyalty,…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Has potential but currently feels like a downgrade from Empires. Empires had the brilliant culture/decadence system where you felt like you were constantly balancing building a huge empire wide trade newwork with new resources you managed to conquer with trying to develop enough culture to keep your Empire from falling in to decadent ruin. It's tense, involves a lot of tradeoffs and made conquering some barbarians exciting because you went in to a rush to develop their lands so they would…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Kingdoms shares considerable DNA with its predecessor, Empires, but has changed enough of the underlying mechanics to require a fresh set of strategies. If you liked Empires, you'll probably find Kingdoms initially frustrating, but also better balanced and more flexible in terms of strategic options. One of the weaknesses of Empires was that it strongly rewarded using diplomacy in unrealistic ways. The best way to win was almost never conquest, but simply buying up territory using a surplus…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Field of Glory: Kingdoms is an excellent strategy game, with wargaming-level depth in military operations and a grand strategy component that is deceivingly complex. Once you wrap your head around the subtleties, this layer is more than serviceable, although Pride of Nations is the best ageod grand strategy game still. To get the obvious out of the way, this is not Crusader Kings. You control a nation, and if you like Paradox games, it’s more like EU IV. There is a peer of the realm system…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →This game is a Gem. Let's straighten it right now : it does not have the Depth and Magnitude of Europa Universalis, but what it does, it does it perfectly. It doen't mean it lacks of Depth, not at all, but the player can't put their hands on everything like in all those boring swedish pretentious "sandboxes". The gameplay is nicely balanced between Realm management and Wars in an intricate way. It looks very simple but it is really challenging and pushes hard decisions on the player. On higher…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →If you regularly play games like the Paradox map games, especially EU4, or Total War Games, or you just play a bunch of different 4X games, this is a great 'alternate' game to those, maybe not to permanently swap to but to have as something you can mix up with. Compared to the previous title, FoG Empires, this game simultaneously has a bunch of cool new features which I enjoy as a returning player from that game but also simplifies things. To be able to play that game at all, on any nation, I…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →This game, while being actively tweaked by the devs continuously, is sheer genius. While it looks simplistic at first glance, there is a LOT going on under the hood. If you like games with a lot of complexity and requiring some deep thought and contemplation, then you want to pick this one up even at full price. If you have played its predecessor, Field of Glory: Empires, you will notice a lot of new changes that will increase your interest in the game. Trade, Prestige, Dynasties, have all…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →My problem with this game is that pretty much every match ends up playing the same doesnt matter what nation you play has, so if you pick florence for example, you gotta either focus on taking out HRE or the byzantines because they will win basically doing nothing and if your nation is far away from those then you are screwed, you would have to sail and invade them instead of being more realistic and focus more in your own region, the game has more buildings than Empires but most of them are…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →It's a really good game. It feels like a mix between MEIOU and Taxes and EU4, while being much more accessible than either (but seriously read the bloody manual, just take an hour and read). Pros: The system for building up a region or a province is great. More control over the pops is nice, as compared to EU4, and the quantity of diversity of buildings creates a situation where you will actually have a series of distinct provinces without it feeling tedious. Having a direct impact on the…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →I would really like to recommend this game but I cant! The main reason being the really stupid Authority system. if you play a main Nation you wont even notice it. But try playing as Wales, on turn two you will get a message saying your country is regressing, you start so far back that you cant catch up and the country will fall apart in around 30 turns no matter what you do. Who ever came up with this idea must have been smoking some good stuff. This game says it is a deep HISTORICALLY…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →It's really hard to make decison to recommend or not this game. Please read to make you decision. This game has a honeymoon period when you study mechanics and having fun. Building draft system and trade was awesome in previous game and even better now. But after investing 100+ hours you will find 3 main issues: 1. Micromanagement hell of big nations. Too much time spent to set building each turn if you want to play optimal. 2. AI weakness, so you need to increase difficulty to just make it…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →The game presents itself in the tutorial as a super complex and intricate game, but when you actually start playing, there's so few levers that you can actually interact with that it basically just boils down to 'bigger numbers are better'. Some of the mechanics of the game are also just absurd, such as authority. Basically, your authority score gets compared to other countries (yes, even countries on the other side of the world), and depending on how high you rank (yes really), your country…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →It is with a heavy heart I do not recommend this, because in ways it's very good. At core it is similar to Paradox titles such as Europa Universalis and Crusader Kings. You take control of a medieval nation (period ~1050-1250) and try to build it up. It is turn-based rather than the pausible real-time of the others, although army movement is simultaneous as all nations set orders and then they all carry out. It's got all the elements you'd expect - develop provinces in several areas…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Tl, dr: get it. FoG Kingdoms is a great grand strategy game, an evolution of what has been laid down with FoG Empires a few years ago. It's different from other Grand strategy. Less memey than CK2/3. Less arcady than total wars, more historically grounded than KoH. Kingdoms is a somewhat slow paced game, with lots of depth and clever "anti-snowballing" mechanics that force the player to think and plan for decades. Forget the "let's conquer the map in 20 years" of other games. This one does…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Again another game i've played more on the forum / site version than on steam, would recommend to anyone who loves war games
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →The UI of this game is ridiculous. From barely readable white text on grey backgrounds, to scripted fonts one level removed from Comic Sans, to ornately decorated windows and buttons that detract from usability. rather than add anything meaningful to the ambience of the game, I want to love the game, but I spent more time fighting it than playing it,
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Field of Glory II Medieval is one hell of a game for making numbers come out of tin soldiers
neutral · AI labelView post →Great great, masterpiece, authentic/true artistic-historical character, complicated but in all the right places. A must buy for all 4X players. Complex but has great manual and online community. Invest a little time, you'll find a real game here, a place for everything and everything in its place. The companion Field of Glory: Medieval II for battles is a must as well.
