RTS-tard
- Thread starter Dr.Poisonfreak
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I salute you... I started doing the same after I bought a console. My reaction to JRPGs was similar but, like zombies goths say in Brutal Legend: "that song makes me want to kill myself... in a good way." FFXIII was a laughable and bizarre spectable of inane charaters and story-telling, which I took as an exposure to an interesting foreign culture. Resonance of Fate, the premise was at least as quirky but the characters were more grounded... a little.Dr.Poisonfreak said:
RTSs are a taste worth acquiring, and good ones can be enjoyed as a campaign, skirmish against the AI, online multiplayer, and, when you want to sit back, watching replays among the pro's.
Starcraft 2 is polished to a mirror sheen, but I find bland, and it's economics and resource gathering, as with the Command and Conquer series, feels too contrived for my tastes. Still Starcraft 2 is a good "safe" choice that you will probably enjoy once you get the hang of RTSs.
Of all those I played, the one that best mixed stategy with visceral fun action was the original Dawn of War. The Warhammer 40k vibe they established was spot-on. Graphics would look a bit dated by todays standards but not bad at all. Music was perfect. Strategy runs a little on the basic side but everything you want out of an RTS is there. Overall it is a fun, fun game that had a wonderful community back in the day and got me hooked with the RTS bug.
Two more from Relic that stand as RTS greats are Homeworld (again, the original)--a space RTS with good strategy and an excellent sense of style and maybe the best RTS campaign story ever (and now it is very cheap), and Company of Heroes--if you like WW2 settings, or more standard RTSs with infantry and tanks and airdrops, though this one probably runs a bit on the difficult side for a first RTS.
OK this is like the third time I've seen someone refer to a Combat Mission Game as an RTS. I have Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin and it is a turn based game. Have they changed the format of the games?L-J-F said:
OT: Company of Heroes is really cool. I liked it a lot.
For good RTS games with some variation I'd suggest some of my favourites:
Starcraft II:
A classic "CNC clone" (they're actually DUNE clones but whatever) type RTS. You build your base, make units and kill the other player's units. I put this on the top because, while SC2 has alot of strange flaws that I won't get into, it's probably the best RTS I've seen for new players. The single-player challenges and the campaign missions (regardless of the shallowness of its plot) do a very good job teaching you everything you need to know about the game, and with its different dififculty choices, from casual to brutal, even a completely new player should be able to defeat the campaign with little trouble, and when/if you want a challnge, increasing the difficulty level will really test you more than any other RTS I've seen.
Command & Conquer 3: Tiberian somethingsomething:
This is the best of the newer "CNC clones" in my opinion. It has the classical base building: you produce everything out of the all-important Construction Yard, and you harvest the "tiberium"-ore substitute with your harvesters. Units and buildings are produced from the side-bar and there is no "food"/control-related unit cap like in the blizzard games (starcraft 2, warcraft 3, etc).
It's a much more laid-back game than starcraft 2, though less sophisticated. I greatly enjoyed playing it occationally when it came out.
Supreme Commander:
The grandest-scale RTS that exists. When in starcraft or command & conquer you'll be controlling dozens of units, in supreme commander you'll be controlling hundreds of units. You start with your "Supreme Commander" mobile construction unit that magically creates everything out of two basic resources: mass and energy. The resource system is fairly complex if you compare it to the two above games, but easy to get your head around.
The game focuses less on "microing" your individual units in skirmishes and more on contructing huge armies to destroy your opponent, or erecting massive bases and artillery emplacements to crawl across the map. The game doesn't look as good as the above two (imagine the strain that'd have on your computer with hundreds or units on-screen at once) but its physics mechanics are very impressive.
It also features one of the most awesome features I've ever seen in a RTS game: The STRATEGIC ZOOM. You can zoom out as far as you want (or as close as you want), and when you zoom out far enough your units are represented by icons rather than their 3D models. It is an incredible feature and it deeply saddens me to see that no other games have chosen to adopt it.
I was very sad to see that with Supreme Commander 2 they decided to dumb down the gameplay and reduce the scale of the game to "appeal to the masses". While SupCom2 is a decent enough game (and to be fair probably a better game for someone new to RTS games) it is inferior to its predecessor in many aspects.
Game #4:
Here I'd put one of the good squad-control games out there, but the only one I've played is WH40K: Dawn of War 2, and while that is pretty good I'm sure somebody can point out a better representation of that sub-genre (I'm not a huge fan of RTS withotu base-building).
"Total War" Games:
Turn-based RTS? You control nations and build armies on the world map, fighting battles in an RTS-like mini-game. They're RTS-like, but I wouldn't call it a true RTS game.
I'd like to type in some more, but I'm out of time! Hope this helped!
