Men of War II Review
From a Men of War: Call to Arms & Gates of Hell Player
(Refunded after 1 match)
I want to be clear up front: this is not a hate review. I’ve put real time into Men of War: Call to Arms and Gates of Hell, and I went into Men of War II genuinely wanting to like it. This review is meant partly for potential buyers and partly as constructive criticism for the developers.
I refunded the game, but there are things worth acknowledging first.
What I Liked
Some UI elements are genuinely clean
Hovering over a unit to quickly see their inventory is smooth and intuitive. That’s a good design choice and something future titles could expand on.
Match loading speed is impressive
Loading into a match with four players was fast. No waiting forever because one person has a slow machine. Compared to older titles, this is a real improvement.
Server customization is actually solid
This is one of the strongest parts of the game.
Being able to edit regiments before the match is great. Adjusting squad sizes, changing unit composition, and prioritizing what you want more or less of feels flexible and modern.
Weather and time-of-day controls are a big win.
The game mode ideas themselves are interesting, even though I only played one.
The variety of regiment types (infantry, engineer, etc.) gives players more room to experiment and specialize.
If development had continued with this level of quality across the board, the game would be in a much better place.
Where It Falls Apart
And unfortunately, this is where it ends for me. I only played one match, but that was enough.
Voice lines are bad
Not mediocre. Not passable. They’re cheesy and immersion-breaking. Mods in Gates of Hell have done better.
Movement feels bad
Clunky, unresponsive, and stiff. It feels like a step backward compared to previous Men of War titles.
AI behavior is noticeably worse
Worse than Gates of Hell. Worse than Men of War: AS2. Units feel dumb in ways they didn’t before.
UI consistency takes a hit
Some UI ideas are good, but overall usability feels worse than earlier games, not better.
Pathfinding is rough
Units struggle with basic movement and positioning, which is especially frustrating in a game where tactical control is the core experience.
Gunfights lack impact
Combat feels weak and inconsistent. Engagements don’t have the weight, clarity, or lethality that Gates of Hell delivers.
Cover System (or Whatever This Is Supposed to Be)
Cover used to mean something in Men of War.
In previous titles, positioning mattered. You could tell when a unit was safe, exposed, or about to get wiped because you messed up. In Men of War II, cover feels inconsistent and unreliable.
Units hug cover and still get shredded like they’re standing in the open
Soldiers ignore perfectly good cover for no clear reason
Prone behavior feels off and unreliable
The biggest issue is feedback. The game doesn’t clearly communicate why a unit survived or died. That kills tactical learning, which is kind of the entire point of this genre.
AI Engagement Range and Targeting
This is one of the biggest immersion breakers.
AI units frequently:
Engage at strange or illogical ranges
Fail to respond to obvious nearby threats
Target enemies far away while ignoring closer danger
Stand idle like they’re waiting for instructions that never come
In Gates of Hell, AI might be brutal, but it’s predictable in a good way. You learn how it behaves. Here, it feels inconsistent and unfinished.
When AI range logic is bad, firefights stop feeling tactical and start feeling random.
Gunfights and Lethality
Gunfights feel soft.
Weapons lack identity. Rifles, SMGs, and MGs don’t feel distinct enough in suppression or battlefield control. Firefights either drag on too long or end instantly for no clear reason.
Earlier games punished bad positioning hard. Men of War II feels hesitant to commit to lethality, like it’s afraid to upset players.
Tactical players expect punishment. That’s not a flaw. That’s the appeal.
Command Responsiveness and Micro
Men of War lives on micro. Or at least it used to.
In Men of War II:
Orders sometimes feel delayed or ignored
Units hesitate before executing commands
Micro-heavy moments feel mushy instead of precise
Combined with movement and pathfinding issues, this makes the game feel unfair at times. You don’t lose because you made a bad decision. You lose because the game didn’t respond correctly.
Visual and Audio Clarity
Visually, the game looks fine. Functionally, it struggles.
It’s harder to read who’s suppressed, exposed, or actively firing
Effects sometimes obscure important information
Gunfire and explosions lack clear audio distinction
Previous titles let you hear and see when things were going wrong. That tension is missing here.
Modding and Long-Term Longevity
Men of War lives and dies by mods.
Right now, Men of War II doesn’t inspire confidence as a foundation for modders. Core systems feel weaker than Gates of Hell, not stronger. There’s little incentive for creators to rebuild content on a less reliable base.
That’s a long-term problem, not just a launch issue.
Final Thoughts
There’s a reason this game is already on sale.
My brothers and I regularly play Gates of Hell with the Warhammer 40K mod (Indromodus), and it is significantly more fun, more polished, and more engaging than Men of War II in its current state.
I wanted this to be the next step forward for the series. Instead, it feels like a regression with a few modern ideas layered on top.
For the devs: you have good infrastructure ideas, but the battlefield itself needs serious work. Cover logic, AI engagement range, movement, responsiveness, and combat feedback should be the top priorities.
For buyers: if you’re new to the series, you might enjoy this at a surface level. If you’re coming from Gates of Hell or Call to Arms, this will feel like a downgrade almost immediately.
Right now, I’d recommend waiting. There’s potential here, but it’s not there yet.
