Realpolitiks II

"Realpolitiks II" ist eine Grand Strategy-Politiksimulation. Wir spielen auf der realen Erde. Es gibt drei Szenarien. Ein reales aktuelles, das im Jahre 2021 beginnt und zwei fiktive, die in der Zukunft starten. Eines ist die Post-Covid Welt, die zunächst herausfordernder ist. Wir können, ähnlich wie bei Paradox-Titeln, jedes im Spiel existierende Land wählen und spielen. Und es existieren fast alle Länder, sofern sie die Größe von Andorra oder Monaco überschreiten. Die größeren Länder spielen sich aber deutlich interessanter, da wir im Endeffekt durch mehr Ressourcen auch mehr Projekte realisieren können. Das Spiel unterteilt sich in mehrere Bereiche wie Wirtschaft, Diplomatie und Militär. Ein Großteil der relevanten Werte eines Staates wie etwa Arbeitslosenquote, BIP und Staatsfinanzen werden simuliert. Zentral wichtig, um gut zu spielen, ist sicher die kompetente Nutzung des umfangreichen Forschungsbaums. Zwei Forschungsprojekte können gleichzeitig laufen. Hier können wir Wirtschaft und Infrastruktur verbessern, unsere Diplomatie ausbauen, neue Entwicklungen im Militär anstoßen oder auch Unterdrückungsmechaniken wie Zensur oder totale Überwachung einführen. Denn jeder Staat ist entweder demokratisch, autoritär oder totalitär mit graduellen Übergängen. In einer Demokratie sollten wir natürlich die zyklisch wiederkehrenden Wahlen ernst nehmen. Dafür können in totalitären Regimen leichter Aufstände und separatistische Bestrebungen passieren. Auch Krieg können wir erklären, was man bei der UN zwar nicht gerne sieht und was unseren Kriegstreiberwert erhöht, was aber manchmal nötig zu sein scheint, um weiter zu expandieren. Die Kämpfe wurden im Vergleich zum Vorgänger grundlegend überarbeitet. Bei einem Krieg entsenden wir Truppen und agieren dann auf einer rudimentären Karte. Sind wir Nuklearmacht können wir sogar Kernwaffen einsetzen, was nicht wirklich unsere Reputation stärkt und zudem auch die weltweite Umweltbelastung erhöht. Auf diplomatischer Ebene können wir Nicht-Angriffs-Pakte schließen oder andere Länder zu unserem Block einladen, allerdings nur, wenn unsere diplomatischen Beziehungen einen gewissen Wert haben. Auch eine Börse können wir errichten und andere Länder zur Teilhabe einladen. Es gibt darüber hinaus noch einige andere Dinge wie zum Beispiel zahlreiche Ereignisse und Entscheidungen bei der UN. Das klingt alles nach viel Stoff und einer Menge Komplexität. Und es dauert