War Games - Page 2

Nubclear · February 23, 2003, 01:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Jack_www
Try Empire Earth, you can play any age you want, and the units in Modern age are good, the only thing is that tanks are pretty uselless in the game, cause they get killed easly be anti tank weapons.

And the AI cheats like no other

monkspider · February 23, 2003, 02:01

I disagree with comrade Che on the subject of RTS's. I find them pretty fun, not nearly as fun as Civ or Paradox games, but, still they can be fun.

Jack_www · February 23, 2003, 02:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Tassadar5000

And the AI cheats like no other

Well I never play the stupid computer. SO I dont have to worry about that.

tinyp3nis · February 23, 2003, 02:36

Quote:

Originally posted by St Leo
He said modern, not sci-fi. SC is better than TA anyway.

There are no good modern RTSes.

SC is the worst thing to ever happen to RTS games. Unfortunately, people always insist on praising the things that StarCrap got horribly wrong.

Its sides are horribly unrealistic. IRL, the Zerg, Terrans, and Protoss would have ended up with exactly the same weaponry within a year at most.

It uses the stupid harvester model of resource control.

It has a fixed and very low resolution.

The queueing that it does have is extremely limited and badly implemented. WC3 actually managed to make the queueing situation worse by dropping build queues. Attacking bases is a pain when you can't tell your units the order of razing in advance.

I don't remember if it required buildings for unit support or not, but it probably did because that's the stupid way of doing it.

You could only select a very limited number of units.

Et cetera et cetera et cetera...

Yeah and the fact that nobody plays SC online anymore proves that... wait ... people do play it STILL hmm

I see from the whinging about queueing that you aren't expert at keyboard/mouse control, good players try to avoid queues as much as possible.
Also this part:

Quote:

Attacking bases is a pain when you can't tell your units the order of razing in advance.

Oh my god. First of all, you CAN. Second, you shouldn't (unless it's empty) because control is everything for good players, and you should allways keep your eye on your men.
Rest of your crap you wrote I won't even touch.
I hate to break this to you but are more of a TBS guy. How lucky this is Civ site

CapitanGarlic · February 23, 2003, 02:46

I've got The Moon Project here on my shelf -- good game, I just haven't found the time to get through it yet.

Ramo · February 23, 2003, 02:51

Hearts of Iron. In spirit, it's more turn-based than RTS, but you can play it like you'd play an RTS if you really want.

Nubclear · February 23, 2003, 02:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Ramo
Hearts of Iron. In spirit, it's more turn-based than RTS, but you can play it like you'd play an RTS if you really want.

Got it.

BeBro · February 23, 2003, 08:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Ramo
Hearts of Iron. In spirit, it's more turn-based than RTS, but you can play it like you'd play an RTS if you really want.

What is this game about? And how much cpu power do I need for it?

Paul Hanson · February 23, 2003, 09:01

It's about the run up to World War II and the war itself. You can play as a powerful major nation like Britain or Germany right down to Belgium, Mongolia or Tibet.

I don't know what the minimum specs are. One of my mates has HoI and it runs fine on his Althlon XP2000, but I should imagine that anything above a P500 would be fine.

VJ · February 23, 2003, 09:06

IMO, there hasn't been any reason to buy RTS' after AoE II, because it's still the best one around.

St Leo · February 23, 2003, 19:24

Yeah and the fact that nobody plays SC online anymore proves that... wait ... people do play it

Yeah and the fact that nobody listens to N'Sync proves that it sucks... wait.. people do listen to them

I see from the whinging about queueing that you aren't expert at keyboard/mouse control,

What does being the fastest-clicker-in-the-west have to do with strategy?

good players try to avoid queues as much as possible.

In TA and Warlords Battlecry II? I did say that SC's queues are badly implemented.

Oh my god. First of all, you CAN. Second, you shouldn't (unless it's empty) because control is everything for good players, and you should allways keep your eye on your men.

RTS is about control of resources, not units.

I hate to break this to you but are more of a TBS guy. How lucky this is Civ site

No, I am a Strategy game guy. I want to battle the enemy and not the interface.

IMO, there hasn't been any reason to buy RTS' after AoE II, because it's still the best one around.

Have you tried Warlords Battlecry II or Kohan?

Nubclear · February 23, 2003, 19:26

Bah. DONT TURN MY THREAD INTO A FLAME WAR!!!!!!!

Sava · February 23, 2003, 19:33

Communism is stupid!

Dauphin · February 23, 2003, 19:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Mercator
Commandos!!

Best game ever made.

Nubclear · February 23, 2003, 19:34

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
Communism is stupid!

Sava · February 23, 2003, 19:35

just doing my part in the flame wars!

raghar · February 23, 2003, 21:08

What about Harpoon? It's not an RTS but it is somethin interesting.

tinyp3nis · February 23, 2003, 21:52

Quote:

What does being the fastest-clicker-in-the-west have to do with strategy?

Just that you will lose games if you are a slow boy.

Quote:

RTS is about control of resources, not units.

Really? Any RTS like that is very poor. Besides I said, for _good_ players.

Sava · February 23, 2003, 21:57

There is more strategy in RTS than in TBS. On top of normal planning, one has to compete with time. Sure, any bozo can study a Civ map and plan his strategy, but it takes more skill to do so in real-time.

I personally don' t like many RTS games. Starcraft is king of them all, IMO. Empire Earth is pretty good, but weak multiplayer.

monolith94 · February 23, 2003, 22:21

"Starcraft is king of them all, IMO"
I agree. And if Starcraft is the king, then Myth 2 is the Queen. the queen with A GIANT BATTLE AXE!

TheStinger · February 24, 2003, 06:57

cossacks is good

TheBirdMan · February 24, 2003, 07:57

Quote:

Originally posted by TheStinger
cossacks is good

So I have head. Going to try it out soon.

TheBirdMan · February 24, 2003, 07:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Tassadar5000

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
Communism is stupid!

Not in Call To Power!

But of course, that is a turnbased game and dosn't really count here.

TheStinger · February 24, 2003, 07:58

Quote:

Originally posted by TheBirdMan

So I have head. Going to try it out soon.

Every now and again the AI is really dumb, but thats always gonna happen i suppose

St Leo · February 24, 2003, 14:44

There is more strategy in RTS than in TBS. On top of normal planning, one has to compete with time. Sure, any bozo can study a Civ map and plan his strategy, but it takes more skill to do so in real-time.

Uhm, the speed of most real-time is not realistic. You are expected to do a couple years of Real Life in in a couple hours of real-time. Ditto for Battle length. Genghis, Caesar, and Napoleon fought their battles at TBS speeds.

Jack_www · February 25, 2003, 00:15

I tryed the demo to Star Craft and never really got into it. It feels like their is a limmited amounts of units. But I did have fun playing it, but never got good at the game, and never bought it.

Sten Sture · February 25, 2003, 02:37

http://www.militarygameronline.com/i...ticles&secid=2

these guys do decent reviews, imo.

Of course if you really played, you would know about www.grognard.com