Why I buy this one ?
- Rule all of Europe in this empire-conquering real-time simulation game
- Build up a successful Kingdom using 6 different types of Knights
- 3 main game views; 3 geographical regions with over 150 provinces
- Map with 3 historical entry periods, each with 100+ playable kingdoms
- Multiplayer gaming allows for up to 6 players

select2go from CA, United States offers this stuff for:

Price : $12.41 Usually ships in 1-2 business days

nws-online-gaming-store from OK, United States offers this stuff for:

Price : $12.41 Usually ships in 1-2 business days

buyerworld from FL, United States offers this stuff for:

Price : $12.41 Usually ships in 1-2 business days

TragicLittlePC offers this stuff with condition New, new for:

Price : $12.48 Usually ships in 1-2 business days

What our customer's say!

"Better than expected.", I won this game by Kingdom Advantage. I can choose to continue on, but I already conquer half of Western Europe and decide to stop at this point.

In my opinion, this game deserves the five stars. I bought this game about two weeks ago, and have been playing on and off since then; actually more on than off - yes, it is additive. I played more on the strategy map than on the battle map. The following are a few of my notes. I hope the notes would get you to get on the game faster, but without giving out to much information that could take out the fun.

* There is more than one way to win this game. To win by military conquest, be prepare to spend lots of time and patient.
* The king has mortal life time but hire knights are not! There are consequences if a prince or princess married to a different kingdom. A kingdom heir does matter.
* Traders, Landlord and Builder (knights in your court) do help and work mostly in the back ground. Used them wisely will improve your game.
* Clergy (another knight) is a very interesting unit - I was confused when he became the pope and discovered that I have some control on most of Europe.
* Spy is also a very interesting unit. For example, I stumble on the pope kingdom. Despite the warning of my spy, I concentrated my force to take him out - one of my heaviest military conquest so far. I lost my best Marshal that helps me conquer almost half of Europe. The Spy helps me to win this battle. Enemy spies also caused me lots of trouble.
* Marshal is the most active knight. I like to see my Calvary Marshal (Marshal that is specialize on cavalry) running across Europe. Seize Marshal is for taking down castle... I won over a better enemy knight by having my Admiral fight him over the open sea. You can customize your Marshal for different role.
* I have not tried to win by diplomacy yet. Diplomacy is also an important factor in the game.
* Plan ahead and build what you need. There is less space to build than the available structures.
* There is limited number of knights on your court at a given time. Again plan ahead depending on your playing style.


"Knights of Honor", A slow but fun game for someone who does not like non-stop action. Helps you learn European history.

"good game", ok i enjoyed the game play.

i got this game at realese cause i liked the concept.
my comlaint is i could not find a online site to play others.
i went to a few popular ones and offical site.

and i wanted the option of adding units of my choice to the quick battle board so after i beat it i got really bored and even quick play battles were limited at this point.

"Coulda been great", I'll start by saying this game had enourmous potential; it was a good idea for a game and that's what attracted me into buying it. Don't get me wrong, it was a fun game, just not what I had expected.

For those of you out there who are critical of graphics this game can become tiresome quickly. All the christian kingdoms have similar castles(unless they conquered it from moslems) and all the moslems have similar castles. The leaderheads are not only cartoonish but also unlikely, like my king of sweden had blonde hair, and a blonde beard. That seems normal right, well his sons had black, blonde, and brown hair. And they all looked the same as kings and princes from germany, spain, and italy. Plus my "juvenile" king just happened to have gray hair! You will also find that the troops look less graphically stimulating than those a Age of Empires, which was made some 6 years before. The landscape was worked hard on, but seemed unreal because they're were no hills or slopes or lowlands, just plains. It is also hard to manage any large kingdom using the map. Most times I had to simply go to a political map to manage things, and I only went to the strategic one to move my armies around.

In playing however, one is quickly absorbed into a very large world that is fun for strategy players who like to mess with diplomacy, religion, trade, and warfare to build a large empires. It is recomended to start as a medium sized kingdom that has a steady flow of cash, without thousands of things to micromanage in a large one like the Holy Roman Empire (incorrectly called Germany in the game), or moving too slow in a small one like Wales where it could take a few hours just to get the buildings needed to make an army. It is truly a strategy game, and anyone who plays it will undoubtedly have several minutes waiting for things to build, cash to earn, or food to grow in which they can stare at a map and wonder what to do. It is fun however because you can spend an entire weekend working on one empire without even realizing that an hours gone by. Their are a lot of things to do, you can conquer with almost every kingdom that existed in Medieval times (in Europe of course). That interested me a lot, but it doesn't live up to the hype, only a few kingdoms were truly special from others. Such as Wales with its longbowman, Muscovy with its boyars and scotland with it's highlanders. Most of the rest had certain troops were produced by half the rest of Europe or could be made in almost half the regions, such as swordsmen, slavonic axeman, and archers. For this reason the game felt very repetitive, I felt like I was doing the same campaign in another part of Europe with a different stupid cartoon governing my kingdom.

The combat was simply pathetic. Very little was put into strategy in battles. Although they had squads of troops and three different formations, these hardly mattered. Most of the time i simply tried to get more troops in certain areas than my foe. That is the only way to win, overpower and/or out skill. Like in other games such as Medieval total war, i could go up against more troops and win using strategy, or atleast i would have advantages in castles or hills. one time my castle was assaulted and i had the same number of troops as my enemy, along with archers. Some how, their peasants broke through my iron gatehouse and killed two groups of knights templar and then proceded to kill my general mounted in the keep when they somhow managed to fit some 200 peasants in ONE tower! My advice is to just use more force than the enemy, because if their is one thing the game does notice is that you're outnumbered by two troops which gives your troops negative morale and forces heavy swordsman to run once one man is killed by an arrow. Problems with generals are also present, like you can have around 4 generals at max without killing your economy, and each general can have only 9 groups of soldiers, making battles featuring 30 men. . . more of a skirmish. Their is also few amounts of troops, something like 50 altogether, giving each province a chance to make anywhere between 4 and 8 different types of troops, like for example Wales is peasants, swordsman, spearman, archers, hobilars, and logbowman.

There are a few other bad sides, like how each province can only make 15 buildings, some say this adds to strategy, but I think it's stupid because a town like Constantinople, (known for having a great surrounding castle), can only make a few buildings because almost all of the others are castles and of course, a port, so you can't make any troops in it or make any buildings to collect recources because you've already spent your building slots. the recources really affect buildings, and you can only have three at max in any given region, trust me you don;t want any more, i will use half of my slots just taking advantage of one. Another porblem is that recources switch regions every new game, this is good for diversity but you end up with awful combinations like marble, furs and salt in baghdad, while you could not find any furs in all of scandinavia. It is also hard to gain resources, you need marble, chemicals, and fertile land in one province just to be able to make a cathedral, that makes it so only one, maybe two cathedrals are on the entire map. Plus when you get that many recourses you typically just go for utilising them instead of making extra stuff.

A few problems are that, despite the era, your regions start out with only a couple buildings. This fit's for the early age, but it just doesn't make sense to have to make a palisade at london in the late era as gunpowder should be coming out, it seemed unrealistic to me. The only province that started with more than just a fishers hut and inn was constantinople which i mentioned earlier. The history was good, however their were a few prblems in it, little stuff that a normal person would never notice, however one major turnoff was the gramatical mistakes. The game was made in bulgaria and it's understamdable, but you'd think something that can make it overseas would at least be important enough to get the grammar right. The language was a problem in some other areas as well because for instance, Athens was referred to Athenai, and other such problems were present.

Overall this game, graphically, should have come out several years ago, and it should have been thought out better. Nonetheless, it is something of a fun strategic game, similar to playing risk except with much more depth. Since it is only [...] i'd say it is worth the money.

"MUCH better than GalCiv II ", I'm having a wonderful time with this game. Before this, I was playing Galactic Civilizations II, which has gotten a lot more attention from the games press. The strategy model in that game was very simplistic, I thought. Basically, it was just a race against the AI up the technology tree...over and over and over. KOH is very deep, on the other hand, and is much more immersive. The learning curve is a bit steeper, but the time spent learning is well worth it. Replayability is much better, too, than GCII. You can play as any country in historical Europe, and each country is quite different in terms of its strategic pluses and minuses. In GCII, playing as a different race just changes your onscreen character's appearance, and the look of the ships. Otherwise, they're all the same.

One other point, to set the record straight: you CAN control the speed of this game, and you can pause it. For some reason, the developers left this information out of the manual. Very unfortunate, as it has led to a bad rap for a very good game. To speed up/slow down, use the -/+ keys. The asterisk key puts you on full throttle. To pause, hit the Pause key. Hope somebody finds this helpful!

Read this reviews before You buy...

"What a great surprise!", I had heard about this game even though it wasn't a major seller, so I took a flyer and bought it from Amazon. Boy am I glad I did! This game is everything Crusader Kings should have been, and is now the best medieval kingdom sim--bar none.

Why is this game so good? First, it's well balanced. It's complex, but, unlike so many recent strategy games, it doesn't confuse needless complexity with FUN. You don't have to run around on wild-goose chases because some governor sent you on a "mission." You build an economy based on various trade goods, but, again unlike so many recent strategy games, this one doesn't force you to keep checking manually to make sure your raw materials are getting to their finishing houses. There are no transport units, no routes to set up from building to building, no little delivery men running into trees and clogging your supply chain. Build structures to produce raw materials, build structures to convert the raw materials to finished goods, and coordinate different towns with different specialties to make sure your overall economy is well-rounded. It's not easy, but it's not frustrating, either. It's FUN. And there's a brilliant cherry on the sundae: when you put together various sets of finished goods, you get what are called "kingdom advances" that afford you great advantages. Out with the old "research" model. (Really, how does one "research" the Age of Discovery?)

Building space in cities is limited, so you have to decide pretty early which are going to become economic powerhouses and which are going to be military powerhouses. And there are special upgrades like cathedrals and universities that require LOTS of advance planning (because they rely on several preliminary structures), so don't expect to have more than one or two universities. And don't think you're going to be able to apply the same building strategy to each city. Personally, I think the available building slots should be correlated with the city's population (not all cities were equal in medieval Europe), but this is a quibble.

Fighting is much better than with most other econ sims, though not quite as detailed as in the Total War series. Still, the emphasis here is on specialization, and again the concept works. Each city produces its own brand of special local troops, as does each kingdom. That means you can spend a lot of time thinking about the best way to assemble a combined-arms juggernaut. Don't try to field a real army without archers.

People complain about the graphics. Please. They're great. When your city grows, you SEE it grow on the map. When a city produces a stone wall, you SEE it on the map. Each city looks different, reflecting the economic and military investment in it (as well as the local architecture). When a commander enters your kingdom, you SEE him riding an armored horse, surrounded by his troops and their heraldic flag. The portraits of your royal family and knights look a little cartoonish, but I've seen worse.

This game is so good that my complaints are almost trivial. "Byzantium" is strangely called "Byzantia." When you take over provinces from enemy kingdoms, sometimes you'll have to face partisans pledging themselves to the German cause (or whatever); this may make some sense as a game feature to slow kingdoms that expand too rapidly, but that kind of nationalism isn't very typical of the European Middle Ages. Finally, the AI is weak, as people have said. The game is not a breeze because there are many rivals to contend with--and if they gang up on you, you could be in trouble. But if you're able to deal with each foe one-on-one, you'll soon discover that you're facing a soft opponent.

"Knights of Honor is the perfect blend of strategy, tactics, diplomacy, commerce, and, yes, I did say diplomacy?", After downloading and playing the demo for about 30 minutes, I ran out and purchased Knighs of Honor! My concise review: Wow! How did I miss this game?! Knights of Honor is the perfect blend of strategy, tactics, diplomacy, commerce, and, yes, I did say diplomacy.

Here's my long winded review:

Pros:

- Strategic map is amazing. You can play in three different time periods, each time period has a different map, and you can play as one out of a 100 different historical political powers. The developers say it is all historically accurate, but, I don't know enough about this time period to confirm it. Accurate or not, it's great. Empires will fall, and then reappear if the populace was loyal to them and the new ruler doesn't subjugate or pacify them properly. If you take a kingdom's central province and kill it's ruler, its sons may form independent kingdoms in the other provinces. You can marry the one rebel prince to your daughter and make his princedom a vassal to you, and have your neighboring allies invade the other prince! The options are endless, the map is dynamic, borders change, empires rise and fall, it really is the best strategic map I have ever played on. What's interesting, is, the map is a Rome Total War style map, but in REAL-TIME (don't worry, units move slow on the map), but, you can zoom it out to a Risk style map if you want. Nifty.

- Graphics. Your city may not be rendered in 3d, but, the 2d buildings and terrain are beautiful to behold. The graphics are on par with AOE or CIV3. For those that complain that the units are not 3d or are not detailed...you've become spoiled! The units and buildings and terrain are nicely done and fun to watch. Two years ago the game graphics would have been top notch...now they may be slightly dated, but, graphics are not the main emphasis of this game. It's all about gameplay, and, it works nicely.

- Units and Building options. The game features an very accurate recruiting model, so you can recruit scottish highlanders in scotland, welsh bowman in wales, etc, plus, recruit generic unit types (men-at-arms, archers, etc) in just about every other province. There are dozens of options in the game, but, usually only about 10 different troop types options in one given province. The game is also part city-builder. You don't actually design your city, the game pre-fills the buildings for you (like Medieval Total War), but, you have dozens and dozens of options, that, unlike most strategic games, the building options all actually do something and you really need to weigh all your options. The level of strategy in the city building is just as important as the main map, and adds lots of depth.

- Documentation. The game features an in-game FAQ, unit and building browser, in-game manual, and mouse over definitions, AND, features a great manual and fold-out map/tech tree, that is very well done and in full color.

Cons:

- This may not be a con for some, but, the game is very challenging. I'm playing on easy, and, I'm still having a hard time. I've noticed that on easy other factions are more likely to agree to diplomacy and the AI mostly recruits low-level troop types. However, don't be fooled, the AI will pull you into touch-alliances, make harsh demands, defend you if attacked by a mutual foe, and behave in a very tricky manner, even on easy! So, the con here is learning curve: be patient, though, and learn the game, and, this con is actually a pro, too.

Conclusion: If you are looking for a sweeping, grand-ol' strategy game that I feel is BETTER than Medieval Total War and even more challenging than Rome Total War, set in the Medieval time frame, then this game is a MUST HAVE.

"Great concepts, but not well polished", I've read the reviews here and I think they do a good job of stating why this game was an overlooked raw gem. As they have all pointed out- it has some great concepts and some fairly in-depth gameplay.

However, I think someone should mention that the AI is extremely weak and thus the unmodded game is not much of a challenge. The biggest problem with KoH is that the AI cannot handle many of the game's concepts. For instance, the AI is incapable of building up an economic infrastructure and therefore cannot put quality armies in the field. Further, the AI cannot gain ANY of the "kingdom advantages"- which give powerful bonuses and allows the first player to gain them all a victory. Also, the AI does not know how to handle the concept of "kingdom power" which is a numbered scale on which the higher the number the more profitable and stable the realm will be. The number goes down depending on a nation's relations with others- being dishonorable makes the number go down. The AI, due to its unpredictable diplomatic behavior, always ends up with very low kingdom power. This results in mass rebellions and the complete inability of the AI to create powerful kingdoms with which to challenge the player.

Also, many of the game's concepts are not well balanced. The game offers a variety of different knight specialities, but some of them are completely useless (landlords and builders) and merchants are incredibly overpowered allowing the player to quickly be swimming in cash which results in taking away the decision making about what to build or buy. The "kingdom advantages" is a brilliant idea- allowing players to win without conquering everything and encourages a more measured diplomatic approach to the game. However, some of the "kingdom advantages" are ridiculously overpowered and the fact the AI can NEVER access them makes it feel like a cheat rather than a legitimate strategy.

KoH is a neat game, but not a well-polished one. The concepts are there, but either only partly developed or badly balanced. What has kept this game on my harddrive are the mods- player created modifications- which have beefed up the challenge considerely over the unmodded version. However, mod makers do not have access to the AI code and thus there is a limit to what they can accomplish. As for Black Sea Studios patching it? KoH was a dud on the sales front so Black Sea Studios threw in the towel on patching it. I can understand that- one doesn't reinforce failure.

"Retro fun", very cool game. I remember hearing about months ago and I finally bought it on amazon since i never saw it in stores.

2-D isn't even worth mentioning because the game is so good. Let me preface that by saying... If you like games like Colonization, Fragile Allegiance, Warlords 2, and Stronghold you will really like this game.

It's a blast if you like slow-paced thinking games. At times the action is a little overwhelming since it takes place in real time, but if you think far enough ahead you should have no problems.

It runs good on my slow cpu, I think the graphics are fine, keep in mind this game is the super clone of all the previous games I mentioned. The knights feature is way cool, and the Royal family dynasty is really neat. I got mad when in order to wed my prince so he could have a well founded dynasty I was required to give up land and so forth. I am not sure if the diplomacy is very believeable, but I must say that for the first time in a long time the cpu will actually honor it's alliances in single player and send armies to help you, and get mad at you if you refuse to help them.

I was supposed to be studying for a final and I got sucked into 8 solid hours like it was nothing. Be aware, in order to stay properly focused on winning you will zone out. I do not reccoment this game to anyone who has a clingy wife or sig. other.

I say buy it and treat yourself to some gaming right out of the Christmas past. Very cool esp. if you dug the whole Sid meier Colnonization. It's very familaiar but so much bigger and better.

"Very addictive game", Pros: Convincing medieval atmosphere. Good challenge: hard but not impossible, makes you eager to win at all cost.

Cons: Fixed armies size, no matter what. Armies can't be merged or combined.

Bottom Line: If you like medieval history and strategy games, in a rather intellectual challenge more than a "click" frenzy, download the demo and give it a try.

First of all; this is a really very addictive game. I have been playing the Demo through the whole weekend (plus the week after), and can't stop, I even didn't lead most of battles, because it wasn't the part of the game I was interested the most.

As always I face a new game, can't resist comparing against others games I know, and try to find probable common concepts. This game reminded me of another three or four, at least.

Regarding the historical and geographical scenario, is almost identical to "Medieval: Total War": Europe, North of Africa and Middle East from year 1000 to 1400.

The concepts of armies and garrisons, with a fixed max number of units, the scale of the gaming map, the cities development management, with a limited number of spots to build and some other few features, remind me of "Legion" (and the most recent inception: "Chariots of War"). The concept of an army gathered around a General (or Marshal), was used too in the past decade by another excellent strategy game at the time; "Seven Kingdoms". In this game, spies played a decisive role as well, and there was also some diplomacy involved, because there were means, other than war, of getting adhesion from foreign cities to your kingdom.

Finally, there is something in the general atmosphere, may be the music or the armies with its banners marching across the territory, I can't be sure, that brought good old "Lord of the Realms II" to my mind.

However, KOH is also different and better than all above, in my opinion. It's not turn-based, is real-time in the good way, events keep happening unless you PAUSE the game (you can set the speed of the time passing), but there is not need, in general, of frantic clicking.

One free advice here: you can speed up the game, to 8 times the "normal" speed. This can be a good recommendation at the beginning of your quest when constructing the basic buildings, as long as your country enjoys a peaceful period. There is not a lot of work to do, while you wait for the buildings to be finished, and you don't have still armies in campaign nor a lot of diplomacy to do, because no country wants nothing to do with yours, they even insult you (which is funny) if you dare to propose them a trade agreement.

But, once you have basic structures erected and at least one army ready to take the field, be careful with the speeding, because if war stalls and your speed is set at 8, you won't have the time of even to think about the basic maneuvers of marching, attacking and defending the key spots, left aside the diplomacy, appointing new marshals, recruiting new armies, restocking the worn ones, etc.

The game has really three geographical scales where you do the play, not only two as MTW: the general (world) map, where you conduct diplomacy and can learn the big geopolitical picture at every moment; the country and cities map, where you play most of the time, managing resources, commanding armies, developing cities, placing your knights at task; and the local map, which is the specific scenario where you lead your army at battle. All the three scales are 2D.

