Rts thread. Post obscure and underated things like pic related
Well I'm sure it doesn't qualify as obscure or underated but my friend just gifted me Rise of Nations: Extended Edition recently and we've been having a lot of fun playing it. Reminds me of Age of Empires meets Civ. Not sure how I missed out on it back in the day.
I'm not an RTS pro or anything, mostly just play the campaigns and custom games desu.
There was a really good korean one I played over 13 years ago at a friends place, never found it again.
All I remember is you could upgrade a normal soldier unit into a mounted hero unit if you wanted to.
Any koreans here?
>suck at RTS
>starting to dread playing COH2 with people because I suck so bad and I don't want to ruin their experience
Such a pity that all the big RTS brands are dead. Starcraft, AoE, Warcraft, C&C, Red Alert... Hell, turn-based strategy is more alive, and despite me liking TBS quite a lot, I'm astonished at the level to which RTS games have been destroyed.
Mein Neger, I played the shit out of that game. The AI was hilarious.
not obscure but i really want a sequel or spiritial successor
Only played the demo when i was younger, Got it from a PC Powerplay Mag.
Guys is the RTS genre gonna die?
CoC complete and utter EA dogshit now.
New Warcraft never.
All other existing IPs are either dead or copy Clash of Clans microtransaction multiplayer bullshit for that sweet f2p money printing machine.
Is there any hope for the future?
I played it. Never owned it though unfortunately.
It's ok. Not as bad as /v/ tends to say it was, just not as good as 1/FA/Total Annihilation.
Still better than C&C imo.
Who wants fort building and siege warfare?
Not exactly obscure, but sequel/remake/remaster when?
i played pic related a few years ago, don't know if it's obscure but i rarely see it posted
Who actually played that game.
It's not rare, Really good game as well. First game was great as well and had more units.
Still play the second game today with friends
Overall, Cossacks has been my favorite RTS.
any interesting sci-fi RTS that might've flown under the radar worth checking out?
RoN is fantastic, glad you're enjoying it anon. I'm kind of in the same boat, played RTS all my life but never really got especially good at them. Try Rise of Legends next, it's an underrated classic
There is this.
I don't know if it's good or not. I haven't played it yet.
QUESTION OF THE THREAD:
What was the best version of Hell March? 1, 2, or 3?
Not obscure, don't care. One of my favourite games of all time and it's sad that both the series and genre is dead.
>you will never become wealthy as fuck so you can assemble your own RTS studio and work without a profit motive
What would your dream RTS be like?
How do I get over ladder nerves in SC2
Whenever I play I just get frustrated that I'm doing shit wrong and want to quit
I'd try some interesting new mechanic I think.
Not that I have anything against the originals but there's a need for some originality I think.
The other night, I was thinking of a propaganda/uprising style RTS. The primary resource would be recruiting civilians to your cause and secondary resources of arming them with revenue sources. It'd take place within an urban area and players would seize control of objectives like banks and tv stations. It'd start with most citizens neutral and would end in urban combat between militias armed to the teeth.
Fair enough. I guess to actually answer your question.
I'd make a Total War-like game with the sole purpose of lighting a fire up under CA's ass, I don't care if it's better. I also don't care if it's not an RTS.
it's fine just play comp stomp with friends
Guys mind helping out? There was an RTS that I played as a kid and somehow lost the disc to it.
You could either play as the Aliens or the Humans, you got resources from lava pits if I remember right. The Alien resource unit had a big brain that would fly up if it was collecting resources while I think the human resource unit was a moon rover or something similar to it. I also remember that the humans could get a cyborg. Oh and you could only upgrade your base and buy buildings for it, so no units for building.
I'd like a WWII RTS that approaches sim levels of autism (something like close combat for those of you who have played it), and instead of training units you have to request them from off-screen and your request will be accepted/denied based on the enemy resistance to stop you from building a huge tankmass and blobbing your way to the enemy HQ.
A modern warfare RTS where you have to deal with whiny journalists who get uppity every time you accidentally call in an airstrike on a hospital because your intel was off.
Aurora technically counts as a 4x, but it's sort of genre transcendent
Can we talk about it here?
>and your request will be accepted/denied based on the enemy resistance to stop you from building a huge tankmass and blobbing your way to the enemy HQ.
That's actually a really good idea
especially if you can disable it on lower difficulties
>tfw I still have both the original and the deluxe edition with Zero Hour on disc
Thinks about it, Moba cuts out all the filler shit of having to build up an economy and jumps straight into the action, not only that but you can play it with 4 other friends, while RTS is usually 1v1.
