This was a pretty good review, especially for one about a game I?ve never heard of. Yet despite my unfamiliarity, the description of the gameplay was done well enough that my interest has been sufficiently piqued. I?ve yet to find a brand of turn based strategy that I hate, so perhaps I?ll have a look into this game.
You covered quite a bit of content, but I don?t feel that you criticized the game enough. You pointed out an annoyance or two in the mechanics, but I was more curious to hear about how balanced the game was. For a TBS game that seems to be built on equal parts variety, skill, and luck, there surely must be a peculiar difficulty curve? Also, you never really touched on the technical elements of the game. It?s good that you can sell a game on story and gameplay, but comments on the graphics and art style beyond including images in the hopes that they speak for themselves would also have been nice. Same goes for sound design.
Come to think of it, you never even mentioned what year it came out or for which platforms it?s available. You said the first Etherlords came out in 2001, but what about the subject of the review, Etherlords II?
Aside from the above, I thought the introduction was fantastic. However the conclusion could?ve used a bit of work. The paragraph before the ?bottom line? section sort of just peters out, while the ?bottom line? itself ends the review proper. I personally think that a final paragraph should actually read like a conclusion and end on an impact instead of just dying out, while the bottom line should be just a quick sentence summary/recommendation and not a paragraph long recap.
Anyway, great review. Good luck on your weekly ?Niche Appeal? column. Hopefully your selections aren?t so obscure that your effort goes entirely unnoticed.