March of the Eagles reviewed: Too simple and too complex, but fun all the same

March of the Eagles

By on March 8, 2013 at 9:50 am

March of the Eagles is Paradox’s take on the Napoleonic Wars, with a very specific emphasis on the ‘war’ part. It’s not a game for grognards (although it does, ironically, have grognards in it).

‘Grognard’ comes from the affectionate nickname Napoleon supposedly had for his Old Guard, elite veteran soldiers. It means “grumbler”, and Napoleon’s grognards  had the privilege of expressing their complaints freely. These days, ‘grognards’ are old-school tabletop gamers, especially those who complain about games being simplified or “dumbed-down”.

If you’ve played a Paradox strategy game before, you might be expecting a comprehensive game covering every aspect of diplomacy and empire-building, or at the very least, every tiny detail of wartime strategy. But this is a wargame, focused on the operational level. If you’re a fan of the Total War series, you might be expecting something like that series’ campaign game. But March of the Eagles is not that game either: it’s an old-school wargame, which means a whole lot of complex stats and systems to master.

Paradox have pitched March of the Eagles somewhere between these two poles. You’ll raise armies by the brigade, form coalitions with other major powers, but you’ll be fighting across Europe for very specific goals: dominance of land or naval territories. This is a game you can win, unlike the sandbox approach of other Paradox strategy titles, but much like a tabletop wargame.

The problem is that in aiming for the middle, March of the Eagles alienates both camps: it’s far too complicated for the casual strategy gamer, but it doesn’t have the depth the grognards demand. The UI is packed with so much information you’ll often have to hunt for the relevant statistic, but despite its depth, it’s lacking in a lot of the kinds of big-picture perspectives an aspiring Napoleon needs to run a war at the operational level. In general, March of the Eagles is simultaneously both too simple and too complex.

The saving grace is multiplayer, which seems to have been Paradox’s primary focus with March of the Eagles. A campaign across Europe with a full complement of human players is a wargamer’s dream. The victory conditions ensure that whatever alliances you might make, only one player can ultimately win, a foolproof recipe for backstabbing and treachery, guaranteed to ruin friendships.

However, finding a full roster of grognards willing to learn the game’s systems and commit to a campaign over multiple sessions might be a challenge. Even having found them, March of the Eagles’ network connectivity is a bit retro, with LAN play, direct IP connections or Paradox’s metaserver lobby being the only options. All of these require fiddling with firewalls and port-forwarding, so getting everyone connected can be tricky.

Once connected however, the game runs smoothly — and real-time play means no waiting for other people’s turns, so many players might find it worth jumping through the necessary hoops for a memorable multiplayer experience.

March of the Eagles might be a good starting point if you want to get into more complex strategy wargames, but it won’t hold a veteran’s interest. This middle-ground of depth, though, suits it particularly well for multiplayer (if the technical obstacles don’t get in the way).


  • Tight focus on war at the operational level
  • Relatively approachable for less-experienced strategy wargamers
  • Compelling multiplayer experience


  • Insufficient depth for veterans
  • Too complex for many occasional strategy fans
  • Primitive networking hamstrings multiplayer

Paradox have given us a six bonus copies of March of the Eagles to give away! If you’d like one, leave a comment on this review before midnight tonight (Adelaide time) with the word “grognard” in it. Six people chosen at random will get a PM tomorrow from us with a download code in it. Enjoy!

12 comments (Leave your own)

Good thing you don’t need to be a grognard to read the review!


GROGNARD! haven’t got into a good paradox game like europa III!


grognard ;)


I’m no grognard but this game may actually be perfect for me. I’ve been looking to get into grand strategy games but I need something a little less complex than Europa or Victoria.


Grognard or not, hopefully is fun!




There once was a gronard online
Who loved the rule systems just fine
But a marketing bloke
Thought the whole system broke
And now the grognard sits there cry’n


i always play the grognard


As long as it’s relatively accessible I think it could be a good grognard game


I’m a chocoholic gamer, and my boyfriend’s a grognard.


Hope I’m not the only one that had to go look up the word grognard.

Turns out it’s French for old soldier. Amusingly, the word originates from the French word grogner, meaning to make a grunting sound like that of a pig. What is not clear is why some gamers choose to identify as old soldiers that make pig sounds.

Oh, and for the curious, the feminine form of the word is grognasse, which means grouchy despicable woman.


I have now sent out all the March of the Eagles codes. Thanks guys!

Leave a comment

You can use the following bbCode
[i], [b], [img], [quote], [url href=""]Google[/url]

Leave a Reply



Steam Group

Upcoming Games

Community Soapbox

Recent Features logo

Announcement: website closure

Website and forums to shut down on November 30.

Life Is Strange

Life is Strange complete season review: Your move, Telltale Games

The year's most heartwrenching game comes to an emotional conclusion.

Halo 5: Guardians

Halo 5 Guardians review: A boring game and a broken promise

343 Industries are back again with Halo -- but maybe they should have left it alone, says Joab.

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

The Witcher 3: Hearts of Stone is a proper, old-school expansion

From a drunk, possessed Geralt to a battle against an enormous toad, Hearts of Stone delivers.

Streaming Radio
Radio Streams are restricted to iiNet group customers.

GreenManGaming MREC

Facebook Like Box