The Good
Tactical Depth Through Rock-Paper-Scissors Mechanics
The game's strongest feature is its commitment to preventing any single dominant strategy. The asymmetrical unit balance creates natural counters—your tank column suddenly looks vulnerable when enemy bombers arrive, but they're just as susceptible to anti-air defenses. This forces constant recalibration of your army composition, turning resource management into the real puzzle. It's the kind of design that rewards adaptability over memorization.
Viability Across the Roster
Rather than the typical trap of having 3 viable units and 20 paperweights, this game manages something rarer: making nearly every unit worth considering. Support roles feel meaningful—slow infantry become invaluable when capturing distant objectives, while fast-moving scouts provide early vision without committing heavy firepower. Even units designed as glass cannons have legitimate use cases depending on the map and matchup. The economy forces this naturally; expensive units are glass cannons because their cost makes loss punishing, while weaker units cost less and can be fielded in greater numbers.
Environmental Gameplay
Terrain isn't just window dressing. Mountains and rivers create chokepoints that alter unit effectiveness dramatically. Air units suddenly become premium assets when the map is dense with obstacles, while ground-based armies struggle with mobility. The dynamic nature of terrain—like frozen rivers opening new pathways—means maps evolve strategically as conditions change. It's an elegant way to prevent game states from stagnating into solved equilibrium.
Where It Falls Short
The Pacing Problem
Mid to late-game turns become a chore to watch. While early turns move briskly, the action gradually bogs down as enemy armies grow larger. You're forced to wait through animations and unit movements that, while understandable, wear thin after the tenth repetition. A 2x speed option would've transformed this from an annoyance into a non-issue, but its absence makes longer maps feel tedious rather than intense.
Steep Opening Curve
The game assumes familiarity with turn-based tactics that many players won't have. The early stages throw you into scenarios requiring multi-turn planning without sufficient tutorialization. New players are likely to bounce off within the first few maps, mistaking difficulty for poor balance rather than recognizing the learning curve. The game might've benefited from a gentler introduction that ramped difficulty more gradually.
Final Thoughts
This is a competent strategy game that understands its core mechanics better than most. The tactical interplay between units keeps you engaged, and the roster design prevents the usual power creep nightmare. However, the presentation pacing and accessibility issues prevent it from reaching the next level. It's a worthwhile experience for strategy enthusiasts willing to invest the time, but casual players should expect some friction in the early hours. Recommended with reservations.

If the developers continue working on this and listen to the community's suggestions, we could see a modern successor to Advance Wars.

From a technical perspective, there's nothing to complain about; the game just needs development, introducing new ideas, and refining existing ones.

I'm posting review after a short playthrough to support the developer.
I hope it becomes for Advanced Wars what Olden Era is for HOMM
Good luck!

So far so good, it's a pretty chill game from perspective of someone who hasn't played anything in this genre before.