March of the Eagles

 PC
User Score
6.9

Mixed or average reviews- based on 46 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 21 out of 46
  2. Mixed: 18 out of 46
  3. Negative: 7 out of 46

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. Lordrock8
    Feb 24, 2013
    7
    if you wanted a war game this it,so if you liked hearts of iron then you should try this. If your looking for something for more depth then go for eu3 or crusader kings.or eu4 thats coming soon
  2. ProneToGlory
    Feb 27, 2013
    8
    I think some of the people are actually rating this game without playing it. I have hit zero bugs, not one. The game is quite fun, not as in depth as Crusader Kings or Europa Universalis, but for a military sim it excels at what it does. I have not tried multiplayer yet so I cannot comment, but singleplayer is one of those games where you mean to sit down for an hour, and play for three or four.
  3. NajjPiP
    Feb 25, 2013
    9
    What fun! I'm not hitting the bugs described below. It's well balanced and tough. Great Napolean sim. Ideal for a group of online players but they need to improve there online access.
  4. Orctownorc
    Aug 22, 2013
    6
    This is Paradox at their mechanical mediocre WORST. The March of Eagle is a lack-luster, passionless and limited attempt to make a Napoleon-light game in order to make some quick money to support one of their more serious projects. This game represents very little effort in recreating the classic Napoleonic wars. A period of highly active militarism that has still not been adequatelyThis is Paradox at their mechanical mediocre WORST. The March of Eagle is a lack-luster, passionless and limited attempt to make a Napoleon-light game in order to make some quick money to support one of their more serious projects. This game represents very little effort in recreating the classic Napoleonic wars. A period of highly active militarism that has still not been adequately represented in a game. Paradox dropped the ball badly here. We should condemn this half-hearted effort. CK 2 and EU 4 show that the team can do a hell of a lot better when they commit themselves to a good result

    THE GROT REVIEW CRITERIA: After a long time writing reviews like an anus, think its time to set a few bad habits straight: Stop insulting designers. Show some respect for the design process and getting games in circulation. Hence (1) No Red scores. (2) Game scores as follows: Bad Game 5/10. Poor Game 6/10. Mediocre Game: 7/10. Good Game 8/10. Great game 9/10. Stella Game 10/10. To get 10/10 it must be a game that can be (theoretically) play-able for 1000+ hours. Not only great but near endless fun. Games may be bad or poor but making them should earn respect. Thus even the worst POS will still be a 5/10. 0/10 no longer exists in my vocabulary. Yellow is the new red. For the sake of accountability: you can reply if needed: Orctowngrot: Tim Rawlins: timtimjp@yahoo.com    … Expand
  5. WarkriX
    Mar 1, 2013
    4
    I played Victoria 2 and A lot of things were not so great in that game. I thought they had improved with March of Eagles but i was mostly wrong. I only experience minor bugs like text fails and a few graphic ones in between. But the AI is maybe even worse. I played as Denmark a minor nation and joined the french coalition. For a long time a British or Russian ship or two passed by. I had 8I played Victoria 2 and A lot of things were not so great in that game. I thought they had improved with March of Eagles but i was mostly wrong. I only experience minor bugs like text fails and a few graphic ones in between. But the AI is maybe even worse. I played as Denmark a minor nation and joined the french coalition. For a long time a British or Russian ship or two passed by. I had 8 battle ships so that was ok and i often-ly let them pass just because i didn't want to loose mine. Then i got the idea to transport some of my troops to Norway because i got invaded there. I built 3 ships and in a matter of days A third of the entire english fleet is there, and the whole russian except two transport ships. I had 11 ships where three of them were as good as useless in battle. This is the things that ruins games. I had planned a future of turtle'ing and the english/russians gained absolutely nothing from this. Furthermore they magicly knew when i got these ships and immediatly send as much as they could to ruin my game. Furthermore the mapping isn't too good. All the good ratings must be people who play as major nations where it would be more obvious of them to hinder you in building ships. I had never attacked any province from the enemy coalition and they had no reason to think so. Rating it 4 is almost a compliment. I know it seems kind of to rage over this one thing. But i tried waiting and seeing if there would be a different result but the exact same happened. And i am convinced that there will be more like this. Just like in Victoria 2 they made this pretty much impossible or at least impossible to gain almost any land as a smaller nation. Also they made the campaign too short in my opinion. You should at least have the option to have a longer campaign. Probably want buy a war-strategy game from Paradox ever again.Only thing is that the diplomacy is a bit better than in Victoria 2. Not recommended.… Expand
  6. oliver1h
    Feb 24, 2013
    7
    Much more polished than the previous games from Paradox Interactive (no lagging after several turns, no major bugs etc..). Still has some flaws (diplomatic things and the map is a little messed up, but I guess they could not portray every European nation 100% accurately, also the way you need to chase fleeing enemy units after a combat is annoying). AI feel somewhat better than in previousMuch more polished than the previous games from Paradox Interactive (no lagging after several turns, no major bugs etc..). Still has some flaws (diplomatic things and the map is a little messed up, but I guess they could not portray every European nation 100% accurately, also the way you need to chase fleeing enemy units after a combat is annoying). AI feel somewhat better than in previous games. Overall a nice little game in the Napoleonic wars era, that fitts into the developers other historic strategy games line.… Expand
  7. Sydek93jm
    Feb 23, 2013
    4
    I just can't rate this game better yet for the reason that it is simply unplayable because of the bugs it has. Paradox's games have always had bugs on their first releases, but rarely have I found bugs that made a game unplayable and March of the Eagles would be the first I've ever seen. It's quite a disappointment for me and now I'm starting to wonder buying Europa Universallis IV wouldI just can't rate this game better yet for the reason that it is simply unplayable because of the bugs it has. Paradox's games have always had bugs on their first releases, but rarely have I found bugs that made a game unplayable and March of the Eagles would be the first I've ever seen. It's quite a disappointment for me and now I'm starting to wonder buying Europa Universallis IV would be a success or just another waste of money.… Expand
  8. Tytos
    Feb 27, 2013
    3
    Not the worst game ever released but due to the prehistoric MP features I can only give it a 3/10, with a decent MP-part it would have gotten 6/10 from me.
  9. Masterped
    Nov 22, 2015
    1
    Bad game ever seen form paradox. I just play it 4 hour and don't has any sense to play it.

