M.A.X.-

Updated (10-7-97)

Recently a friend of mine purchased M.A.X. for me, and I am able to give it a more thorough review. I still include the previously written review so that you can get a more first-impressions viewpoint. This addendum appears where one would expect an addendum, at the end. If you have read this review before, simply scroll to the bottom of the page.

Ah, to own M.A.X.

M.A.X. is one of the few reviews that I will do for a game that I do not own. I include it because of the reports I have from a friend of mine who does own it, as well as my few experiences playing the game while visiting him.

M.A.X. could probably be best compared to a turn based version of Red Alert. In it, you build bases, gather three resources (ore for manufacturing, fuel for power plants, and gold for research), and build a huge number of types of units. These units can have upgrades to their speed, armor, etc. developed, but they remain fundamentally unchanged. I.e. A tank will always be just a tank no matter how souped up it may get. These war machines include a broad mix of land, air, and sea units.

A feature that really impressed me was a zoom that could be set at any level. From an extreme closeup to a view of the world, there was no integer zoom level. You are not limited to 1X, 5X, 10X, etc. You could set it at 1.2X or 7X.

Apparently the AI is very good, though I haven't had much experience playing against the computer. It scouts out your defenses, and aproaches from your rear side if that is the least defended position. Many multiplayer options are provided, including hotseat, internet, and modem. Kali and MPlayer have yet to carry the title, however. As a multiplayer game it is very involving, though games tend to take around 10 hours or more. This severely restricts internet or modem play.

Strategy in M.A.X. seems to be based mostly on range of weapons. Shots always hit, so plugging away at maximum range is definitely advised. My friend's favorite tactic is to build up his technology in the range field, and then mount an assault on the enemy's base from beyond reach.

Apparently M.A.X. has great replayability, since it is still one of my friend's most played games, even after about 6 months. The only shortcoming I see isn't even a real issue. I would just like to see armor facings matter, instead of an over all armor rating. As is, flanking attacks are less than important, since those units sent to flank would probably fare better in the main assault group. Once again, an issue of local superiority.

Addendum

After playing M.A.X. for several games, I have a much different viewpoint than before. First, I have to say that the engine is much more thought provoking than any other real time game, but you had better be prepared for a long game.

There are two ways to win at M.A.X. The first is one you will be familiar with: decimate the enemy army. The second is a new idea, and one that tends to favor a defensive stand. You can build buildings called biospheres that give you one point per turn per biosphere. For example, you build 5 biospheres at turn 200, you will gain a total of 1000 points by turn 400.

Playing an offensive game can grow very involved on most maps. Each unit has a limited amount of ammo, and ammo carriers can follow the offensive force to help re-arm vehicles, while cargo ships and planes help to cross rivers and seas.

The units follow a rock-scissors-paper approach. There are units that are very strong against some types of units, but are very weak against others. This strongly supports a multi-task force and helps to thwart the infamous tank rush found in games such as Red Alert.

Finally, I have to admit that the game has little personality. Each of the units makes different noises when it moves, the music is good, the graphics are great, and yet I felt while playing like I was playing a sterile chess game. Perhaps this was the intention, since the units are actually supposed to be computer operated.