Unfortunately, between missions 3 and 4, there were a grand total of... TWO tanks as reinforcements. Each mission in this campaign took approximately two hours to play. Each scenario and campaign comes with its own brief historical background, but the mission objectives are not explicitly stated.
The AI is spotty - it will sometimes take advantage of mistakes, other times it doesn't. Playing a linked campaign game several times, the AI attacks at different parts of the line each time.
Morale is an important factor in combat - a disrupted unit will not advance, and disrupted engineers cannot clear minefields or destroy walls. Leaders of each side, when stacked with units of the same type, give disrupted units a better chance of recovering morale and become undisrupted. Leaders are also used to simulate the resourcefulness of units of each army (The Israelis typically have more and/or better leaders than the Arabs).
Opportunity fire is a great feature in this game. It allows friendly units to shoot in response to enemy actions automatically, provided some action points have been saved from the previous turn. The controls are very flexible, and can be set both globally for that unit type and on a per-unit basis. Options include maximum range for different types of enemy units.
Line of sight plays a very important role in some missions. Night missions restrict visibility to one hex, and give infantry a great advantage; their shorter range compared to the armoured units no longer matters - everything has a range of one hex. Some missions come with a limited number of starshells for illumination and smoke for daylight assaults. Some units can shoot in both direct fire (line of sight) and indirect fire (no line of sight) modes. Mortars shooting in direct fire hit their targets in the same round, while those shooting from behind a forest or other obstacle don't hit their targets until the beginning of the next turn. The rest of the artillery and air support is also handled as indirect fire.
 |  |
My biggest gripe about this game has to be the absurd balance between the different units. Infantry, specifically rifle platoons, are extremely durable and powerful - they're bloody difficult to kill. Tanks, on the other hand, seem to be excessively weak and fragile. I've seen a rifle platoon destroy a tank with one shot of opportunity fire. Rifle platoons have high assault and power values, while tanks aren't very good at assaulting at all. Tanks are best used against other vehicles, as they are almost completely useless against infantry. Air strikes are poorly done and don't really accomplish anything - at best they're an extra artillery barrage. Anti-tank guns seem normal at first - they will damage or destroy tanks most of the time. However, they destroy ships (landing craft) and helicopters (!!!) with surprising efficiency. Anti-aircraft guns are exactly the reverse - they do very well against armour, but seem to have difficulty shooting down helicopters. Helicopters are another sad story. A rifle platoon shooting at a loaded helicopter might not damage the unit, however they will wipe out its cargo. A helicopter hovering over water cannot shoot for some odd reason - but move it over land and it shoots just fine. Helicopters are also considered to be "soft" targets, and I've had a rifle platoon eliminate 6 helicopters from 4 hexes away (roughly 1 km) with one round of fire. Some terrain is rather strange, too - I've had a tank's line of sight blocked by a road. A line of my tanks on my side, another group of tanks on the other... and neither can shoot each other because of a road. Once my tanks roll up onto the road, however, they are subject to opportunity fire from the enemy tanks.
Multiplayer seems to be an afterthought. Divided Ground can be played over TCP/IP, IPX, e-mail (Play By EMail), modem, serial connection, and hotseat. PBEM is the only practical mode, however, for anything larger than a skirmish. Each turn in the more complex scenarios (such as Israeli Assault, the only one that is recommended to be played with another human) literally takes an hour. The interface feels tacked on at the end. The client and the host must each pick a scenario first before going to a dialogue asking for the host's IP (assuming you use TCP/IP). The client's choice is then overridden by the host's choice upon connection. The client and host are then asked for which side to play - neither side being told what the other is playing within the game. There is no in-game chat at this point. Should both players choose the same side, the host actually plays the game while the client is a spectator - and the game literally stops, because the computer isn't controlling the opposing side either. When the host quits, the client then takes over as the controller of their side. Cooperative play is not possible for two players against the AI.
Map Editor
Divided Ground's saving graces have to be its map, order of battle, and scenario editors. These vastly improve the replay value of this game. Tweaking the scenarios makes many of them more playable, as well. They are fairly standard - the map editor lets you edit the terrain, change the elevation, change the map dimensions, and label areas of your map. The order of battle editor lets you modify the units and the leaders involved, and the scenario editor allows you to define victory conditions, place troops, and set other variables (ammo, available air attacks, AI behaviour).
Conclusion
Divided Ground is a war game with more than its share of issues. Unless you are desperate for a game that spans the wars in the Middle East, there are better values for your gaming dollar elsewhere.
Rating: 60%
forums
send article 
hardware newsletter 
article comments (1)
Digg this!
del.icio.us