 |
| |
|
|
fuerza
|
|
I've have tried so many (but not all) 'nation building' games and I have yet to find THE ONE that keeps me excited, challenged, and happy. So, I will ask the hardcore gamers, which is not me.....
I want a Civ/Strategy game that is a balanced mixed of Civ3 and RoN/Empire Earth/AoE
With Ron/Empire Earth/AoE I feel like the decision making is out of my control. With those kind, the only option is to fight. I would love to see RoN or EE have a diplomacy component: Be a friend or foe or just cold war neighbours. Make deals before war happens. Negotiate. Capitulate, an Armistice, etc.
Yea, I know alot will say, well then, just play Civ3. Well, no...I want more actually action graphics so that when I AM involved in a war I can control the tactics of my units. You really can't do that in Civ3.
So, hardcore Civ/RTS gamers, which has the happy mix of what I want?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Solver
|
|
Apolyton Duke Of Something
|
 |
Latvia, Riga
Sep 2000
time: 07:31
|
|
Generally, RoN is the closest to what you want. It does have the diplomacy, with all capitulations, etc.
However, take this in account. Civ 3 is a TBS game. In all TBS games, you will need thinking, but will not have too much control over troop tactics. In all RTS games, though, you will need a good deal of speed, and less thinking.
CtP2 provides a more complex and much more strategic combat model than Civ 3, and a nice "battle view", but it's not battles like in RoN.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
fuerza
|
|
Yeah, I agree with some of what both of you said. CTP2 with the complex strategy of war play and the fact that RoN needs to really delve into the diplomacy aspect of this game.
Ideally...I would love to see a game that is an excellent cross between Civ3 and Ron/EE/or the like. I need total control of the eagle eye vs. micromanagement views of each city. For example. I want to establish a city founding and cue up buildings and/or units ( I really like the idea of public works in CTP2), then while that is going on, return to a mid to well-developing city and go to micromanagement and work with the soldiers or personnel of my city. When it comes time for battle I would like the governers of the cities I am NOT zeroed in on to follow the build cue or make decisions based upon my civilization goals while I am commanding the troops in a different region of the map. A 'call for reinforcement' button would automatically dispatch troops from neighboring cities based on a home troop/away troop percentage I could specify in the beginning. Hell, these are just a few of the ideas I have for what I would love to see. Yea, I know it could be very complex but that is what I want. The complete micromanagement of EVERYTHING in RoN or EE turns me off alot of the time. In those games, more times than not, everthing seems to end in a military conflict. What I am trying to say is that I want a true Civ game with a big dose of player controlled, as in options and preferences, RTS! Geez, if I had better programming skills I would write exactly want I wanted and sell it myself. Hopefully, there is someone, some software house out there that also has my ideas in mind and makes it happen.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Todd Hawks
|
|
How about Europa Universalis (2)?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chronus
|
|
I saw RON last night for the very first time. My nephew gave me a brief introduction to the campaign game.
From what I can see (and from what my nephew described to me), it doesn't have that Civ 3 aspect. Maybe I see it this way because I'm a peaceful-builder type. Like Europa Universalis, there just doesn't seem to be a whole lot to do when you are not fighting anyone.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Vipermmx
|
|
Cruddy? lol
Look at RON
Its fanbase shrinks daily! Its boring!
SPAM warfare is all it is. Set rally point on target and spit out endless units till one of ya dies and claims city. The economy is far to fast and gameplay is a drag once ya figure out all the units are the same.
No units counter there counters worth a damn. 1 tank cant take 5 infatry? LMAO ''
Uniqie units arent! There same with same stats!
Techs all the same.....after 3 times of teching up the tree its boring. Why no Auto tech? Thats the worse part of the game!
Even on VERY EXPENSIVE its far to easy to tech and build a war machine!
Lets compare!
Graphics---
- Empire wins here. Even though RON has very nice animations for units and they do small perks its ugly. Tanks look bulky and boxy! Infatry are pixeled! Explosions suck! No blood!
-In Empire all graphics are amazing! Water that reflects its surroundings! Trees that seem real! Units up close still look good and tanks and everything look like they belong in the world! Not to bulky or unattached unlike RON!
Counter system----
Empire wins! In RON no unit counters worth a crap!