auch eine Weile, bis man sich in den ganzen Menüs zurechtgefunden hat und die Wechselbeziehungen der einzelnen Parameter begreift. Allerdings bietet das Spiel nur eingeschränkte Langzeitmotivation. Das liegt vor allem daran, daß sich jedes Land recht ähnlich spielt. Zudem kann man zwar auf Krieg verzichten, aber dann sind die Aktionsmöglichkeiten doch eingeschränkt und ziemlich unspannend. Ich spreche bewußt von einem Spiel, nicht von einer Simulation, denn auch im Realismusgrad hat das Spiel so einige Schwächen. Das beginnt schon im ganz Kleinen. Spielt man Deutschland ist nicht nur die Aufteilung der Regionen merkwürdig, sondern auch die Benennung wirft fragen auf. Die Region, die in etwa Niedersachsen repräsentieren sollte, nennt sich Bremen. Saarbrücken ist so groß wie das Ruhrgebiet. Und die Provinzen Rostock und Hamburg bilden zusammen die Region Vorpommern. Darüber kann man natürlich hinwegsehen, aber diese Ungenauigkeiten ziehen sich durch praktisch jeden Bereich des Spiels, was teils zu fragwürdigen politische Zuschreibungen führt. So ist auch das Parteiensystem merkwürdig und die Möglichkeit demokratische Parteien durch Geld und Punkte zu beeinflussen, beschreibt ein merkwürdiges Verständnis vom demokratischen System. Auch die Gegner agieren teils abstrus, unlogisch und oft auch nicht in eigenem Interesse. So werden Bündnisse mit Nationen auf der anderen Seite der Welt geschlossen oder es werden scheinbar wahllos irgendwelche weit entfernten Länder angegriffen. Und dabei steckt durchaus viel Kreativität in dem Spiel. Der Forschungsbaum oder besser die Forschungsbäume sind riesig und durchaus logisch aufgebaut. Auch ansonsten scheinen viele Konzepte gut verschachtelt und Alles beeinflußt ziemlich Vieles. Im Vergleich zum Vorgänger wurde reichlich Inhalt draufgepackt. Es gibt viel mehr Provinzen, das Parlament ist viel detaillierter und auch die Forschung und das Militär sind deutlich komplexer. Allerdings wurde das mit größerer Unübersichtlichkeit erkauft. Auch fehlen sehr oft Tooltips oder andere Informationen, die es im Vorgänger noch gab. Und die Menü-Strukturen wirken teils chaotisch. Zusammenfassend ein interessantes Projekt, das eine zeitlang unterhalten kann, dessen Wiederspielreiz aber begrenzt ist. [h1]Wertung:[/h1] 5/10 Atmosphäre 5/10 Story 5/10 Grafik 5/10 Sound 6/10 Spielmechanik 4/10 Balancing 5/10 Spielspass [h1]Fazit:[/h1] Die Welt ist zu kompliziert. [h1][b]5/10 Gesamtwertung

