Printable View
Well there is that. Although Dos emulators like Dosbox tend to run old games pretty slow, well on my PC anyway. People using Win98 can stick their PC into Dos mode, then use a slow-down program like Moslo to slow things down. Some old games are a lost cause trying to play on modern machines though.
Hehe i feel the same. I just hate this whole build your army from the scratch every time concept. Build your cities/civilization from the scratch every time ( i wonder what happened with settlements i builded in earlier battle).Quote:
(can't bear traditional RTSs)
Build as many man as you can and send them against enemy with no plan or cohesion. And ofcourse the silly concept that you have to win each and every battle to achieve victory (thats so silly). And last thing, no campainge element.
Its terrible.
I like only two games with RTS elements.
Total Ware series is the best by far. Second great game series was Close Combat.
This was great WWII battlefield combat simulation. Unfortunately part IV was awful (it was destroyed by much to small battlemaps). Part V was better but still didnt hold me to long, it was a bit easy and it missed most important element.
It didnt recreate massive allied air superiority. Witch was so unrealistic and made the game to easy (afther playing it i can say that without this massive air superiority allies invasion would not suceed).
Its getting even worse now. Now i find it hard to play games that have decent campagne element (but none is such complex as RTW) but lacks battlefield element. I just hate seeing my beautiful army being misused by computer in autocalc.
I hope that in future we will see more TW like games.
Imperial Glory was a nice try. Its not good and i didnt like the demo but at least it uses TW concept.
Hopefully other companies will try the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LorDBulA
It is THE most realistic WWII strategy, and if there are two games I wanted most to be continued it were Close Combat and Fallout (3). CC is history. Hope that Fallout makes something worthwhile.
Couldn't agree more about IV and V. Have you played the second part? Seems it's okay, but I never got it to work on new computer. Still the Russian front is undoubtedly the best.
Sid Meier's Gettysburg had real time battles that were rather like Total War. Arguably even more historically accurate with morale (cohesion?) being central. The engine was later used for Austerlitz and Waterloo, by Breakaway Games, IIRC.
However, I could not get into them. Firstly, there was no strategic campaign of TW style to hook you in to playing the battles. Second, the graphics seemed rather ropey to me and the whole thing just lacked the excitement and wow factor of TW battles. The games felt too sedate and the controls too clunky and overly complex (the commands for TW become remarkably intuitive after a while).
Ow yea that was also great game.Quote:
Sid Meier's Gettysburg
Unfortunately i played only demo, but it was superb.
Some time ago i aquire copy of this game but unfortunately i cant make it run properly on XP :( and yea graphic is a bit obsolete.
Yea i played it. It was good.Quote:
Have you played the second part?
In third part i mised one element that was present in Second part.
You could choose when you want to make your next attack (2 hours from now, 4 hours from now etc..) and in third part you could only make next attack on the other day.
I just hope that TW wont repeat history of CC. That would be so sad.
The best possible combination - Paradox Crusader Kings(or EU2) campainmap + TW battlemap ~:)Quote:
Originally Posted by LorDBulA
I think that RTW map is much superior. Dropping province concept for army movements was a great step forward. Your armies now have total freedom and i love this. You can choose easier/safer rote, protect passes, build forts to restrict enemy movements, lay ambushes, make raids on enemy settlements (like my gatai raid on Athens, on the way i had to pass through Epirhotes lands and Makedon lands, actually it was raid on Epirhotes but since they agreed to pay ransom when i threaten to attack they city i shifted my attention to Athens).Quote:
Paradox Crusader Kings(or EU2) campainmap
Its incredible.
The only problem is that this new map is so good and complex that AI have troubles to keep up.
What i like most in Paradox games is the number of factions, nice diplomacy. .
CK has few good things - manpower concept so you have only certain amount of certain troop types from province, well portrayed feudal interactions, great political interactions.
If AI could use the freedom of movement in RTW properly it would be good, but all this dipomatic, political depth in Paradox games makes its camp map better (for me) than RTW. On the other hand i could hardly stand how the battles are calculated :(
I think that manpower element should be very much considered for some future TW. It's realistical and can really show the difference between vast empires and city-states.
Well I tried AoE3 and it just didn't work out for me. I'm not going to even start comparing the TW series to other strategy games. There is no match of a game out there, especially when it comes to my dear old Shoggy! I think I'll never get over it.:no: As for AoE3, even though my PC makes it possible to enjoy its wonderful visual aspects in full glory, I believe that the gameplay aspect is actually inferior to AoE2. I wouldn't recommend buying it, you get used to all the eye-candy after a while.
In general, I develop alergy when I see the peasants chopping woods and gathering resources...and then making buildings...God, I love turns...and non-resource combat...
Aye. Its well over stayed its welcome. I remember Age of Empires and the constant berry picking!!! Arrrggghhh!!Quote:
Originally Posted by BelgradeWar
hey heh...I actually like AOE3's gather resources system. I think AOE3 is a fantastic "modern" version of warcraft, only using realistic units and the such. However, I still never find myself able to click on that button, rather than the Rome button on my computer. Come to think of it, after I bought BI and updated the new patches a few weeks ago, Rome is the only game installed on my pc :laugh4:
I like that in TW you HAVE to stress and deeply, deeply strategize on how to run your economy, production, arms buildup, "research" etc...but that you're not, as some have pointed out, actually controlling how many berries are picked off of a plant. I prefer grand strategy to micromanagement. There's no building an "empire" in traditional RTS's. Not at all. Games are over in 2 hours at most (at MOST...sometimes I've heard of a WC3 or AoE3 game going 3-4 hours, but only with multiple players of high skill). It's just not enough for me...I want to be able to build MY army, MY way, at MY time. If I want to dig in for 30 turns and turtle, I can...it's a viable strategy for booming. On AOE3, turtling and playing defensively is really not a viable strategy for winning the "war"...just the inital skirmish battle. It's just not "grand strategy". MTW and RTW let me build my own nation, on my terms...over a long period of time, competing against other empires that are flourishing as well. I just don't get that out of any other game. And the battles themselves are amazing in TW games...sorry, hands down, nothing else will EVER touch TW battles heh. :no:
I will also add that I have found myself, sitting around with a cup of coffee or soda in the morning looking over the campaign map on my monitor before I play for the day. It almost is like a living breathing world...with wars, economies, leaders, heros, and an ultimate goal. I just don't get that experience out of any other game. Same reason why I loved WOW in the mmorpg genre...it was just a massive living breathing world the likes never before offered in the genre before. (don't get me started on mmo's...I'm done with them...they just eat a hole that's way too large into my life heh..that and raiding parties can be quite..."interesting"...)
I think the TW series was so far ahead of its when it first came out that there is nothing that can come close. All the other RTS are still stuck in a time warp, berries and all! :s
As great as it is however, I think Total War has a lot to improve on on the strategic aspect of gameplay (diplomacy and the way you interact with other factions in general). I've had a lot of TW games where I feel like I'm playing a slower version of a Free-For-All multiplayer FPS, wherein you just run around and shoot people. Here, I was simply amassing armies and sending them out en masse, without even moving a single diplomat. :no:
Heck, Total War could learn a few things from Civilization, Crusader Kings, even Galactic Civlizations! (Which, IMO, has one of the best AI in the turn-based strategy genre). :2thumbsup:
In the past I used to play a lot of RTS games. Now I prefer RPG and stealth games(Hitman,Splinter Cell). The only strategy games I love are the total war series.
Resource gathering is too boring and silly! And almost all RTS has it!:furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joan of Arc