Starcraft II:
A classic "CNC clone" (they're actually DUNE clones but whatever) type RTS. You build your base, make units and kill the other player's units. I put this on the top because, while SC2 has alot of strange flaws that I won't get into, it's probably the best RTS I've seen for new players. The single-player challenges and the campaign missions (regardless of the shallowness of its plot) do a very good job teaching you everything you need to know about the game, and with its different dififculty choices, from casual to brutal, even a completely new player should be able to defeat the campaign with little trouble, and when/if you want a challnge, increasing the difficulty level will really test you more than any other RTS I've seen.
Command & Conquer 3: Tiberian somethingsomething:
This is the best of the newer "CNC clones" in my opinion. It has the classical base building: you produce everything out of the all-important Construction Yard, and you harvest the "tiberium"-ore substitute with your harvesters. Units and buildings are produced from the side-bar and there is no "food"/control-related unit cap like in the blizzard games (starcraft 2, warcraft 3, etc).
It's a much more laid-back game than starcraft 2, though less sophisticated. I greatly enjoyed playing it occationally when it came out.
Supreme Commander:
The grandest-scale RTS that exists. When in starcraft or command & conquer you'll be controlling dozens of units, in supreme commander you'll be controlling hundreds of units. You start with your "Supreme Commander" mobile construction unit that magically creates everything out of two basic resources: mass and energy. The resource system is fairly complex if you compare it to the two above games, but easy to get your head around.
The game focuses less on "microing" your individual units in skirmishes and more on contructing huge armies to destroy your opponent, or erecting massive bases and artillery emplacements to crawl across the map. The game doesn't look as good as the above two (imagine the strain that'd have on your computer with hundreds or units on-screen at once) but its physics mechanics are very impressive.
It also features one of the most awesome features I've ever seen in a RTS game: The STRATEGIC ZOOM. You can zoom out as far as you want (or as close as you want), and when you zoom out far enough your units are represented by icons rather than their 3D models. It is an incredible feature and it deeply saddens me to see that no other games have chosen to adopt it.
I was very sad to see that with Supreme Commander 2 they decided to dumb down the gameplay and reduce the scale of the game to "appeal to the masses". While SupCom2 is a decent enough game (and to be fair probably a better game for someone new to RTS games) it is inferior to its predecessor in many aspects.
Game #4:
Here I'd put one of the good squad-control games out there, but the only one I've played is WH40K: Dawn of War 2, and while that is pretty good I'm sure somebody can point out a better representation of that sub-genre (I'm not a huge fan of RTS withotu base-building).
"Total War" Games:
Turn-based RTS? You control nations and build armies on the world map, fighting battles in an RTS-like mini-game. They're RTS-like, but I wouldn't call it a true RTS game.
I'd like to type in some more, but I'm out of time! Hope this helped!
I bought Rome: Total War on Steam for under $10 the other day. The good thing is that it doesn't strain your system (not sure what kind of PC you have). But either way, graphics don't matter when the game is this fantastic. A good mix of real time battles, and turn based management. Also, it is much easier to learn the basics without getting your butt kicked!
Rome: Total War. Do it!
Rome: Total War. Do it!
Nobody can really handle the original's graphics but Starcraft 2 is a great place to start.
Watch!
Watch!
For your bread and butter RTS have to try STARCRAFT 2. That should be your entry or indoctrination into the genre. Warcraft 3 is a good choice too if youre gaming on a budget. (Starcraft 1 aged poorly, another B&B RTS is the Command&Conquer Series, but its not all that good tbh. C&C4 became an RTT. O don't bother with Supreme Commander unless you have a real Beefy rig 
)
An easier type of RTS is the subcategory of Real Time Tactics which is more on managing your troops on the front line than managing a base. That i would recommend COMPANY OF HEROES / DAWN OF WAR Series (I think CoH is the better game)
If you prefer Space based RTS try SINS OF A SOLAR EMPIRE/ HOMEWORLD 2 (most awesome Space RTS's ever made)
For the Civilization based RTS try AGE OF EMPIRES series (Go for the last one)
If you decide those are too fast u can try Turn Based Strategy with CIVILIZATION Series (Civilization 5 just came out and everyone loves it XD)
Or you can play the hybrid Turn Base Strategy and Real Time Tactics that is TOTAL WAR Series (personally love Empire:TW and Rome:TW)
)An easier type of RTS is the subcategory of Real Time Tactics which is more on managing your troops on the front line than managing a base. That i would recommend COMPANY OF HEROES / DAWN OF WAR Series (I think CoH is the better game)
If you prefer Space based RTS try SINS OF A SOLAR EMPIRE/ HOMEWORLD 2 (most awesome Space RTS's ever made)
For the Civilization based RTS try AGE OF EMPIRES series (Go for the last one)
If you decide those are too fast u can try Turn Based Strategy with CIVILIZATION Series (Civilization 5 just came out and everyone loves it XD)
Or you can play the hybrid Turn Base Strategy and Real Time Tactics that is TOTAL WAR Series (personally love Empire:TW and Rome:TW)
i say starcraft or starcraft 2
starcraft is a good one to start with cause they have cheats you can use to ease into the game and take the time you need to get better
starcraft 2 is much more better, the enemies are tougher, smarter, faster, and all around badass
but never...EVER.....EEEEEEEVVVVVVVVEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRR get halo wars!!!!!