Moba is the superior genre unless you're a friendless aspie.
I have never met anyone else who played this and i fucking love it
I was a little iffy about Legends when I started playing. I was a massive fan of Rise of Nations and I wasn't sure if I was going to like it.
Even if the plot was kind of stupid, Legends was fun as fuck in the end.
This is one of the most boring, generic and unassuming names ever.
How do they expect not to be obscure when they name a game/mod "zero-k"?
I played that back then when it had "annihilation" in name so I know what is it all about and that name manages to discourage even me.
>Not selling all your starting items and rushing mace men
its literally the only way to win some of the crusade maps, its borderline horse shit but I still love it
I think it's the units and yes the Com's variety is better too.
I like how there are spiderbots with entirely different tactics from the tanks or cloaky bots. And it's not just their base(as in the ability to scale walls or jump) but their means of attack. That amphibious(or was it hover?) gauss thing penetrating rows of enemies and the spiderbots' dumbfire rocket unit or the EMP spider.
Every shit is different and it's so cool when your team works together with different factories supporting each other.
Not him, but the worst thing about that game is, when i stop playing for about 2-3 weeks i literally loose all my game instincts and carefully built triggers which makes me regress back to silver league levels of play.
Will this stop happening if i keep on playing?
Every time someone starts an RTS thread we all get to be reminded how absurdly loose /v/'s definition of the genre is.
If you find yourself raising an eyebrow at some of the titles posted, just remember that these are the same people who might say "Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines" when asked for their favorite first person shooter.
I want to make a RTS that controls in 3D. It takes place in some blame!-type megastructure, right, and by scrolling in and out you don't zoom in and out, instead you move up and down throughout the map. The map is divided into levels, not discrete like the over/underworld in HOMM3 for example, just a 3D map that is sliced into sections to control easier, you can still have ramps and such, but the terrain is designed to be controllable. The control elevation sets the prioritized level of control, not the absolute, so if you want your unit to jump down from a large height you don't have to scroll to his level and select him then scroll down to the ground and tell him to jump, you just click on the guy far up and click on the ground below. Units that you have vision over would display an outline throughout any terrain.
So you can have units on one floor of the map, and then you scroll down and there's a floor below that also has units, and there's a stairwell somewhere that units can walk up and down between floors(dynamically, it's not a garrison-type portal), and there can be holes in the second floor so units can reveal the 3D fog of war and shoot at each other.
Or there could be a large (like 20 meters) vertical wall, and units can be knocked down from it, and take damage proportional to the fall distance, or they can jump willingly, but not jump up because they lack jump power, or certain units could walk on walls so they can navigate that way. If you have a motorcycle-type unit you could ramp it off ramps, if you have a flying unit it moves to the point you order it in the current selection level, if you have a small unit you could sneak it through smaller spots, like vents. Basically any form of action by a NPC possible in a FPS game or similar would be possible by a unit here, and the map geometry could be practically anything as well. Would be a tactical RTS like DoW 2 though because supcom-scale battles in a complex environment would be weird.
World in Conflict was THE bomb. I can't understand why it didn't become more popular than it did. It was so fantastic. I played it really hardcore, made it up to the top 100 in the ladders, probably top 50 when it came to air.
WiC's singleplayer campaign is amazing, the story and presentation are wonderful.
What surprised me more was Bannon.
I hated him from day one, I never EVER expected to actually be sad about his death, or to care about him as a character at all. WiC was the last place I expected something like this.
Counter action was fun. Shame nobody remembers it.
Please be excited
Looks like little johnny never played Ground Control
Did you read the lengthy steam guide?
What is this? Is AoM now getting expansion packs too as well as AoE2?
Man I remember playing this as a kid, so cool and nice atmosphere with all the mining equipment.
How do you get this running on windows 7 64 bit? Is there a good piratble version out anywhere? I have it on disk but it wont even install.
>I hope Starcraft 2 is selling well
Like two weeks after LotV was released, it had around 2000 viewers on Twitch.
I hate to break it to you, but the Starcraft franchise is dead.
I wonder if it would have been different if they had allowed LAN play, so that there would have been a larger fanbase of the game from the start (with people from poor countries who pirated the game). As time goes on, the lost revenue from a few people pirating should be offset by all the additional people playing the game and watching esports, like in Brood War.
>What is this? Is AoM now getting expansion packs too as well as AoE2?
Yes, They're releasing the Chinese. They've only shown the human units so far. Standard Cho ko nu and halbardiers. And several cavalry units (light, heavy, ranged). Only myth units we've heard of are white tigers and terracotta warriors.
Comes with a campaign which isnt related to fall of the trident or new Atlantis. Though i don't think it will be that great.
Theyve worked with some of the high elo players for balance.
it runs like shit but I still want to play
>A modern warfare RTS where you have to deal with whiny journalists who get uppity every time you accidentally call in an airstrike on a hospital because your intel was off.
"Conflict Zone's main innovation was the use of propaganda, which was crucial in the game: acting in a way that brought public attention against the player's side made the game harder."
>mfw I have 3 copies of the game incl my first copy, soviet assault complete and collectors edition with that berlin wall rock
>I browsed the Massgate forums everyday for latest bantz and custom maps/movies
>I used to have bantz with the small clan I was in
>I beta tested community maps with MiR, Gearhead and some other devs that were regulars on the forums
Kinda sad what happened to the game. The multiplayer community was great, and the multiplayer features (active clan scene/features, well featured forum, fully featured player profiles etc) were really fleshed out too. I feel like having 20 minute games with that rock-paper-scissors balance was really comfy but got old eventually, especially when they'd play the same maps over and over.
A part of me kind of died when all Massive Entertainment did after the ubisoft acquisition was make assassins creed DLC and far cry 3 co-op modes, I'm happy that they're doing The Division but not sure if they will pull it off. Idk if Ubisoft own the Ground Control and World in Conflict IP's though and ubisoft will prob never want to make non shit RTT/RTS games anyway
Gearbox is just publishing though, isn't it? I thought the devs are pretty much old Relic guys.
I'm moderately hopeful for this. I fucking love HW setting.
Gearbox is only doing some PR and QA the entire development of the game is being handled by Blackbird Interactive.
Dark Omen was pretty fun. Plus it had this cool motherfucker in it.
I don't get it either. Runs like SupCom if not worse
There are sequels to Z, on steam right now.
The only issue is that they are dogshit.
get open Z or whatever it's called if you wanna play, as it's much better and higher resolution.
There were a few winter levels, I remember the there was quarry, radar (that tug of war map), that map with the train station where
bannon kills the civiesand the comfy christmas map, cascade falls. A bit of a shame some of the maps were designed for tug of war or assault though, people would only play them every so often because domination was so better and less frustrating
My boss is an old dude that liked command and conquer back in the day.
I said I'd look into an rts for him because his son sold his xbox and he can't play red alert anymore.
Whats a good rts in the setting of current times military that will run on an older laptop (4 - 5 years old)
I just found out that they officially closed the servers for World in Conflict and removed Massgate, IT WAS ONLY LAST MONTH AS WELL, I feel so sad now, hold me /v/
Anyone ever play netstorm?
Such a unique game, can't really think of anything similar.
My mate actually tried to play the campaign, shit is very tedious, especially when you have to pay for unit maintenance so their damage values wouldn't drop to abysmal levels.
>All I remember is you could upgrade a normal soldier unit into a mounted hero unit if you wanted to.
That's too broad a spectrum since that was quite normal back in the day before the genre lost all its creativity and settled for a pretty bad game of RPS+Gun.
Battle Realms is one such game, so is No Man's Land.
So underrated. The MP was infested with cheating Russians last time I tried the open source version.
You lose, lose, lose until you learn something and then you lose some more. RTS losses can be really demoralizing. And crushing players worse than you is pointless.
TBT does it better: it does all the same without cutting you down to one unit which can end up a worthless waste of space if the enemy side has counters and none of the units it counters.
I blame E-Sports and retard devs that make games under casuals that don't want to git gud.
On the other hand SCII is broken and doesn't have enough variety to experiment with.
The only things good about GG is the OST and the premise.
The rest is something I'd consider a relic of the past and why RTS games are dying.
>What would your dream RTS be like?
Acquire the rights for Metal Fatigue and make a sequel that has as many anime mecha tropes, but avoids or alters the cliches.
>Three 40 missions long campaigns with a magnitude of ways to finish them + a forth secret campaign.
>The way you choose to finish a mission will actually have results that will affect future missions.
>Combots now have more parts to be built out of and can be further upgraded with modules that further increase their capabilities.
>Combot Crew classes that allow for the Combots to gain unique abilities or alter how certain parts and modules function.
>More shenanigans like earthquake generators, assault teleporters, fortress buildings, Combot air-lifts, aircraft carriers for aircraft and jet-Combots.
>More differences among the factions. Not just in Combot parts.
>A commander skill-tree for skirmish/multiplayer that allows to choose to be either a assault specialist, a expert defender or a economical juggernaut. Each skill-tree set differs from faction to faction, the skills are not connected and do not require investing points into previous skills, and allows to freely choose what stuff you want to invest into (in fact you only need to acquire a level and the particular skills get unlocked). Additionally some of them would allow for unique vehicles, buildings and combot parts.
>A texture editor that allows you to personalize your army making them stand out in skirmish/multiplayer.
Battlecry IV never...
I played it this morning.
Some tuning to hero powers and the way economy scales, and voiced lines instead of groaning to give units more character. That's literally all it would need to stand with W3 and RA2.
I want to summon that one guy in earlier rts-threads that found hilarious ways to break this game.
What are you up to now, you glorious faggot? Is a Ssrathi dragonslayer commanding the Fey still the most bullshit thing?
I never saw anyone exept me mentioning it on /v/.
>I can't understand why it didn't become more popular than it did.
It was super popular back when it first came out but then the base building fags killed it.
They made up shit like RTT designation, threw shit at the game and so, despite the Soviet Assault improving everything, most people never got it because they were turned off by the bad word of mouth from those alphafaggots (I understand liking different things, I also prefer games with some base building but what people pulled off here, spreading doom and gloom about the genre dying out to consolified RTTs to harm the game... that is just inexcusable faggotry).
what if Nintendo made a Super Smash Bros style RTS game? one where the "race" you play as would be a nintendo franchise and you could choose between Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, Metroid etc
that could revive the genre imo
>Would the Campaigns be like in SCII (as in you choose your missions the way you like them)?
Add to this branchings based on the decisions you made and in what sequence you undertook the missions, then it would impact the story.
Like you have a choice:
>Destroy a Mil-Agro storage base that has its defenses damaged or a research lab.
>You choose to destroy the base, yet the mission where you have to destroy the lab starts with the enemy having better, more powerful parts for their Combots.
>Choose to destroy the lab, and the mission where you need to destroy the storage base starts with the enemy better prepared since they fixed their stuff.
Literally StarCraft with submarines. Fun to boot.
>I wonder if it would have been different if they had allowed LAN play
The game is simply 6 fucking years old by now.
Even Brood War died out outside of a few thousand hardcore fans in the west in a matter of about a year and a half, completely dying off when RoC got released but 4 years later.
These guys seem to delude themselves by believing the game has always had a massive population outside SK or that it can be kept up indefinitely just like WoW.
If they actually had any actual competition, the game would have been dead in the water by now.
Stronghold is fucking intense, I feel like I'm creating something smart but then the AI come before I can build anything meaningful, or it seems I struggle to produce the resources I need, and I just get stomped. How do I Stronghold? I don't like micro, just want to build a comfy castle and watch it actually survive.
Speaking of games, which are your favorite original concepts that actually worked well in practice, but never caught on?
I'd go with Battleforge.
1. get as much stone as possible
2. sell it
3. buy bows and crossbows and leather
4. square towers with the turret
5. fill with archers and crossbowmen
6. pikemen and pitch
literally easy: the game
unless you face the wolf
>towers outside the gates
That makes zero sense, you could just send some guys and rush the towers, use the towers to fire against the town itself. Red trapped himself by doing this. This is using real life logic and not game logic though.
Loved the game, tried getting my account back because of their shitty merge once and could never play again.
Those single red raptor rush at game start
Those blue tower spams.
The issue was that the game was not casual enough in MP.
You had to follow a meta and it was way too punishing to not follow the usual builds
forgot to add that you need to make like 8 woodcutting posts, and make alot of iron factories and sell that stuff too
grow the stuff need to make ale and tax your people when they like you
also MAKE BREAD its the best food option in the game
I´m almost moved to tears here, not because I supposedly love the game so much, but because there is only level headed and non-obnoxious response to the mere mention of it.
RTS-/v/, you are pretty alright.
And you are also okay, if slightly confused.
>any rts where macro > micro?
There is an almost forgotten but brilliant RTS called "Kohan" (Immortal sovereign or expansion-alone Ahriman's Gift) that contains virtually no micro to speak off, instead focuses on macro and large scale strategy.
It has it's issues, balance and mechanic wise, but it's still an amazing title.
Just avoid the sequel. Kohan 2 is shit and not even worth picking up.
>Even Brood War died out outside of a few thousand hardcore fans in the west in a matter of about a year and a half
Bullshit, back in 2003-4 it was the most played game on the internet even ahead of counterstrike.
Fucking loved this game.
Really enjoyed beam weapons, Ion weapons a shit.
>Kohan 2 is shit and not even worth picking up.
Calling it shit would be a severe understatement.
Yeah, it does expand on certain factions like the Drauga or those ork/elf guys that live in the mountains, but the whole darn thing is a filthy StarCraft clone with a shitload of the thing the game was notable for altered for the worse.
just about all of them except like Men of War, CoH and WC3
>but the whole darn thing is a filthy StarCraft clone
WARcraft clone. It's a painful attempt to ride the Warcraft 3 popularity. I've spend hundreds of hours on Kohan 1, and I've quit Kohan 2 after a few tutorial missions. The art style alone was hideous enough for me to cringe (I still maintain that Warcraft 3 is on the list of top ten ugliest games ever made, and Kohan 2 managed to somehow look similar yet worse).
When I noticed how much the guttered the core expanding mechanics, I just gave up entirely.
My friend wants to get back into videogames via RTS games, he used to play the shit out of Age of Empires and Age of Mythology and is looking for similar games (similar amount of micro and setting somewhat historic), any recommendations?
I feel like it was a pretty good period for PC games and RTS games around 2007-2009, we had CoH that set the benchmark for RTT games, world in conflict, supreme commander, command and conquer 3, Red alert 3 came out etc. The RTT trend and games dumbing down and trying to get the console crowd (world in conflict almost did this) was kinda gay though. World in Conflict had a pretty active community though, I miss the times when people got hype over RTS games
Darn. Forgot about that part. But seriously what were they thinking? What devs think it's a good idea to alter a game with unique mechanics to look like a SC/WC/AoE clone? These practices is what killed off RTS in the first place.
But if you want an RTS that looks nice, try out Armies of Exigo.
It's fantasy StarCraft (not WarCraft due to the fact that the mechanics are much similar with StarCraft) with really sweet models and some nice extras.
Lords of The Realms 2.
There is one RTS from my childhood that I can't find anywhere.
Similar to C&C Tiberian Sun, it featured a leveling system for each unit and you could carry the strongest units to the next missions. I have the feeling this company went bankrupt since I haven't meet anyone that knows this game, and it's not in wikipedia RTS list and other abandonware sites. It's a mistery, this game came for free in CD magazine that had nothing to do with games also.
>But seriously what were they thinking?
From what I can tell, Kohan, very much like OP's Original War, just did not get any praise from the mainstream journo's and critics. I don't know what exactly it was with game critics and RTS, but I don't think there is any other genre were quite as much injustice was ever done to great games by shitty reviews from shitty critics.
The company did not have that much faith in the game, the publisher was probably hesitant to greenlight it, untill somebody came and said: "See Warcraft 3, and see the amount of dosh they are making! Do that and you should be fine."
That is how it generally goes with cases like these.
That description actually fits more than one game, in fact Original War in OP's picture being one of those. How about you give us a setting or something.
Blizzard said sc2 was the end of StarCraft. They probably want to put their efforts into easy free to play trash so I wouldn't hold out hope.
>That is how it generally goes with cases like these.
Seriously, fuck journalists. Have the gamers decide what a good game really is.
And for what we got for these years of waiting for the game we got some stupid shit of a story.
>Bullshit, back in 2003-4 it was the most played game on the internet even ahead of counterstrike.
I call bull unless you give me a proof.
During the age of TFT, DoW, CoD, Halo 2, UT04, etc.
And do keep in mind we're talking about west only. If it got ahead of CS1.6 worldwide it simply means that Eqstern Europe couldn't be bothered to count all the net cafes with hundreds of thousands of CS1.6 addicts every day.
>I hope Starcraft 2 is selling well, I really want a Warcraft 4.
It's not. Which is a shame, because ignoring the insanely terrible singleplayer story, Legacy is actually really good.
But it's not selling, and I suspect it's what somebody clever already noted here: One new unit per fraction and a story campaign so terrible that even the writers themeselves admit they just could not be arsed is not enough to sell the damn thing.
So SC2 is done and went out with a fart. Legacy isn't selling well. Everything that is worth playing about SC2 (some of the mods, including faithful recreation of original SC1 and Broodwar) can be played on the free-to-play version.
