Yeah Dawn of War 2 was a complete and utter blast, I loved that game. I might try Company heros too. I will be a general one of these daysDaezd said:
Poll: RTS gaming .
- Thread starter yaik7a
- Start date
Recommended Videos
The RTS genre is going strong. While some games Iw as looking forward to, like Dawn of War 2 and Empire Total War were epic failures, the awesome thing about RTS games is the fact that most RTS games don't get old and you can always mod them. Company of Heroes is a game I still play every day as that game actually requires tactics rather than just micro and games like Medieval 2 are still awesome with mods like Third:Age Total War. Hopefully, Napolean:Total War and Starcraft 2 will be good games.
If you thought Dawn of War 2 was fun, then Company of Heroes will give you orgasms. It's essentially Dawn of War 2, but better. Dawn of War 2 was ruined for me due to the fact that it was essentially a very simplified Company of Heroes without awesome quotes from British soldiers.The Rockerfly said:
The RTS genre is doing fine, I love playing older games such as cossacks and rise of nations.
Cossacks is a brilliant game, you should all buy it now, because someone on the internet told you to!
Cossacks is a brilliant game, you should all buy it now, because someone on the internet told you to!
Holy shit, if you are telling the truth then I think I may start having sex with this gameEmphraim said:
How is it different though from Dawn?
I just found out I kind of like RTSs.
However, I like sitting at my base and slowly making a huge army with no particular strategy, so people who are RTS veterans with strategies usually rush me with some uncounterable tactic.
I'm sure I'll get better eventually though.
However, I like sitting at my base and slowly making a huge army with no particular strategy, so people who are RTS veterans with strategies usually rush me with some uncounterable tactic.
I'm sure I'll get better eventually though.
1. Company of Heroes is a bit slower paced than DOW2 and requires more tactics.The Rockerfly said:
2. One of the most visible differences is the importance of buildings and urban combat. You don't know how awesome it is to make a hole in a roof with a mortar, then have an artillery shell crash into the hole you made, knocking out all the machine gun teams in the building.
3. Vehicle combat plays a much bigger role in the game. When I played the Multiplayer beta for DOW2, vehicles were mostly a late game affair. In Company of Heroes, if you play correctly, you can get a m10 as Americans within 10 minutes and unlike DOW2, vehicles aren't high HP damage sinks. Like in real life, a tank in Company of Heroes is extremely powerful , but a few shots from an AT gun and it goes boom.
4. This is a personal bias most likely, but the vehicles in DOW2 seemed to feel worseThey didn't control as smoothly or have the same attention to detail as the COH vehicles.
5. The biggest thing for me is game balance. DOW2 is a major screwup in game balance. Even now, the Tyranids have a large advantage over any other faction. Company of Heroes, even though the competitive players on gamereplays.org whine that it has been ruined due to the addition of the British and Panzer Elite into the game, is still one of the best balanced RTS games out there, right below Starcraft and Warcraft.
6. The game is still one of the best looking RTS games out there.
But really, I can't do the game justice. I suggest watching some game clips and reading reviews.
Sounds a blast, I will pick up a copy off of Amazon or maybe off of SteamEmphraim said:
Thanks ^-^
Have a cookie
I love RTS games. Rome total war sold me on the genre but my favourite is ENDWAR.
Actually, both of these are turn-based-strategy rather than real-time-strategy, but there so similar i sometimes class them as one.
Actually, both of these are turn-based-strategy rather than real-time-strategy, but there so similar i sometimes class them as one.
Though I generally like RTS, I prefer TBS, because it lets you maximize your strategic potential.
I'm a ludicrously huge fan of them, first game I played was Ages 1.
But I think they're starting to get a bit shafted just because tastes are changing. It's kind of become like chess in that it's slower and complex in different ways than the slightly more instantly gratifying rpg's or fps's. Too bad, really.
But I think they're starting to get a bit shafted just because tastes are changing. It's kind of become like chess in that it's slower and complex in different ways than the slightly more instantly gratifying rpg's or fps's. Too bad, really.
The RTS genre never really got me. I enjoy being in the thick of the action rather than overseeing it, but that's just me.
Has some potential, but I think that all games that are being released right now look really similar with their "OMGAWESOME" 3-D graphics engine. Although it does feel nice to destroy a building and actually SEE each individual block fall, it stops becoming awesome when every other modern RTS title starts using the same thing.
Another thing is that ever since the best RTS came out 11 years ago (Starcraft), all the RTS games out there feature "WOW3UNIQUERACESLOL" but all the races are too similar. They all have a gun toting basic unit, they all have similar tanks. They only have slight variations on this, like maybe the cost of units for different factions are different or maybe the superunit of each faction is different.
I still play Starcraft from time to time, I think it's the most balanced and stable RTS out there (they had 11 years to patch the thing). Blizzard put a lot of time and effort into making the game, and the graphics aren't horrible. I liked what they did with the microing aspect of the game, giving each unit the power to change the tide of war because of leet skills on the player's part. And the different races are COMPLETELY different from each other, unique and strange in their own way. I liked that.
That reminds me, modern games also seem to have an obsession with the whole "LOOKOVER9000UNITSLOL" and they try their best to advertise their game as epic. This is fun, yes, but it sometimes feels like I'm just grinding out units on a production line to send them to their deaths, only occasionally changing the angle or area of attack. Whoopdeedo.
The microing aspect of the game is gone or toned down. No longer can a single unit do an epic move to change the course of war. No longer can each unit be precious to the commander to the point of giving them names. Who cares about the tiny things, you have billions of them, they'll die anyway, preserving their life is useless, HURRDURR.
And another thing in the current RTS genre is that developers are acting if they have hit on some WINNINGFORMULALOL and repeatedly applying the formula to every one of their games. Each and every game they make is doomed to have many units, similar units, etc.
Whatever, RTS gaming is becoming too similar and not diverse enough. I've given up caring.
Another thing is that ever since the best RTS came out 11 years ago (Starcraft), all the RTS games out there feature "WOW3UNIQUERACESLOL" but all the races are too similar. They all have a gun toting basic unit, they all have similar tanks. They only have slight variations on this, like maybe the cost of units for different factions are different or maybe the superunit of each faction is different.
I still play Starcraft from time to time, I think it's the most balanced and stable RTS out there (they had 11 years to patch the thing). Blizzard put a lot of time and effort into making the game, and the graphics aren't horrible. I liked what they did with the microing aspect of the game, giving each unit the power to change the tide of war because of leet skills on the player's part. And the different races are COMPLETELY different from each other, unique and strange in their own way. I liked that.
That reminds me, modern games also seem to have an obsession with the whole "LOOKOVER9000UNITSLOL" and they try their best to advertise their game as epic. This is fun, yes, but it sometimes feels like I'm just grinding out units on a production line to send them to their deaths, only occasionally changing the angle or area of attack. Whoopdeedo.
The microing aspect of the game is gone or toned down. No longer can a single unit do an epic move to change the course of war. No longer can each unit be precious to the commander to the point of giving them names. Who cares about the tiny things, you have billions of them, they'll die anyway, preserving their life is useless, HURRDURR.
And another thing in the current RTS genre is that developers are acting if they have hit on some WINNINGFORMULALOL and repeatedly applying the formula to every one of their games. Each and every game they make is doomed to have many units, similar units, etc.
Whatever, RTS gaming is becoming too similar and not diverse enough. I've given up caring.