    Positive : Napoleon Era , Many type of unit , combat description , Combat engine , No bug :) , Great Multiple play Negative : Campaign map only in europe , cannot recruit Leader you must be boring with same leader or not to get it new for example if you play in some minor nation you can only    Bad game ever seen form paradox. I just play it 4 hour and don't has any sense to play it.

    Positive : Napoleon Era , Many type of unit , combat description , Combat engine , No bug :) , Great Multiple play

    Negative : Campaign map only in europe ,
    cannot recruit Leader you must be boring with same leader or not to get it new for example if you play in some minor nation you can only get one general or not has it that mean you will be total kill by any nation such as Prussia Austria and France in first day of battle and no chance to win
    Siege system and control over province Long time siege and not get control any province if not stable troop in it
    Ai is very stupid (More than total war easy mode) they run like cat ,
    Province system noob development only 3 building Fort , Civilized development and deploy only coastal has port so it wil be 4 !!! ,
    Economic system trade are not here also industrialization you can only get tax ,
    Manpower are hardly to get ,
    Unit Movement so slow 3 day they can't go out from one province meanwhile my paris has been siege by little english troop ,
    No DLC No development
    Mostly of mod are already dead (you know what i mean)

    i am a fan of napoleon era (little fan) i get napoleon campaign , napoleon total war and many of the game I think this game is good in combat engine or you play with France but bad if you want to change history for minor nation and i hope heart of iron 4 will be better    … Expand
  10. surys
    Mar 9, 2013
    8
    It feels like it's just test for EU4 improved Clausewitz engine, and it is. People who aren't Paradox Interactive fans won't like this, people who are into their grand strats will have a feeling that something's missing in this game to call it grand strategy. It's just a short war simulator. Core of the game deserves 6/10, but like every Paradox game, you can mod everything in it, so fansIt feels like it's just test for EU4 improved Clausewitz engine, and it is. People who aren't Paradox Interactive fans won't like this, people who are into their grand strats will have a feeling that something's missing in this game to call it grand strategy. It's just a short war simulator. Core of the game deserves 6/10, but like every Paradox game, you can mod everything in it, so fans will quickly write some top-class mods which will turn this game into real grand strategy.… Expand

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
71

Mixed or average reviews - based on 19 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 19
  2. Mixed: 11 out of 19
  3. Negative: 0 out of 19
  1. PC Master (Greece)
    Jun 10, 2013
    78
    For strategy fans that wish to go a step further than your normal RTS and Civilization/Total War clone, that want to touch a more hardcore subgenre, but without getting choked by endless menus, numerical stats and graphs. [April 2013]
  2. Thunderbolt
    Apr 19, 2013
    50
    You could come into March of the Eagles expecting a glorified game of Risk and go away quite satisfied. That’s reductive perhaps, but there is a solid if unspectacular base strategy game here that’s deep enough for grand strategy fans to sink their teeth into. There’s just not a lot else to enjoy.
    Read full review
  3. Games.cz
    Apr 14, 2013
    60
    A promising update of the classical Paradox formula, trying to bring the Napoleonic wars back. It manages to bring it on, however, the result is not consistently good. Even though it is all about its multiplayer game here, it's not the thing worthy of remembering.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »