Massive Assault Network 2 looks like a modern RTS but in fact it is a turn-based strategy, more of a complicated war game or multi-faceted chess set than more traditional online strategy games. The emphasis is on speed and ease of play as well as complicated and thought-out strategy, and this strategy is favoured over quasi-realism and rush action. Typically I'm more of a Dawn of War-esque Starcraft clone kind of guy, but I found MAN2 not only easy to learn (although like all games the tutorial voice was a pain in the ass) but also engaging to play, with its territory and resource based system feeling exceptionally well balanced and designed, the designers focus on improving gameplay obvious at every turn.

While the graphics engine isn't top of the line it is certainly functional, and is capable of providing immense satisfaction when combined with the strategy required to bring such things to happen. I like to occupy an opponent's attention with a lot of weak units along an obvious front, slowly tempting them to draw their forces away from unilateral defence in order to deal with the threat, and then landing a small force of rocket launchers to devastate the unprotected rear of their line. The graphics engine's ability to render rocket after rocket smashing into my enemies is truly a sight to behold.

The camera can become a little irritating, in that it swings back and forth over the game in a manner that grows quite irritating, but on a mid-range system the game can run perfectly, without the slightest slowdown.

As these screen shots will attest, each level is beautifully crafted and really accentuates the battlefield action. The special affects for weapons fire and the like also stand out, easily on par or superior to the efforts of other games in the genre.

The online lobby can be initially confusing. It took a while to work out how to play a solo AI and even when it finally happened I wasn't entirely sure that I had got it right. If an interface can be said to have enthusiasm then the issue with MAN2's interface was its high enthusiasm for online play: while trying to work out how to have a simple game against the AI I inadvertently sent out several challenges and joined a game against a human opponent, something I was desperately trying to avoid and something that I was not aware was happening before it was too late.

On the upside, though, the MAN2 community seems dedicated and helpful; a constant stream of chat is indicative of the general level of enthusiasm for the game. There seems to be little of the teenage level of maturity commonly found in other game lobbies, and even in my favourite Dawn of War. Instead people acted quite weird, which is to say pleasant and helpful towards each other, something so rare I didn't know what to make of it.

Once in a game of course the turn-based effect comes into play. Typically turn-based games are disdained for multiplayer gaming because inevitably the patience required to wait for opponents to finish their moves proves to be too much for your average gamer. Not so in MAN2. The nature of the game means that a player's turn inevitably takes little longer than 1-2 minutes at most, an easy amount of time to wait given a player's ability to watch the action as it occurs.

A possible explanation of this seamlessness is the phase-based gameplay. The game is broken up into several distinct phases, with each having a fixed set of actions that can be performed. One phase is for moving and attacking, for example, while another allows you to spend your acquired resources on new units.

An interesting aspect of the game is that it is broken up into territories, and the way such is managed. A territory contains a city which provides the unit resources, obviously vital in any game. In order to take over a territory you first invade, at which point your opponent gets to play the role of defender and place the bonus guerilla forces you get for an invasion. In order for a defender or attacker to win, all that is required is to remove all enemy units from the territory by the end of a turn. Where it gets special though is in the case in which the defender wins, in which case the player who controlled the defence automatically gains the territory as his own.

All this makes for gameplay that is a little different than normal and really, really fast without suffering any penalty to strategy. The number of units available allow for quite a few different combinations to tailor to any playing style, so a prospective player can readily define themselves online. Transport over water and air along with aerial assaults are all stock trade in strategy games but again are carried off slightly differently here and certainly require a finesse to use. One complaint would be that apart from a few unique units the bulk of your military is the same regardless which of the two factions you take, save for the actual unit graphics. While this does make balancing easier (and you lose some of the paper-scissors-rock aspects that you get with some titles) it does render faction selection almost pointless.

Apart from the faction similarities the major points of conflict I have with the game stem solely with the woefully repetitive and droning voice acting, as well as the previously mentioned camera. Normally the lack of a developed storyline would be lamentable but given that this is a solely multiplayer game that could be viewed as more of a sport or a battle of minds than a general blood fest, and as such there is no real need for fictional motivation. No "For the Emperor" here, although there is nothing stopping you from saying it for comfort. For the Emperor! Ahem. The game in all other respects is fairly polished, although again the online lobby could perhaps do with a bit of rework. The principal gripe that my issues stemmed from was a lack of intuitiveness, or perhaps false intuitiveness (things which I thought did one thing actually did another). Once mastered however it was relevantly simple, and it didn't take too long to master.