Gameplay-----
Empire yet again. In empire you actually have different races with there own units and strategys! Unlike RON where its mostly all about out producing your enemy and climbing the tech tree fast as possible!
Favorite RON moment!
Hey look im in classical age! 10mins later hey I got a nuke!
Thanks :
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Divvy
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Vipermmx
Graphics---
- Empire wins here. Even though RON has very nice animations for units and they do small perks its ugly. Tanks look bulky and boxy! Infatry are pixeled! Explosions suck! No blood!
-In Empire all graphics are amazing! Water that reflects its surroundings! Trees that seem real! Units up close still look good and tanks and everything look like they belong in the world! Not to bulky or unattached unlike RON!
Counter system----
Empire wins! In RON no unit counters worth a crap!
Gameplay-----
Empire yet again. In empire you actually have different races with there own units and strategys! Unlike RON where its mostly all about out producing your enemy and climbing the tech tree fast as possible!
Favorite RON moment!
Hey look im in classical age! 10mins later hey I got a nuke!
|
What's wrong with you really? As far as I know hardly anyone plays empire earth (if thats the game you're talking about)
You might actually have a couple of valid points but..., Im not much of a RTS player.
"In Empire all graphics are amazing! Water that reflects its surroundings! Trees that seem real! Units up close still look good and tanks and everything look like they belong in the world! Not to bulky or unattached unlike RON!"
That's such complete utter bullshit, zoom in on the units in EE and they look uglier than total annihilation units (which is MUCH older 5-6 years? maybe more)...
I think AOM is one of the better looking strategy games (although I don't actually own it, nor do I own RON for that matter)
The only thing I can remember of EE is that it probably has the lousiest AI ever created, it has to cheat like mad to have any chance... and it does too.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
VitalyB
|
|
Israel
Nov 2001
time: 07:31
|
|
He's talking about the EE v2.0, "Empires: Dawn of the Modern World".
And a short score review (based on the averag of GameRankings):
Rise of Nations: 89%.
Empires: 84%.
Empire Earth: 82%.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
bigboss
|
|
Canada
Oct 1999
time: 00:31
|
|
The overall best "Civ" type game I have ever played is:
Master of Magic
This game has exactly what you are looking for. Diplomacy, trading, building cities, exploration, and tactical battles.
Sadly, it is an old DOS game that uses EMS, and is often a pain to get working under current operating systems. If it was possible, I would personally buy the rights to the source code and modify it to use DirectX.
Galactic Civilizations also appears to be something you would be interested in. I have not tried it personally, but I have read much about it and came very close to buying it. I have too many games that don't get enough attention already.
Another good, but old, series is Lords of the Realm. It is turn based like the ones mentioned above. This was the first strategy game that made me never want to quit playing.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Rolfski
|
|
Amsterdam, Netherlands
Nov 2001
time: 06:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by fuerza
I want a Civ/Strategy game that is a balanced mixed of Civ3 and RoN/Empire Earth/AoE
Yea, I know alot will say, well then, just play Civ3. Well, no...I want more actually action graphics so that when I AM involved in a war I can control the tactics of my units. You really can't do that in Civ3.
So, hardcore Civ/RTS gamers, which has the happy mix of what I want? |
I played them all so this is my opinion:
If you like traditional RTS like AoE or Cossacks series play RoN, it's better. If you like space setting I can also recommend Homeworld 2.
If you like fast paced micro clickfests buy WC3, Empires DotMW or Generals. These are all solid games with high mp value.
If you like casual turnbased empire building buy CIV 3: Conquest. The lastest CIV is polished and has some nice alternative campaigns. If you like space setting go for Galactic Civizations, it looks dated but the gameplay is good, diplomacy is deep and the AI is incredible.
If you like deep (and I mean really deep) and highly realistic empire building RTS buy Paradox games: EU 2 (1420-1820), HoI (1936-1947) or Victoria (1836-1920). Their latest Victoria has an unsurpassed complexity and realism, still it is fairly easy and inituitive to play. And the diplomacy options will make Henry Kissinger feel like a boyscout.
If you want it all buy Medieval: Total war. IMO the best overall strategy game that combines turnbased empire building with very tactical realtime 3D battles. The latest VI expansion is good and there is an incredible mod (MedMod) available that enhances overall gameplay a lot.