This is a great game with tons and tons of potential, marred by some very real and very frustrating issues. I'll start with this: This is a STELLAR game for anyone just getting into Grand Strategy, the fundamentals can be learned in less than a week with little to no external help (wikis, etc) and it's generally a very good pick-up-and-play experience. Singleplayer campaigns will last about a week and a half if you're playing for a few hours every day and they're generally a pretty fun experience. The game doesn't operate on many pre-determined relationships (for example, I spent most of my time with this game playing as Russia, and didn't experience any grief from the West, or from Eastern Europe, including Ukraine) so you're not penalized or made to clean up a mess of sorts by picking any particular country, which adds great roleplay value. The biggest boon this game has is easily READABILITY, something a lot of Grand Strats suffer from badly, imagine being someone just getting into HOI4 and getting hit with that game's UI - it's daunting and makes you not want to play or engage with certain aspects of the game. This game has none of that, which is great. Skill trees are very easy to understand, broken up into different categories which affect your game on both a roleplay and material level, and the skills all clearly spell out what they do, meaning situations where you ♥♥♥♥ yourself without knowing why (although those do occasionally happen) are rarely because of your choices as a political leader, so long as you're not purposely playing as a despot. Like I said above, this is among the most accessible and readable Grand Strats I've played, while still maintaining a reasonable amount of depth of gameplay. With that said, this game has a few major issues that make it sometimes very frustrating to me. First of all, maintaining a bloc (a military alliance with up to nine other countries) is very difficult in the early game, and it's definitely something you need to be prepared for. For some reason, it seems like certain countries degrade faster than others in a bloc, and I think this comes down to governance mode more than anything else. Like I said above, you don't start out on good or bad terms with any other country, but there are certain modifiers that push particular countries towards or away from one another. Example - While I was playing as Russia, I knew right off the bat that I wanted Estonia, Kazakhstan, and the UK in my bloc. Kazakhstan was by far the easiest to keep satiated, Estonia required more attention, and it felt like the UK was constantly looking for any excuse to leave the bloc until I upgraded my Bloc Integration tree. There's also the issue of bloc permanence once you do integrate them - My goal for the Russia run was to overthrow the PRC and reinstate China as East Turkestan, Tibet, and the ROC. After that, I would pursue a different goal - Spain had begun to conquer Europe, so I would attempt to push back. That said, my original bloc was more or less permanent, and with it capping at 10 member states, I couldn't invite more. It's really great that bloc members will integrate after some time, but this feature is kind of a double-edged sword in that it makes them a bit difficult to remove from the bloc after this occurs. Next issue - the wars are too short and too easy in this game. The aggressor almost always has a high advantage over the defender, and God is almost always on the side with the bigger battalion. I built up my whole playthrough for a dramatic, multi-year long conflict with China, only to steamroll them in a matter of in-game months, because my armies were bigger. There isn't a "front" so much as there are provinces and a binary choice of them either being occupied by the invading force or not. The minute an enemy force steps into a province, it's considered occupied, which prevents the invaded from utilizing military installations in that province. This is an alright way of doing things, but I would have preferred a front system a-la HOI4, even a watered down version of it would have made armed conflicts feel a lot more epic and large-scale. Another issue, albeit a minor one, is the internal politics of your country. Just like in real life, conservatives and conservative parties pretty much exist to prevent the government (you) from doing anything of benefit to anyone. Conservatives will consistently cockblock defense pacts, helping out your allies (including bloc members) and any projects that don't involve either boosting the economy or turning your country into a nationalist state. I don't know if this varies by country, as again, I spent most of my time as Russia, which I understand to be a very culturally conservative country, but it seems to me that the game has a large bias for right-wing politics (in terms of gameplay, not in any meta kind of way) while occasionally throwing in a far-left or "radical centrist" party win every few election cycles. If your country uses a parliamentary system, expect it to be dominated by the far- and center-right and expect to get nothing done until you lobby them (which lasts a little under half a year, but you can only do one time per year). Again, this might be an issue specific to Russia, but I almost never saw the center-left party appear after the beginning of the game. Final issue with the game - it is very eager to be over, and has memory issues. Past the year 2100, the game literally begins to break down, the UN disables itself and the game fails to render properly, among other issues. This is disappointing, and I think it has something to do with the game's RAM usage, but I'm not certain. Overall, this game is a great introduction to GS, and stands on its own as a fun, if not somewhat janky, experience, but once you're attuned to this game, I'd recommend picking up something a bit more comprehensive and polished.

