They took a shot and they missed

Ill start this off by saying that I understand this is a new concept to them. Having characters besides "broken English tutorial lady" is a good concept--done right. However, it really isnt here. There is no precedent for the war, and they just seem to be guides rather than actual characters. (Though I will give props to good character sprite design). Echoing what many people have said here, one of the weakest aspects of the game is the lack of Conquest mode. I personally usually do conquest mode since on your other games I cant get past Barbarossa, but I digress.

Overall, its a good concept, and it has potential to be something great, but this game as is isnt it. To echo what I and many people think, to make this game or a successor better you need:

-Conquest mode back.
-A better storyline (maybe hire a native English speaker to write the dialogue for it too)
-(I havent tested it, but I know that multiplayer is a perennial problem in Easytech games. A working multiplayer would do wonders.)
-(the AI seems better here than in, say, WC2, but Id just make sure that allied ai is as strong as enemy ai)

Why am I rating it so low, then? I am hoping that easy tech reads this and makes changes. Easy tech games, being the only type of Paradox style war games out there, do a really good job. Honestly, an easy tech game that has enough plot to keep one still interested in difficult campaigns, a dynamic conquest, and a powerful multiplayer system could easily go viral. I hope they read these comments and make changes in this or their next game.

Aqua817 about Glory of Generals 2, v1.3.0