In your case I would probably go for MTW, deep strategy and very controllable action although a bit light in diplomacy.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Alfonsus72
|
|
Hi,
I´ve just played multiplayer RON and I must say it´s much more a warcraft-style experience than a civ-building one. You can´t win without gettin mad with the mouse. I wonder how many mouses have broken playing the game those who are at the top of the rankings.
What I really find interesting in RON is the Conquer risk-style campaign. If only it were a little more deep, the game would be the perfect empire-builder.
The idea of a good empire building for me is as simple as: TURN BASED BUILDING (production, research, diplomacy,...) + REAL TIME COMBAT. This way you have the fun and spectacularity of the RTS without losing the sense of control over your civilization.
Good examples of this(not all RT combat, but all showing battles in detail): FALLEN HAVEN(sci-fi), LEGION (romans) and IMPERIALISM(XIX cent.). But never in a 4000 BC-2000 AC game.
I also like EU and HOI, if only you could have a little control of the combat...
Last edited by Alfonsus72 on 24-11-2003 at 14:58
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Rohag
|
|
I'd like to echo the praise of Rolfski's comments above. Though much more could be said about all the games mentioned, I appreciate the comparitive summary by someone who has played them all (I certainly haven't).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
VitalyB
|
|
Israel
Nov 2001
time: 07:31
|
|
quote:
Just find it interesting that Empires was not embraced here but RON, which was not original, was..hmmm more so because Brian Reynolds was involved with it I think.. |
Or.. Maybe because it was much more innovative than EE?
Lets be fair, EE didn't make anything all that new. They had a LOT different units that seemingly made it look like you're advancing in human history.
RoN added to the whole RTS really new concepts like borders, attrition, support, spies etc etc etc. Sure, most of the GOOD concepts were recycled, but they were recycled the good way which resulted a great game.
P.S When IS Rome Total War out?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
SpencerH
|
 |
Co-Ruler of my patch of land south of Birmingham Alabama
Feb 2002
time: 23:31
|
|
from the rome total war faqs
"A. Total War games are in genre of their own. If you love strategy games, you will love RTW, but this isn't an RTS, it's much, much more. You can tailor how you play the game to appeal more to your tastes. If you want a perfect balance of politics, micro management and real time epic sized battles you've got it. If you want to spend more time in the senate than on blood stained battle field you've got it. If you want to prove your might purely on how you master the art of war then you've got it.
The biggest change you'll notice is on the campaign map. The 'Risk-style' provinces have disappeared to be replaced by point-to-point movement for armies, and settlements with their own regions (hinterlands) that they draw on depending on the size of the settlement. A big, advanced city will have more influence on its surrounds than a small town. Armies and characters on this map are now fully animated and march (or sneak, in the case of spies!) to fulfil your orders.
Cities generate income and train new troops, drawing on local resources. Each city can be assigned a governor, who will do his best (well, probably) to manage the place and keep order.
What is cool and new is that when you fight a battle to control the city, every building that's in a city on the campaign map is there on the battlefield. Destroy a building in a siege, and it's gone on the campaign map. Storm a city and take it with siege towers, batterings rams or artillery and you'll find that you can use any buildings still standing to further your plans of conquest. Better still, the buildings in a town even show who made them, as each culture has its own style of architecture!
Q. Can you make your own treaties?
A. You will be able to negotiate specific treaties and other agreements with other powers. This lets factions agree military treaties, trade agreements, trade cities and territory, arrnage diplomatic marriages, demand tributes, pay blackmail money, swap information and so forth. Deals don't have to be symmetrical, so you can trade a city for military access, and some cash if you want!
Q. Are maps fully dynamic i.e. what happens on the battle map has a physical effect on the strategy map and vis versa?
A. Rome: Total War features a continuous 3D map covering the whole of Europe, North Africa and the Middle East, and any point on this map could be a battlefield. The Campaign map is comprised of thousands of 'battle maps'. This means that you could fight on approximately 10,000 battlefields, each of which can change according to your actions in the game.
Every mountain, hill, forest, farm, volcano, city and Wonder of the World that you see on the campaign map is right there on a battlefield. As the map changes with roads, forts and farms being built it is reflected on the relevant battlefields. As the seasons change you see snow on the north of the campaign map and on northern battlefields. This continuity between the two levels of the game opens up all sorts of strategic options. You can build forts to guard mountain passes, set ambushes in forests, make beach landings, launch fast raids into enemy territory, move your armies through allied territory to co-ordinate campaigns, capture Wonders of the World, ford rivers and generally try to out-manoeuvre your enemies. It all helps to make you feel like you are in one epic, continuous world."