The general map is simpler than the MTW's one, and the local battle scenario looks smaller and simpler too than the MTW's one. Armies are smaller as well, around 300 men, which is historically accurate for an earlier time in Europe, around year 500, after Roman Empire fall. For the time of the game, after year 1000, a few thousand of men, as in MTW (including reinforcements) are more probable in a battlefield, left aside the Mongols, whose armies, around year 1200, accounted for tens of thousand of men.

It's the country map what makes the game so lovely to play, that's my feeling. It does not matter, really, that it's 2D, that's completely irrelevant. Why? Simple, the country map is not just a good drawing, with some digitalized and animated objects moving across. I think is really Great painting art. It's like an old and good, vivid and detailed landscape painting, brought to life in the computer screen, with a lot of lovely little live characters, moving around. The cities change of shape along with its development evolving in the time is a real pleasure to see.

Diplomacy, as another reviewer pointed, is simple and easy to manage. Never did so much of diplomacy in any other game. I have won entire campaigns of MTW with zero diplomatic moves from my part and waging war against everybody else. However, in KOH diplomacy is a must, at least in the basics of making trade agreements with some of your neighbors. It's easy to use, and very fun as well, sometimes the answers you'll receive to your offers are really hilarious. Even this funny feature is useful, because the tone of the answer sheds some light in how the other kingdom sees yours.

A few disappointments. First of all, I missed the "Legion" feature of putting close in the map two armies, and being able of exchange units between them. Main undesirable consequence of this lacking is that when your king dies, the army under his command evaporates. You can work around to certain point, using as buffers the six slots for garrison units in each city, but this stops you of fully develop the city garrison, if you prefer to leave some empty spots as buffers.

Also, it looks like the authors forgot the fact that armies cost always, not only at the moment of the setup. Apparently, only when you hire a unit, you are charged on gold and food. In "Legion" (and MTW too) armies are expensive to keep all the time, except when they win a battle and grab the spoils of the enemy. In the economical report, only military ordinary costs you can see are Marshals' wages. Perhaps these include the costs for the whole army under their command, even though they (Marshals) always cost the same, regardless of how big are their armies, except for when a Marshal is improved with a new skill. In this case, his wage rises, as expected in reality, better soldiers are more expensive than average ones. But it would be realistic as well that when the better the commander, the larger the armies that he can hire and deploy, allowing a few additional units slots for highly skilled Marshals.

Secondly, there are only nine spots for knights in your court. From them you have to assign commanders, merchants, spies, etc. Even enemy Marshals taken prisoners by yours are placed here, lowering even more the already scarce number of available spots (on the contrary, your Marshals taken prisoners, still keep occupying their spot in court). What happens if you manage to master a bigger kingdom, having more than nine provinces, meaning more than nine cities? For I have read from other reviewers, this is a regular feature in the game, not only the demo.

Couldn't be reasonable expect that whenever you conquer a new province, your royal court is enlarged with, let's say, two new slots for knights? This would make the game not only more playable, but more realistic as well. The more provinces a medieval realm comprehended, the more nobles and lords its court had.

Lastly, even though this should be a demo designed (lacking of) feature, does not matter how many princes your king raised, at the beginning of the third generation, when the grandson of the first ruler takes charge, the game finishes when you are enjoying the most.

Because of this, is impossible to win while playing the demo, simply you don't have enough generational time with only two kings lifetime. However, there are some relative measures of success; when the game finishes are calculated rankings of Most Respected Kingdom, Wealthiest Kingdom, Strongest Military Kingdom, etc. and you can analyze how your performance was based on the positions on the rankings.

One last thing, so far, after a while playing the demo either as "Duke of Bohemia" or "King of Scotland", given that they are rather small countries, you find yourself with a lot of time to look at the global map. Many times I have wondered about the dramatic changes in the political geography the game AI generates: you can see "Croatia" as a very large kingdom, threatening the southern border of Bohemia, even armies of a "Duke of Epirus" (small Greek region) reaching and rampaging Central Europe, etc. Perhaps I'm wrong, but sometimes this seems to me a little too much fantasy.