Blizzard is going to focus everything into Overwatch (and Heartstone, but I don't think that takes a lot of work and resources) now.
In other news, Act of Aggression was a flop, world of Goo was a flop, Planetary Anihilation was a flop. The genre is dead. And it's not just because of MOBA's - even those who constantly proclaim how they wish there were more RTS games don't actually play them when they are out.
And frankly, the genre was always weird as fuck, with some bizzare quality standards and bizzare userbase.
DA'S WOT YER MUM SED DE UDDER NITE M8
Anyone hyped for Battle Realms steam release this month?
I need help /v/.
Theres a rts game I saw a trailer for when I was younger. The premise was angels vs. demons with humans stuck in the middle. It was set in the medieval age. I cannot for the life of me remember anything more then that but it looked amazing.
Do you guys know anything about it? Or did it end up dying?
BANNON GET OVER HERE
BANNON WHERE ARE YOUR TANKS
SHUT UP BANNON IF YOU HAVE NOTHING USEFUL TO REPORT
BANNON FLANK THEM
>The single-player story is not bad, I'm not sure what's up with you faggots.
No, it's not bad. It's in fact irredimably god-fucking-awful. Each SC2 campaign was worse than the last one, TLV's being so bad even the most hard-boiled fans of the series were mad.
Mechanically, it's good. The mission design and stuff is cool. But the story is insanely bad, which is particularly painful considering that origina SC had at least fantastic atmoshere and settings.
>Even the last expansion had over a million pre-orders.
And costed several hundred million dollars.
>be decent enough at rts, play lots of customs
>queue up my first ranked match (placement)
>heart is beating at 300 BPM, just below my APM
>playing zerg, tryharding and expanding like i'm playing a piano
>i'm about to be fucking destroyed any time now
>a few more minutes pass
>i attack with roaches and hydras
>my opponent has no army and just finished building a forge and second nexus in his base
MAKE BREAD involves MAKE BAKERIES and bakeries need their own separate courtyard so you can contain the weekly resonance cascades. Bread's a nice granary filler but if you rely too much on it you're gonna die.
I made a drawing a long ago for asking, I kinda gave up.
The graphics were similar to Tiberium Sun, if not better, An isometric RTS game with futuristic units. Pic related are the units I can remember, the truck is an AA vehicle that kills everything and has a massive range, about 2 screens away so it was hardest unit to deal against.
The missions were timed, usually from 1 to 2 hours to complete. Each units, including static defenses gain rank by attacking the enemy. Max rank is S totally OP, stronger units takes longer to rank up even after a dozen missions it's rare to reach S unless it's a weak unit. You could select which unit you want to bring to the next mission, they were essential to complete the later ones and maybe the only way to kill the enemy static defenses.
There are some other things I remember but, the tower defense that shoots a green laser is hard to miss. I haven't seen any other game that has a similar static defense.
>And costed several hundred million dollars.
The most expensive game to ever develop has been GTA V, at $265 million, including marketing costs. An expansion to a RTS game did not cost several hundred million dollars to develop.
Idk but apparently the original devs are bringing the code up to date with steam multiplayer and everything so I'm reasonably hype
Same here. I think I borrowed it to some snotty kid and never got it back. Still bothers me a bit that cover art is super cool
>Sorry commander, I overslept
>please don't punish me
>the ordos vs tilexus missions
This is not okay.
This is the opposite of okay.
>redownload it and play it for the first time since 11 years old
>the helicopters are bugged, pretty much crippling you on this particular mission
10/10 concept for a game. it never left my head. seamlessly jumping from control of a unit to commanding them still isn't done well or at all.
this is was the attack patron of the tower. However if a single enemy unit comes in range of this tower then it changes the patron and concentrates the green bream on that unit only, killing it way faster.
it's not in the wikipedia RTS list, I already checked. It must be abandonware desu
Had so much fun playing it on LAN with friends
Try it /v/, try playing it in your next LAN party.
Legends had that art style and music, 10/10 units. it's like the game you wanted but didn't know you wanted.
if you ever wondered why your RTS didn't have a unit, this game had that unit.
>mfw no new Dune games with pretty desert graphix ever
And not a Homeworld game in most cases.
It would've been better if they simply made a HW3 with the results of what the Hyperdrive Cores did.
Also Cataclysm 2 when? With the thing that spawned the Beast in the first place being the BBEG and Fleet Somtaaw coming back to do more slaying.
They did mention it, but it's all silent for years.