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Panzeh
|
|
Actually, counters do work, but its not complete and utterly brutal to counter a unit.
I hate it when counters utterly slaughter the countered without any tactics needed.
I think fusiliers are a tad underpowered, though.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sartek
|
|
I've played RoN and I loved it, and now I'm playing Civ 3, waiting for TW:R
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sartek
|
|
Light cavalry are great aganist archers, but masses of musketeers can kill heavy cavalry fairly easily
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Panzeh
|
|
Of course masses of heavy cavalry will do a lot to musketeers.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Russian_King
|
 |
Australia, Perth
Dec 2002
time: 13:31
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Vipermmx
Cruddy? lol
Look at RON
Its fanbase shrinks daily! Its boring!
SPAM warfare is all it is. Set rally point on target and spit out endless units till one of ya dies and claims city. The economy is far to fast and gameplay is a drag once ya figure out all the units are the same.
No units counter there counters worth a damn. 1 tank cant take 5 infatry? LMAO ''
Uniqie units arent! There same with same stats!
Techs all the same.....after 3 times of teching up the tree its boring. Why no Auto tech? Thats the worse part of the game!
Even on VERY EXPENSIVE its far to easy to tech and build a war machine!
Lets compare!
Graphics---
- Empire wins here. Even though RON has very nice animations for units and they do small perks its ugly. Tanks look bulky and boxy! Infatry are pixeled! Explosions suck! No blood!
-In Empire all graphics are amazing! Water that reflects its surroundings! Trees that seem real! Units up close still look good and tanks and everything look like they belong in the world! Not to bulky or unattached unlike RON!
Counter system----
Empire wins! In RON no unit counters worth a crap!
Gameplay-----
Empire yet again. In empire you actually have different races with there own units and strategys! Unlike RON where its mostly all about out producing your enemy and climbing the tech tree fast as possible!
Favorite RON moment!
Hey look im in classical age! 10mins later hey I got a nuke!
Thanks : |
 WOW!!!
could not have been a better description of RoN!
the only remotely interesting part of RoN is the conquer the world mode!
otherwise the strategy is to get up to nukes as fast as possible get a fiew ICBMs and nuke the hell out of the world until 3 turns to armaggeddon, while capturing the newly undefended cities!
A TRUE combat strategy-wise RTS game i know of is C&C GENERALS! (and zero hour as the expantion)
if you like to TRULY control your combat this is the game to have>! along with its amazingly realistic graphics, ability to rotate the map 360 degrees and zoon in and out, you control all kinds of battle (but sea)
build a combined force that isw NOT utopian like other games, most battles consist of no more than 20 units, half of whitch are infantry hidden inside mobile bunker vans or tanks. have a front line of heat wave generators that repel missiles and other defenders, directly after come some tanks and anti infantry counters, behind you have artilery, some capable of firing all the way across a 1024 pixel screen! but should you leave those undefended, the enemy can march in with a couple of tanks or 5 rocket troopers and get a very easy promotion!
If you think the force upcoming defends their artilery all too well and you fear for your immobile base defences to go down without a fight: god invented AIRSTRIKE! with either your own built airfield's aircraft groups OR general's promotion points u acquire during combat, in which case u get some kinds of powerful free strikes and such every set amount of time. but beware, the opponent might have hardcore AA defences for their artillery (or base) and while your aircraft is likely to succeed, it will go down on its way back if the defense is overpowering!
with combat planning in such detail, Civ seems very boring. However, europa uneversalis approach was quite good.
if you mix full timeline generals (perhaps with less graphical enhancements) with civ 3 (eg whenever there is a battle, you go into a short generals mode game where the battle's outcome is decided between the players on a relatively small random map featuring the terrain which the battle takes place on), you would not only have to master civilization building, but also be a proffessional general! (of cource sometimes you can make your automated general take control of certain battles and account for the losses that you could have possibly avoided as a HUMAN player  )
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Panzeh
|
|
I really think Generals is more like what army you bring more than how you use it.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31.
Apolyton Time is 00:31. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
16-10-2003 03:10
|