im sure everyone will agree with me when i say halo wars sucks balls
starcraft is a good one to start with cause they have cheats you can use to ease into the game and take the time you need to get better
starcraft 2 is much more better, the enemies are tougher, smarter, faster, and all around badass
but never...EVER.....EEEEEEEVVVVVVVVEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRR get halo wars!!!!!
im sure everyone will agree with me when i say halo wars sucks balls
My RTS experience started with Warcraft III, followed with it's expansion. And it hooked me up.
After that followed Red Alert 2, Caesar III, Age Of Empires.
Whatever you try, you won't make a mistake. Have Fun!
After that followed Red Alert 2, Caesar III, Age Of Empires.
Whatever you try, you won't make a mistake. Have Fun!
warcraft 3 is fairly basic. i would recommend playing as the humans at first because it will make more sense
rome total war is the most basic of the :total war series (easily one of the best series of the RTS genre)
i would suggest staying away from games like supreme commander at first
halo wars is also probably the most basic RTS out there, but there are only a couple different strategies so it gets boring online
rome total war is the most basic of the :total war series (easily one of the best series of the RTS genre)
i would suggest staying away from games like supreme commander at first
halo wars is also probably the most basic RTS out there, but there are only a couple different strategies so it gets boring online
Anything Command and Conquer before Generals is good to start with. I suggest Red Alert 2 or Tiberian Sun.
Homeworld, the original. Definitely. You want reasons? Here they are [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.233628-A-Complete-Game?page=2#8250565]. Be warned, that is a MASSIVE post, but it's worth reading. Homeworld is utterly brilliant.
Also, I've seen people mention Homeworld 2. Hrm. I haven't got it myself, but among fans it actually has a pretty bad rep for dumbing the original down and having a story with just too many subtle plot holes (and a few massive ones). I'd say, get the original Homeworld no matter what, because it is just the best game ever.
Also, I've seen people mention Homeworld 2. Hrm. I haven't got it myself, but among fans it actually has a pretty bad rep for dumbing the original down and having a story with just too many subtle plot holes (and a few massive ones). I'd say, get the original Homeworld no matter what, because it is just the best game ever.
I think the people complaining about just massing and army and moving out are just playing the campaign on easy. Setting the computer to higher difficulties in skirmishes or playing online requires harassment attacking and countering the enemies units and build order.
Ruse is a good choice for an rts. The basics are easy to learn, its relatively balanced, you have to really think about your strategies (for instance, recon and intel=more important than a king tiger, or a me 262 or what have you + the ability to cut off supply lines)but since i cant really explain since im horrible at explaining things
here is a few user reviews that i copy and pasted off the gamespot website (these are all positive but i coudnt find any negative and thats not fanboysm i literally coudnt)
review #1
R.U.S.E. is great game in my opinion, it's a game that sucks you in and you can play it for long time although it is different than any Real time Strategy .in the game you can feel yourself that you are a general that order his army to do things. The different abilities is nice in the game example the ability to silence radio this ability will hide your units or other ability is camouflage to hide buildings. In the game the units are organized as heavy tanks, light tanks and recon, infantry airborne, anti-tanks units, different types of planes fighter and fighters and recon.
This game tests your strategic skills and it needs patient and time i think it's best played on PC not ps3 or other consoles because of the controllers. The game have some technical issues or glitches but they can be managed.
review #2I've never been so pumped about a strategy game on release. I even stopped playing SC2 to get into this game. The beta was SO much fun to play and the combat is about as realistic as has ever been attempted on this grand a scale.
This isn't a click-fest like a lot of strategy games. You aren't going to spend tons of time clicking hotkeys and bouncing all over with the camera. It's a thinking man's game and timing, terrain and scouting are hugely important.
It's incredibly satisfying to fool your enemies and surprise them and watch the action slowly unfold.
That being said, Eugen did a terrible job with the campaign and it's pretty obvious that they didn't invest much time or money into it. I won't go into it very much because there's really not much to say. The AI is bad. The cutscenes are ugly with bad dialogue and the whole experience is contrived. That would all be well and fine if the AI was decent, but it's not, so don't buy this game for single player.