>summon hero and unit
>ready to explore the map for objectives securing
>see enemy player waiting for me outside
>he has last tier everything lategame ultimate units and 90% of the map under his control
>it's like 5 minutes in the game
I don't get it
If they ever release DoW 3 I hope they do away with that disgusting arena-feel of the maps that DoW 2 had
Where my Forged Alliance niggers at?
whats your UEF strat? I usually vacuum seal my base with t2/t3 point defense/sams and turtle my way to a nuke
>tfw after 23 hours only just learned you can upgrade your commander
i get that everyones played it but i really do think wc3 is the best rts made. i just really, really enjoyed hero leveling, spells, their inventory, etc right off the bat and the human paladin just felt absolutely on point, and the music was great, just everything was superb the first time i played wc3
first rts you ever played?
Pic related for me. Good times.
Custom maps ruined it.
There, I said it. That game had a great campaign and awesome multiplayer, but then everyone started playing their faggy custom maps like the little casual shits they are.
>going sneeki-breeki, stels all ze wai.
>strike with the precision of a surgeon
>called a nigger
>go in yelling UNGA BUNGA MUH EARTH
>guns blazing, destruction galore
>shoot everywhere and hope you hit something important
>MUH UEF MASTER RACE LAST HOPE OF HUMANEETEE
WC3 is the best but the credit for making RTS great in general goes in AOE2
sure Dune was important but it was AOE2 that made RTS into what it is today in my opinion
not that it matters anyway since RTS is dead
Come on work you piece of shit, I want to unite the three kingdoms to one
can it even be considered RTS?
TO THE FAR REACHES OF SPACE
>this would never work in real life
I think you need to look into fortifications, son. Having parts of the fortification separate from the rest is quite a useful way to wear down the attacker without exposing the overall integrity of the defences.
Sidebar or bottom bar, /v/?
Who had the better idea, Westwood or Ensemble?
I love the Blizzard from back then.
"It's not like Dune! Look, the sidebar is on the left, whereas it's on the right in Dune.
Totally different game."
And then they took AoE's bottom bar for Starcraft and.... switched the map to the other side.
It's dead, don't bother thinking about the card game anymore.
With that shrine that resurrects their dead warriors with full experience? Yep. Broken as fuck.
UCS for life. Mechwarrior faction best faction.
that fucking soundtrack
there's a critical lack of tibsun in this thread
I like bottom bar better, it's more comfortable
Also, it's my duty to remind you people that spellforce is a really good game with interesting mechanics.
>So you can't capture buildings in Cossacks? Are there any RTS where you can do it?
You can capture unattended artillery and civilians but when it comes to unguarded buildings, the troops will only set them on fire.
You can capture unfinished building sites, that is including towers that are being upgraded.
It's a visionary game and it simply missed the mark as to where the tech will go.
They thought the second core is the only thing we'd add to the chip and then return to upping the speed of the cores because of diminishing returns.
Turns out, Intel doesn't want to invest into new technology and so they simply kept adding more cores at the expense of rather limited potential.
That said, they're not the only ones who thought this.
TW2 based Total War games will also slow down to a crawl dunig certain effects even on the fastest consumer grade PCs because they thought the power would come in the form of faster cores, not more of them.
Pretty sure this game is obscure. I sucked at it though and could never go past like the third or forth level. The robot sergeant guy always scared me as well.
>Theyve worked with some of the high elo players for balance.
And those 'balance patches' are meticulous and often insanely-unbalanced piles of bullshit designed to appease to that hanfdul of 'top level' players regardless of what the rest of the playerbase thinks. Nevermind the fact that those balance patches are done completely for free by a volunteer team of players because Skybox is too lazy and they want to distract people from the fact that the game has huge issues running, won't perform well, multiplayer doesn't work properly and every match ends with a sync error.
This is a legitimate problem for me. I can regularly beat my gold league friends, but when playing ladder I can't deal with the stress, which leads to bronze-tier decisions and plays.
Yeah, i recently decided to buy it because it was on sale, i got it with $2 and it was spellforce 1+2 and every dlc.
I'd say the campaign is really creative and plays with your expectations and the RPG side it's really complex, i've yet to finish spellforce 1 but i have over 100 hours of play in it, it's definitively worth it.
one of my faves. it's slow but the scope is big.
>And those 'balance patches' are meticulous and often insanely-unbalanced piles of bullshit designed to appease to that hanfdul of 'top level' players regardless of what the rest of the playerbase thinks.