abandoned

This is more of a middle of the road review because there are bugs but also some appeal in map design and fun to be had. I have nearly 30 hours in RP3 so decided to try out RP2 since the map design, colors and clean interface looked more appealing. FEELS LIKE AN EARLY ACCESS GAME As of this review I would say it feels like a game still in Early Access but it's not in EA hence this negative review. Game concept is fun trying out strategies and country takeovers. NOT OPTIMIZED AND BUGGY Game has some broken mechanics. Tried Improving relations with a select country (Israel in this case) with a 100% chance to succeed. And it still fails? Not sure why. Tried to rename a spy but instead faced a game breaking bug. Cannot close the rename spy dialogue box and cannot even open the settings menu to save or exit the game. MAYBE WORTH TRYING WITH A MASSIVE DISCOUNT The concept here is fun and the map can be fun to tinker with but there are still bugs. You can edit the game's settings using the MOD editor included as a launch option from STEAM. Play at your own risk and maybe it's worth it on a steep sale (under $4)

Realpolitiks II, developed by Jujubee S.A. and published by Fulqrum Publishing, represents a clear attempt to evolve the original game into a far more expansive and system-driven grand strategy experience. Set in a modern geopolitical landscape, it once again places players in control of any nation in the world, but this time with a much heavier emphasis on internal management, long-term planning, and systemic complexity. Rather than simply reacting to global events, players are now expected to actively shape their country from the ground up, making decisions that ripple across politics, economics, military power, and international relations. What immediately stands out is how much broader the scope feels compared to its predecessor. The game introduces a layered approach to governance, where managing political parties, appointing advisors, and navigating internal power structures becomes just as important as dealing with foreign policy. Economic systems are more involved, requiring players to think carefully about production chains, investments, and national development strategies. Technology progression also plays a bigger role, offering a sense of forward momentum as nations evolve over time. These additions give the experience a stronger sense of progression and agency, making each playthrough feel like a long-term project rather than a series of disconnected decisions. The inclusion of multiple scenarios further enhances the game’s variety. Beyond the standard modern-day setting, players can explore alternate versions of the world shaped by crises or speculative outcomes, each with its own strategic challenges. These scenarios help keep the experience fresh, encouraging players to adapt their approach depending on the conditions they are placed in. Whether leading a stable global power or attempting to rebuild in a fractured world, the game offers enough flexibility to support different styles of play and strategic experimentation. Military and diplomatic systems have also been expanded, offering more direct control and involvement than before. Warfare now incorporates additional factors such as positioning, logistics, and environmental conditions, making conflicts feel more deliberate and less abstract. Diplomacy, espionage, and economic influence all provide alternative paths to success, allowing players to pursue dominance without relying solely on military force. This range of options is one of the game’s strongest aspects, as it reinforces the idea that global power can be achieved in multiple ways. Despite these improvements, the game’s ambition often works against it. The increased complexity introduces a heavy reliance on numerical systems and layered menus, which can make the experience feel dense and, at times, overwhelming. Many decisions revolve around optimizing statistics rather than engaging with intuitive or narrative-driven mechanics, which can reduce the sense of immersion. While there is depth here, it does not always translate into meaningful or satisfying gameplay, especially when systems feel disconnected or overly mechanical. Technical issues and balance concerns also impact the overall experience. Inconsistent AI behavior, occasional bugs, and performance hiccups can disrupt the flow of play, making it harder to fully invest in long campaigns. Some mechanics do not always function as expected, leading to situations where careful planning is undermined by unpredictable outcomes. These issues, while not constant, are noticeable enough to affect the game’s long-term appeal. Visually and in terms of presentation, Realpolitiks II adopts a functional approach. The interface is more developed than in the first game, offering access to a wide range of information, though it can feel cluttered due to the sheer volume of data presented. The map serves its purpose as a strategic overview but lacks the visual polish that might make it more engaging over extended sessions. Sound design and music remain understated, contributing to the atmosphere without becoming particularly memorable. In the end, Realpolitiks II is a game that clearly strives to deliver a deeper and more comprehensive take on modern grand strategy. It expands on nearly every aspect of the original, offering greater freedom, more systems to engage with, and a stronger sense of control over a nation’s development. However, its complexity, technical issues, and sometimes overly mechanical design prevent it from fully realizing its potential. For players who enjoy detailed simulations and are willing to navigate its intricacies, it can provide a rewarding and thought-provoking experience, but it remains a title that feels as though it is still reaching for its ideal form. Rating: 6/10

This game was the worst mobile phone piece of trash i have ever indulged in. think i have a serious disease from playing this, PLEASE. DO NOT BUY!!!! Respectfully Redsaber. ;]

terrible game, i dont recommend you buy this game, i have tried to play it its a really shallow version of a game of victoria 3, theres no depth in the game you can tell they just made the game for the sake of selling fo temperary income not actually making a real game, highly dont recommend this game, if you want a game that has everything victoria3 this game lacks everything from depth to financial, political, trade, economic, graphic, almost every aspect of what an economic and warfare game is

Эта часть еще сложнее первой части. Я почти не уверен, что понял как играть в эту игру.

its amazing total worth the money ive olayed all night its got a big learning curve but its fun

Trudna ale wciagajaca