Expeditions: Rome hops between genres as easily as it hops between continents. Its action takes in both sides of the Mediterranean, from Greece to Egypt to Gaul, while its mechanics switch from grand strategy to tactical combat to character-driven role-playing. As a whole it does exceptionally well to tell a story that encompasses both the large-scale politics of war and the deeply personal matters of family.

Wisely, it doesn't overreach. The strategic map –- where you're marching your legion around, sieging towns and securing resource nodes like mines and mills -– is light and doesn't demand you get bogged down in the details. And the areas that more resemble a BioWare RPG – where you're talking your way through dialogue-driven quests or catching up with party members back at camp, to gauge their thoughts on the current campaign or maybe even their romantic interest in you – act more as a sideshow than the main event, a quick change of pace to break things up.

The main focus is the tactical combat, the thing you'll spend 75-80% of your time doing, and what almost all of the various crafting, gear and skill systems build towards. And the good news is that it's very good indeed.



The basics are familiar. You have a party of characters, usually six but sometimes more, who take turns moving across the hex-grid arena, attacking enemies, and using special items and abilities. Where it excels is in presenting you with meaningful tactical choices each and every turn drawn from the way the four main character classes complement each other so well, how their special abilities function cleverly in tandem, and how the hand-crafted design of every combat arena always encourages you to do more than charge forward and attack.

---

"Hurling a pilum to break an enemy's shield is much more effective than beating them down with a sword...”

---

Seemingly little distinctions reveal great tactical depth, like an archer class with a skill that lets them mark certain hexes for extra damage versus a skill that lets them mark a specific enemy for extra damage. Working out the best moment to use the former and when to use the latter, or when to fire off an aimed shot versus one that will cripple an enemy, become the sorts of decisions that turn the tide of battle. It took me many hours and many fights before I fully appreciated the incredible benefits of using the various tactical items each character can carry into battle. Hurling a pilum to break an enemy's shield is much more effective than beating them down with a sword. Similarly, tossing some caltrops will slow the advance of a group of enemies more efficiently than taking them out one-by-one. And then your heavy can move forward and pin them down in the trapped area. Which then becomes a prime target for your archer to mark for extra damage. See what I mean about working in tandem?



Each class has access to three distinct skill trees that deliver a range of active and passive abilities, and the weapons they're equipped with confer yet more abilities, meaning even two characters of the same class can require entirely different approaches to combat. There are rich seams to be mined in terms of speccing out characters suited to very specific roles, and identifying when and where you need to deploy them -– resting them for missions they're not suited to -– is extremely rewarding. All characters in your reserve earn XP, even if they're not active on the current mission, so you're always able to choose the best party for the job, not because you have to go level someone up.

---

"Often the enemy is able to call in reinforcements every few turns, cranking up the urgency...”

---

The tactical maps exploit all this potential to the fullest, mixing open areas with tight chokepoints, high-ground vantage points and vital rows of cover. They're large, too, often several screens long, and occasionally even taking in several locations and rolling objectives. Sometimes there are friendly AI-controlled units fighting alongside your party, ramping up the sense of scale from skirmish to full-blown battle. Often the enemy is able to call in reinforcements every few turns, cranking up the urgency of the task at hand, and potentially pressing you forward or hunker down in defence depending on the circumstances. As a result, each encounter remains dynamic and only rarely turns into a mopping up operation.



Every battle feels meaningful. There are no grindy, gimme fights to be had, at least not on the Normal difficulty setting. I'm a reasonably experienced tactical RPG player and found almost every fight presented some sort of challenge, or at least something to think about. I couldn't just mindlessly click through the motions as you so often do between major fights in similar games. While I felt pressured to play well, I only failed and was forced to repeat a mission a few times. It somehow manages to maintain the sensation that you're fighting for your life while only sparingly delivering on that punishment.

---

"The best bit is they can be quickly skipped through and you can get back to the tactical fighting in a flash...”

---

Outside of combat, things are less interesting. Yet that feels by design. The strategic map is mostly lacking in meaty strategic decisions. It acts more as a way to gate you from progressing the story as you slowly take over territories and reveal new locations. There's a very light layer of resource management tied into how you can upgrade your camp, but it's so light you barely notice it.

Slightly more interesting is the way sieges are handled via something of an abstract card game. But it's poorly explained and, even after dozens of hours and many, many sieges, I found myself simultaneously unable to understand how the sieges really worked and capable of winning every single one of them. The best bit is they can be quickly skipped through and you can get back to the tactical fighting in a flash.



More successful are the efforts at telling a story, both the broad campaign that borrows liberally from various Roman wars and the more personal tales of the handful of primary characters who'll join your cause along the way. I particularly enjoyed how choosing a female main character was reflected in dialogue and story events, with many of the NPCs I encountered struggling with the concept of a woman commanding a Roman legion. There are entire scenes where this aspect of my story was the centrepiece, and I'm very curious to know how differently things might play out if you choose the male option. Elsewhere there are many occasions where a choice clearly carried significant consequences – an important factor not so much for providing a reason to replay and make a different choice, but for the manner in which it imbues your decisions with weight. It feels like they matter, even if you don't entirely know what might have happened differently.

I thoroughly enjoyed my time with Expeditions: Rome. The tactical combat held my attention throughout. It has some weaknesses elsewhere, for sure. But like an effective party, they work to offer support. Tinkering away in your camp, or shuffling pawns across the strategic map might not get the pulse racing, but it provides an opportune moment to catch your breath, to rest and recuperate before pulling on your armour and once again striding onto the battlefield where you belong.