It's kind of a universal problem with RTS games balanced by "Pros."
Brood War had 2 balance patches in total (that is counting the expansion as a patch and all the patches of the original as well).
Had they listened to Koreans, the game would have been changed a billion times over before 2006 or so when they finally found out how to play ZvT.
Meanwhile, Starcraft 2 is "balanced" by pros at the head with the guy who was repsonsible for DoW1 balancing.
No, players are not the ones who should balance games.
That should be designer's job when making the whole damn game piece by piece.
>They still make these games, right?
The only thing was a certain expansion they found the source code for after they'd acquired the studio's assets.
The second game is more of a generic RTS, anyway.
>Play MoW:AS2 with friend
>Co-op mission, have to infiltrate a German camp with American paratroopers
>Sneak around the outside for 30 minutes, carefully picking off guards and acquiring explosives
>Finally sneak into base
>crawl past 20mm AA gun
>misjudge enemy patrol
>retreat cut off
>they're coming closer
>greet them with a volley of rifle fire and grenades
>get btfo in 5 seconds by AA gun
>life is suffering
The reason i played it is because the RTS threads kept mentioning them, so i waited for a sale and bought them.
They are really good, and it helps that i am a big fan of both RPG and RTS.
I saw a video of spellforce 3, so that may arrive in the future.
Play 4vs4. Individual skill hardly matters there, and give you a feel of all the units. Playing support/defensive mnakes sure you are not a total waste of a player slot
>sc on release
>do my 5 placement matches
>just mass roaches and A move across the map to the enemy base
>get into platinum league
>never play again
I'll just retire knowing that I'm the best sc2 player in the world and I don't need to prove myself anymore after those placements.
I always loved RTS games that emphasize on the real strategical aspect of it, where planning is more important than repid clicking noises in the distance, so I will always recommend Total Annihilation and Alpha Centauri, I think they are pretty obscure since they are old as fuck and nobody wants to fucking play them because MUH MMR MUH BROOD WARS.
>No, players are not the ones who should balance games.
I thought this was known since forever, balance is always done by other people even in the highest real life sports, a game that is balanced by the players will never be a real and fair competitive experience no matter how much they cry about it.
>Total Annihilation and SMAC
>The latter being an RTS
Anon, if you want strategy, you just play turn based strategy games like Go.
If you want it in real time, you play grand strategy games.
RTS is simply a name for the genre but it's not really descriptive, just like a fighting games need not contain every game with violence ever made.
The real issue is that the developers usually don't care to re-work a bunch of code and mechanics to appease the 0.1% of gamers that think the game is broken because their lightning-fast clicking leads to a gross imbalance. Big picture, 'fixing' a lot of those issues would make the game be perceived as imbalanced by the other 99% of players.
It's very difficult to design a game that scales well with skill level. The Pros will say that you balance the game assuming perfect play, but sometimes playing at that level to maintain balance is so difficult that it will seem like the game is imbalanced.
BUILDING GUNDAMS AND SMASHING THEM TOGETHER IN THE SKY
BURROWING UNDERGROUND AND SPEWING YOUR GOOEY LOAD OF TANKS RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ENEMY BASE
KNOCKING OFF AN OPPONENT'S ARM AND STEALING HIS TECHNOLOGY
I played it and finished it. I remember buying a sketchy pirate copy from a bootleg bazaar in the city, only because I absolutely loved Rise of Nations.
I actually quite liked that game, I loved that the campaign was pretty fleshed out compared to RoN's.
the first game of CoH 2 i played against real people, my team mate was OKW.
my enemy was US and they just blobbed me. he just spammed GIs and pushed the point over and over.
oh i know, i'll get MG to counter. oh wait, no, the blob can just flank it, oh he's bombing my statics with white phos while blobbing.
there is like no counter to that other than fighting his blob with my own blob and i refuse to play that.
that is why i don't play competitive. you're ALWAYS pigeon-holed into doing gay tactics. sorry, i don't want to spam Grenadiers and pioneers every single game, it takes away a lot of fun.
maps are important and favor strategies more. like arty is obviously good on the spaced out ones, with ton of open ground and out of reach resources.
towns, cities, etc favor close-quarters and flames.
open maps favor snipers and vehicles.
if you go arty, you better be defending an important fucking point, either a CP or fuel, so you can just destroy anything that tries to capture without suffering man power.
everyone hates CoH 2 because they removed the sapping/arty metagame, where you could GG people by blowing up their base. desu i kinda miss it too.