The multiplayer experience SHOULD redeem the game and when you're actually 'playing' it absolutely does. Unfortunately, you have to play through Steam, which broke the game up into 100 'regions' and you can only play with people from your region. I haven't been able to find a ranked game in 2 days without waiting for 20 minutes, and the custom games I play usually end up with me playing the same group of about 10-15 people over and over again. I understand the logic behind region locking, but we'd have probably been better off with AT MOST 10 regions instead of the 100 we were given. It's insane.
There's a lot of mp potential with this game. I would like to recommend it to strategy enthusiasts. I cannot do that, however, until Ubisoft and Steam sort out the multiplayer net code and region locking. Until then the game is just a waste of hard drive space
review #3
Is a nice game whit a good story and amazing gameplay.Eugen Systems are good to create a game like this,and a love this .Is a nice game whit a good story and amazing gameplay.Eugen Systems are good to create a game like this,and a love this game.Is good that you feel like a real comander when you play this game.They are many faction and that is good,the story is very intersing.The multiplayer is not boring ,because you have a battle whit computer and that is good.Ilike the rusopedia too and the multiplayer,is a nice game whit a good story,good gameplay and good multiplayer,so this game is cool and i like it.So try is is have fun and is training you stategy.Is a very good game and i love it,I love to play stategy world war games.like company of heroes,and many,many games.I love this games and i like this game R.U.S.E.So gamespot give mine full stategy games.
and here is a few videos
http://www.youtube.com/user/RUSEHD
warning the above post may be filled with bad grammar (from me) being uncomprehensible and all around stupid. if it is bad grammar I really dont care.
here is a few user reviews that i copy and pasted off the gamespot website (these are all positive but i coudnt find any negative and thats not fanboysm i literally coudnt)
review #1
R.U.S.E. is great game in my opinion, it's a game that sucks you in and you can play it for long time although it is different than any Real time Strategy .in the game you can feel yourself that you are a general that order his army to do things. The different abilities is nice in the game example the ability to silence radio this ability will hide your units or other ability is camouflage to hide buildings. In the game the units are organized as heavy tanks, light tanks and recon, infantry airborne, anti-tanks units, different types of planes fighter and fighters and recon.
This game tests your strategic skills and it needs patient and time i think it's best played on PC not ps3 or other consoles because of the controllers. The game have some technical issues or glitches but they can be managed.
review #2I've never been so pumped about a strategy game on release. I even stopped playing SC2 to get into this game. The beta was SO much fun to play and the combat is about as realistic as has ever been attempted on this grand a scale.
This isn't a click-fest like a lot of strategy games. You aren't going to spend tons of time clicking hotkeys and bouncing all over with the camera. It's a thinking man's game and timing, terrain and scouting are hugely important.
It's incredibly satisfying to fool your enemies and surprise them and watch the action slowly unfold.
That being said, Eugen did a terrible job with the campaign and it's pretty obvious that they didn't invest much time or money into it. I won't go into it very much because there's really not much to say. The AI is bad. The cutscenes are ugly with bad dialogue and the whole experience is contrived. That would all be well and fine if the AI was decent, but it's not, so don't buy this game for single player.
The multiplayer experience SHOULD redeem the game and when you're actually 'playing' it absolutely does. Unfortunately, you have to play through Steam, which broke the game up into 100 'regions' and you can only play with people from your region. I haven't been able to find a ranked game in 2 days without waiting for 20 minutes, and the custom games I play usually end up with me playing the same group of about 10-15 people over and over again. I understand the logic behind region locking, but we'd have probably been better off with AT MOST 10 regions instead of the 100 we were given. It's insane.
There's a lot of mp potential with this game. I would like to recommend it to strategy enthusiasts. I cannot do that, however, until Ubisoft and Steam sort out the multiplayer net code and region locking. Until then the game is just a waste of hard drive space
review #3
Is a nice game whit a good story and amazing gameplay.Eugen Systems are good to create a game like this,and a love this .Is a nice game whit a good story and amazing gameplay.Eugen Systems are good to create a game like this,and a love this game.Is good that you feel like a real comander when you play this game.They are many faction and that is good,the story is very intersing.The multiplayer is not boring ,because you have a battle whit computer and that is good.Ilike the rusopedia too and the multiplayer,is a nice game whit a good story,good gameplay and good multiplayer,so this game is cool and i like it.So try is is have fun and is training you stategy.Is a very good game and i love it,I love to play stategy world war games.like company of heroes,and many,many games.I love this games and i like this game R.U.S.E.So gamespot give mine full stategy games.
and here is a few videos
http://www.youtube.com/user/RUSEHD
warning the above post may be filled with bad grammar (from me) being uncomprehensible and all around stupid. if it is bad grammar I really dont care.