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →The game is amazing. Some systems feel bad, because they're random, but I can see why the devs made it this way. Without randomness governing key gameplay aspects, the player will just steamroll the AI, like in CK3 you can be lord of a single county and still have the strongest army in the world. The UI is pretty good, much cleaner than PDX games, simple and effective while the game still holds a lot of depth, meaning you'll know what everything does, but wont understand how it will affect…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →After a bit of thought, have to put it as a negative. The base game sorely needs actual differences between factions, more unit variety and more meaningful decsions and it seems like those will only partially come via DLC's. You have to own yet a seperate second game for this to have a chance of being worth it, and even then I am not the largest fan of how they implemented the export battles. Probably the biggest problem is how the world feels unalive. They detatched many ostensible decisions…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Great game. Complex, satisfying management/strategic layer - an improvement upon their earlier game. More beginner friendly than it's predecessor, but not for a lack of depth, just better design. And combined with Field of Glory: Medieval you get to play out your battles in the best turn-based historical battle engine on the market. A winning combo if there ever was one.
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →i just found out Field of Glory II Medieval is free to keep on steam right now... this game is really good if you like tabletop wargaming, even better if you have someone to play it against. straightforward to understand & very fun to execute
positive · AI labelView post →Aaaaargh. Alright. I really wanted to like this. Strictly speaking it's exactly what I expected - Field of Glory: Empires, but modernized. The problem is that while it is indeed more polished and refined, it's still entirely married to the creaking old skeleton of that engine and its terrible UX. And I just can't get over it anymore. I wish I could, but no, it's just too painful to play.
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →I tried several times to get into this game but got frustrated with something or other and gave up. But I kept coming back. One time it just clicked, I finally understood the mechanics enough to enjoy the game, and really like it now. They're a small studio, so quality of life and transparency are a bit lacking but the depth of the game more than make up for it. What I like most: - Mechanics that make it harder to paint the map. I like playing "tall" i.e. have a small area but build it up…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →I ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ love this game. It scratches an itch similar to TW Medieval, but is slightly more complex. I'll state this with the caveat that a lot of my enjoyment has come from exporting my battles to FoG II: Medieval, and to do this you'll need both games instead of just the one. I initially bought Kingdoms because I was enjoying FoG II: Medieval, but wanted more 'context' for the battles I was fighting. Medieval has campaigns that are fun, but I wanted a little more autonomy in army…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Almost gave up on this one because it is a steep learning curve and the on board tutorial is close to useless. Even most of the tutorial videos were guys just going through if for the first time. But I stuck it out, found some useful videos (DasTactik), and now I'm really enjoying it.
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →I enjoyed Field of Glory Empires but this game just doesn't work for me; it's just too tedious and frustrating. On paper the improvements sound good but overall they've just taken the fun out of playing. The slowness of the game really doesn't help. I've got a top end computer but the computers turn takes way too long. The last straw for me was having a vassal insist on giving me new forces every turn that I couldn't afford to maintain; going through 20-30 new armies every turn to disband them…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →I want to like the game, but its really hard. The character system is not very good, but it can and will shift the course of any game you might be playing without notice. Want to build up your dynasty? You can't the characters are static, but you wouldn't want to anyway because the game could shift on a dime and completely reset your dynasty at any instant. Have a disloyal character, might as well write him off. If you use him, he will cause a civil war. Even if you don't use him, he could…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Overall, FoG: Kingdom is a fun and challenging strategy game. Due to the historical setting and it being turn based, it has some similarities to Total War: Medieval, particularly the first installment, which is my favorite of the entire Total War series. Some of the graphics are really nice and dedicated to replicate historical sources. This makes it a big plus for me. This being said, the game also has some serious drawbacks. The UI is badly designed in places, with icons being…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Well, colour me impressed. I was somewhat hesitant to get the game as I couldn't get into all the people machinations in CK2/3. But this game sidesteps this to a large degree, so it feels more historically based. I love the synergy with FOGII:M as I already have that game and love the smaller battles you can play out. And finally can I say to whoever was responsible for the game manual, congratulations. A well presented, well detailed and explained manual with little to no typos is…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →This is the thinking man's Medieval: Total War Excellent game....systems and mechanics that all work together and over the course of play are very satisfying. It's a slow burn; have patience, and read the manual even if you've played Empires.
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →I own but did not really delve into Field of Glory Empires. I also own the tactical games and have not spent too much time in them. All of that said, there is something about Kingdoms that sucked me in immediately once I began playing it. I very much get that just one more turn feeling; before I know it I have been playing for 6 hours straight. My first run has been the early start date as France. Early game I made some major mistakes with managing my economy not understanding the trade and…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Its really stupid game , the authority system is just pain in the butt were you cant control more then 6 provinces as piety chiefdom or otherwise you wont be able to promote yourself to higher level of goverment. but then theres no way to get rid of extra provinces because decision to form vassal is randomly granted to you. i dont know how people play this , every turn is calculated by loading screen its just plain stupid , also batlles are auto resolve i thought batlles are big part of this…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →I would like to recommend this game, but unfortunately it's just a little too janky and half-baked. To start, there are too many buildings with indiscernible differences. Why is there a feudal and medieval town/city? Why are buildings now locked behind singular buildings that don't always appear instead of just reaching a required number of a class? Now there's a new change where vassals will just throw troops at you, bankrupting you in the process. It's unfortunate because there is great…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →First off, yes this game is fantastic if you like a game with nuance and depth where you manage (or micromanage if you like) your fledgling empire-to-be. If you've played Field of Glory: Empire then you'll have the cliff-notes on what to expect, which it is basically more of, but is also not a negative thing. My main draw to this is the single player combination of Field of Glory Medieval to manage the tactical combat between armies instead of the main games engine, which does have it's good…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →I love the concept and the new things they have tried to implement. It just feels so. Unfinished. In every aspect.
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →4 Free Steam Games to claim by July 17 Ultimate Zombie Defense store.steampowered.com/app/1035510/... Battlestar Galactica Deadlock store.steampowered.com/app/544610/B... Field of Glory II: Medieval store.steampowered.com/app/1368870/... Caribbean Crashers store.steampowered.com/app/2921380/...
neutral · AI labelView post →I like to do Jihad.
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →A solid upgrade over Field of Glory: Empires. Paired with FoG: Medieval 2 it is a very solid Total War-like game. This is not a CK3 clone though if that's what your looking for.
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →I cannot, as of right now, recommend this game. Kingdoms is in many ways, a vastly improved successor to empires. However, in one regard that i personally consider to be of importance is the integration between kingdoms and its FoG counterpart. This integration seems to have been completely untouched in the years since the first iteration of it and for $30 more that is unacceptable. It is ludicrous that with all the years of development in between the titles, that it is still not possible to…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →"Field of Glory: Kingdoms" is a triumph of game design. It's a masterful blend of politics, religion, and warfare that will keep you engaged for countless hours. With its addictive gameplay mechanics, rich setting, and focus on building a lasting legacy, this game is an absolute must-play for fans of grand strategy and historical simulation.If you enjoy games like "Hearts of Iron IV", "Sid Meier's Civilization VI", or "Total War: Rome II", you'll love "Field of Glory: Kingdoms". However, be…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Game is lovely, there is only one thorn in the side. Previous game had culture to decadence ratio creating golden and dark ages for nations, greatest mechanic I've ever seen only grand strategy mechanically representing ups and downs instead of paradox linear progression. In this version however we got authority not representing anything real. For example take the caliph of Baghdad who is a crumbling empire whose authority was realistically 0 - he could influence nothing and his potential…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →A MAMO update! The video game developer Slitherine will join us for a gaming showcase of Field of Glory: Kingdoms - Rajas and Tribes. This exciting showcase is part of our Middle Ages in Modern Games thread, organised by @robehoughton.bsky.social and @vinicius-marino.bsky.social
neutral · AI labelView post →Feudal Empires. Indicted to be the most reserved game in my Library... the historical accuracy is scholarly.
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Unstable, minor ui issues, some questionable design choices, tacked-on character system detracts instead of adds to the game (i figured this was going to be the case, but I bought it to try out anyway), still poor ai from the original game. Released 3-6 months too early, as per usual with Matrix/Slitherine these days. They're starting to turn into Paradox, where they demand devs release early, just to start making money for some reason. I was hoping for an upgrade from Empires, but this is…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →I've played over 1400 hours on Field of Glory: Empires (FoG:E), so naturally, I was excited to play Field of Glory: Kingdoms (FoG:K). I've been looking forward to an expansion eastward into Slavic territories. I get the feeling that I'm not playing as the developers intended as I shy away from Vassals, and I enjoy selecting small nations (Murom) to play with. Luckily, playing on easy or balanced makes it so I can play however I want. I really enjoy the different limitations (e.g., standing…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →I enjoyed Empires, but I am just not getting into this one. It doesnt seem to have the just one more turn itch, and it feels a bit disjointed and lacks flavour. The building economical game is top notch, but the diplomacy is bare, and I am unfortunately not really having much fun.
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →It's the Medieval cousin of FoG Empire and it shares all the strength and flaws of its predecessor. The comparison with Crusader Kings 3 it's the easier to make but it's quite unfair because the two games have totally different scope and budget. FoG:K is much more focused on realistic military and economic simulation rather than characters and roleplaying, and in those aspect is very superior to CK3 in my humble opinion. The buildings mini-game is addictive and in my opinion realistic as any…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →You simply MUST play this game if you like grand strategy! By far the BEST 4x game I've ever played, and it's SUPER easy to mod. Exporting the battles into FOG2 is not required and actually I would argue that it's best if you don't do that most of the time, the two games simply have very different pace and Kingdoms was designed without FOG2 in mind, thus it's a complete game without it. 10/10 you owe it to yourself to try this game
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →This is the game Civilization wishes it could be. It really is the perfect mashup of city manager turned grand strategy. The replayability is nuts! There are so many viable factions to choose from. All unique in their own way.
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →The game has so much to like, but it is so slow. Its takes a full minute minimum to process a turn even when you are playing a small country.
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →'You mean I can go back in time, reform the Empire, avoid Manzikert and recover Syria and Egypt?' 'Yeah buoy!'
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Excellent Strategy Game. If you have already try FOG: Empires, and liked it, Kingdoms is even better. Great job Slitherine & Co.
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →I don't hate it but it isn't a good game. It looks like it at first but this is not as comlicated as paradox games. Combat is meh, Diplomacy is an absolute mess. Buildings are cool but I rather play Civilization.
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Sorry but no, I liked Empire despite its default but Kingdoms is rather disapointing. FOGK did not improved the formula, some of the key aspects of what we can expect from a full price strategy game in 2024 are a total let down: UI is plain bad. interactivity cluncky, lack of critical information - have to fight to understnad what's going on and what we can do about events presented as a simple text line, the map is ugly, scarce sounds/music . Overall FOGK feels amateurish, AGEOD has been…
negative · reviewer's own thumbsView post →The more I play the more I appreciate this fine game. Lots of nuance and the factions play very differently to each other. The building choices are an art in themselves. A great improvement of Field of Glory Empires.
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →Just wanted to share my experience with Field of Glory: Kingdoms, a new turn-based grand strategy game that I've kept turned on since last week. Even with limited playtime so far, I'm impressed. Looks even better than the original, both gameplay and graphics-wise - lots of cool illuminated manuscript-like drawings. It's everything Pentiment hoped to be if Sawyer could make anything better than a clueless Umberto Eco ripoff. You play the role of a medieval country of varied size (from small…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →[Fanatical | Steam] Tabletop Battles Bundle (Close Combat series and more) | €1.50 / item or less. A BYOB bundle with each item you choose priced at €1.50 or less. This is a particularly good deal if you're interested in the classic tactical wargame series Close Combat as I don't think these games have ever been bundled at a price as low as this before. Pick from: Battle Academy Battle Academy 2: Eastern Front Close Combat - Gateway to Caen Close Combat : Panthers in the Fog Close Combat:…
neutral · AI labelView post →This game is an absolute master class in game design on the campaign map with a battle system that's....let's just use the term "controlled chaos". Additionally, despite FOG Kingdoms having an absolutely MASSIVE unit roster, the units are generally abstracted to be "Swedish Spear Mercenary" "Polish Light Cavalry". Nations of note will have one or two unique units, but I really think there needs to be a massive game update or overhaul AT LEAST for cultural groups or something, making the units…
positive · reviewer's own thumbsView post →
Posts are quoted from public profiles with links to the original. Want yours removed? Contact us.