3 out of 5
Crudely drawn turn based strategy
This particular turn based strategy feels very out of its time, given that it was released in 1997. Simply put, it looks like it was developed in the late 80, say, for 286 IBM compatibles and then quickly rehashed for more potent machines, for the late 90s market. What you will discover is that it plays as many war-game simulations. It pits you in a kind of medieval setting, offering you the type of units of the era: horse riders, infantry, and cannons and so on. You play the game very typically, by managing top down decisions from the map screen, and you have your host of higher level economic and other types of management options separately in, again, a very crudely drawn interface. For what it's worth, the game can be played, but given that by the end of the 90s there were many graphically superior war gaming sims, it feels a bit unnatural to go for this one. Yes, it's got what it takes to deliver an ok experience, but you will sometimes struggle to decipher which unit is which and quite probably emerge exhausted at the end of a run, with your eyes blood shot and no energy to spare. So think twice if the sacrifice is worth it, I personally would advise against it.
4 out of 5
Not for graphics lover
This game (like also the predecessor) is not for people who just love graphics and don't care too much about the gameplay. It's sort of Civilization game
, but much more toned-down. Imperial conquest 2 has one purpose - WAR! You get to be one of many ancient civilizations (including the Rome, Ptolemaic, Seleucid, Greece, Macedonia, Dacia, Thracia, Armenis...), basically, you take over the whole Mediterranean. You'll be satisfied when all the cities on the map will get your country color. You also get to create armies, build fleets, tax the people, and other smaller aspects, such as reading the daily "who vs. who" "who pwned who" news...