The General

Overview

The General presents a fascinating study in what happens when a game strips away all visual pretense to focus purely on strategic decision-making. This text-based war simulation divides players sharply between those who see it as a masterclass in resource management and those who find its presentation unbearably austere. For the right player, it offers deep, chess-like challenges where every economic calculation and troop deployment carries weight. But approach expecting flashy battles or visual feedback, and you'll find only spreadsheets and dialog boxes. It's a game that lives or dies by its mechanics - and for strategy purists, those mechanics sing.

If you like excellent strategy based gameplay and don't care about graphics, this game is for you.

Spidweb00

The Chessboard of Conquest

At its core, The General delivers a remarkably balanced wargaming experience. Every player starts with identical resources and territory, eliminating any advantage beyond strategic cunning. The objective is deceptively simple: conquer the entire map through economic and military domination. What elevates this beyond basic risk-clones is the intricate web of interdependent systems. You'll constantly balance peasant populations against scientist recruitment, wheat production against military spending, and technological advancement against immediate battlefield needs.

The brilliance emerges in how these systems create tangible tension. Do you invest in scientists to research agricultural improvements that boost your economy long-term? Or divert those funds to recruit more soldiers for an immediate offensive? Every coin spent on research means fewer troops on the front lines. Every peasant converted to a scientist reduces your tax base. This creates delicious dilemmas where short-term gains might cripple your late-game prospects, while over-investing in technology leaves you vulnerable to early aggression. The game forces you to become a true multitasking commander, weighing economic policy with the same gravity as military maneuvers.

The Technology Arms Race

Research forms the game's beating heart, transforming simple troop movements into a high-stakes arms race. Six distinct technology trees allow for dramatically different playstyles, each with escalating costs that demand careful planning. Will you focus on military upgrades to field superior soldiers? Economic enhancements to boost your treasury? Or population growth to expand your workforce? The beauty lies in how these choices compound - each research level requires exponentially more scientists, creating natural progression gates that prevent runaway advantages.

This system rewards both specialization and adaptability. Focusing entirely on military tech might let you overwhelm neighbors quickly, but leaves your economy vulnerable to collapse. Conversely, an economic focus builds formidable reserves but risks being overrun before your investments pay off. The most satisfying moments come when you successfully counter an opponent's strategy by pivoting your research priorities mid-campaign. It's a constant dance of prediction and reaction that makes every decision feel consequential.

Research plays an extremely important part in this game... each level of technology requires an increased amount of scientists which makes for some interesting dilemmas.

Spidweb00

The Austerity Divide

The game's complete lack of visual presentation proves its most polarizing aspect. Where most strategy games offer animated battles or detailed maps, The General presents everything through text boxes and menus. This minimalist approach becomes a litmus test for players: those who crave deep systems find the absence of graphics liberating, allowing pure focus on decision-making. For others, the experience feels less like commanding armies and more like managing accounting ledgers.

This stark presentation creates two distinct experiences. For players like Azhar who "feel like a real General," the abstraction fuels imagination - each troop movement becomes a mental battle map. But for those expecting visual feedback, the game feels barren and unrewarding. There's no denying the cognitive load either; tracking multiple fronts through text alone demands significant mental mapping. The comparison to spreadsheet work isn't entirely unfair - success requires meticulous record-keeping of enemy movements, resource flows, and research progress. Whether this feels like elegant efficiency or tedious bureaucracy depends entirely on your tolerance for abstraction.

Scaling the Challenge Curve

The General masterfully modulates difficulty through map size and opponent count. Smaller scenarios serve as accessible tutorials where basic strategies prove effective. But the true test comes in massive 20-player campaigns where survival requires foresight measured in dozens of turns. Early mistakes compound catastrophically here, and opponents who survive the initial culling become terrifyingly efficient war machines. The absence of artificial handicaps means skilled players can dominate through superior planning, yet enough randomness exists to prevent perfect predictability.

The larger maps with more opponents are extremely challenging to win consistently. This game is extremely fun and easy to learn but also extremely hard to master.

Spidweb00

Victory demands understanding nuanced systems like the snowball effect of captured territories. Conquered lands boost your economy but stretch defenses thinner, creating natural tension between expansion and consolidation. The game shines brightest when multiple players survive to the mid-game, creating complex diplomatic standoffs where temporary alliances form and shatter based on shifting power balances. These emergent narratives - entirely player-driven through their decisions - provide the emotional payoff that the minimalist presentation otherwise lacks.