Field of Honor

the game is very good and I like it, but I would like to have a multiplayer mode where two players play against each other, each with their own army. This would add variety to the game and make it more fun. Alternatively, two players could play together and help each other. I am not asking for a server with 500 players, as this would be challenging. However, I would still like to have a multiplayer mode with at least two players. If it is possible, please consider adding this feature to the game in a future update.

Really engaging game and I hope that you add some sort of 24 hour war style where we can earn logistics and such.

this one reminds me of Mount and Blade Napoleonic, but is over all much better with the range of units and armies and variety of maps, and a workshop facility too - you can create your own maps in game and upload them - a great feature

Field of Honor, developed and published by civciv, is a unique blend of real-time strategy and first-person combat set during pivotal moments in history such as the Napoleonic Wars, the American Revolution, and the American Civil War. As an early access title, the game already manages to carve out a compelling niche by giving players the ability to both command massive armies from a strategic perspective and experience the chaos of battle firsthand as a foot soldier or cavalryman. This dual-layered approach is ambitious for an indie title, and while not without flaws, it creates moments of scale and immersion that are uncommon at this price point. The game opens with an immediately arresting concept: full-scale battles with over a thousand units clashing across open terrain. You can take control of your faction from a top-down perspective, issuing orders to infantry, cavalry, and artillery units. The strategic component is straightforward but effective, with flanking maneuvers, formation management, and terrain considerations all factoring into victory. Where Field of Honor sets itself apart, however, is in allowing you to drop directly into the action at any time, switching from commander to soldier in the blink of an eye. From this first-person view, the experience becomes gritty and chaotic—you’re suddenly in the mud, reloading a musket while cannonballs explode nearby or galloping across open fields as part of a cavalry charge. This duality in gameplay presents both the game’s greatest strength and its most glaring challenge. When it works, Field of Honor delivers a sweeping sense of scale unlike most indie war sims. The sheer number of units, combined with the ability to jump directly into the heart of the conflict, creates an engaging loop of macro-level strategy and micro-level immersion. However, the transitions between the two modes can sometimes feel jarring. Controls in first-person mode are functional but lack the polish of dedicated FPS titles. Melee combat, in particular, can feel clunky, with rudimentary animations and inconsistent hit detection. Firearms handle better, though reloading and aiming can still feel stiff. Visually, the game takes a minimalist approach. It’s not going to turn heads with cutting-edge graphics or detailed environments, but what it lacks in fidelity it makes up for in performance and clarity. Uniforms and battlefields are recognizable, and while textures and animations are simple, they serve the gameplay well. The maps are expansive enough to allow for genuine tactical maneuvering, and the relatively lightweight visual style means the game performs well on a broad range of systems. That said, some environmental assets and unit animations could use further refinement to match the game’s ambitious scope. Content-wise, the game includes several modes—Conquest, Defense, Assault, and a Custom Battle option—as well as nine maps, five playable nations, and a handful of unique units for each. While this might seem limited, it’s important to consider the game’s early access status and its very modest price point. The roadmap promises additional factions, units, and historical scenarios in the future, and if the developer follows through, the replay value could increase significantly. Community feedback so far has been mostly positive, with players praising the scale of the battles and the overall vision, even while noting areas for improvement. Despite its rough edges, Field of Honor delivers a satisfying experience for fans of historical warfare and large-scale strategy. It offers a rare opportunity to experience both the command tent and the front line without the need to switch games or modes entirely. The indie nature of the project is evident in some of the presentation and mechanics, but it’s also what gives the game its charm. It’s a passion project that takes bold risks—some pay off now, and others likely will as development continues. Ultimately, Field of Honor is an evolving title that already offers a distinct and enjoyable experience. For players who enjoy strategy, history, and the idea of being both a general and a grunt in the same battle, it’s worth keeping an eye on. With continued updates and polish, it has the potential to grow into a standout historical war game that bridges the gap between tactical command and immersive combat in a way few others do. Rating: 8/10

Just downloaded and watched some developer instructional video. Even though the game is very simplified in visual style, it has a LOT of potential. This is an early release, but I expect (and hope) that this game gets more robust in the future releases. Great start for a solo developer!

Mom, can we get Holdfast, Nations at War? Mom: we have Holdfast, Nations at War at home Holdfast, Nation at War at home:

抽象but好玩

Great game. Really captures the feel of linear warfare.

Super jeux, des mises a jours souvent, beaucoup de nation, un peux plus de map ne serait pas de refus, un multijoueur serait la bienvenue, plus de régiment et un peu plus de nations serai la cerise sur le gateaux, bref si vous cherchez un petit jeux indépendant pas chère et sur lequelle on ne s'ennuie pas ce jeux est plus que parfait