Favourite strategy game of all time

[econ21]

With all the discussion about the forthcoming M2TW, I've started to wonder - what do people here look for in a strategy game? It seems like some want a blistering AI, others historical authenticity etc. Perhaps the best way to identify this is to consider what do people consider great strategy games?

To narrow it down to something comparable to Total War, please rule out "tactical" strategy games where you command individual soldiers or characters. Some of my favourites are those kind of squad-based games (X-com, Jagged Alliance 2) but that may be because they are close to role-playing games which is a genre I love. Hardcore historical wargames, traditional RTSs, civilisation type games etc all qualify though.

Personally, I find Total War games rather hard to beat - especially RTW mods such as RTR. If forced to choose at this moment in time, I'd probably go with Europa Barbarorum, even though it's still a beta.

Beyond that, I really liked the Panzer General games - I consider them like Total War games, in that they were historical wargames lite. They set up historical campaigns with lots of period flavour but had fun gameplay that was somewhat abstracted from that of a hardcore simulation.

I also find things to admire - particularly the challenge from the AI - in turn-based empire games like Civ4 and Imperialism2.

If I were to identify common elements in my favourite strategy games, they would be:
(1) historical flavour with a fair amount of detail and complexity (lots of units or techs etc);
(2) the hook of a long campaign, where individual decisions have lasting consequences (upgrading units, gaining experience, investing in the economy or technology etc);
(3) a cerebral game speed (turns or a pause button required);
(4) at least moderately challenging gameplay (e.g. must have interesting trade-offs and choices in the combat and economic models etc);
(5) fairly brisk gameplay - beer and pretzels - (I want gaming to be exciting, not slow and agonising).

[BelgradeWar]

(1) Close Combat
(2) RTW/RTR
(3) EU II
(4) Blitzkrieg
(5) The Operational Art of War

[Fragony]

(1) Sacrifice
(2) Medieval
(3) Alpha Centauri
(4) X-com
(5) Homeworld

[frogbeastegg]

Difficult question to answer. Many games get parts of what I want, but none ever get all, or even 4/5s. I find that as much as I like the challenge and options of a game like civ 4, I yearn for a better historical atmosphere and setting, such as in EUII (actually, I prefer medieval or classical settings. EUII gets to be the example because it does its historical ‘thing’ really well). Or I want something which can be picked up and played in many different ways with many different factions, like Knights of Honour. Or something with loads of diplomatic options, options which actually work logically for once, such as … er, no game has managed that yet, not completely. Or full scale real-time battlefield combat, as in STW (the best of the TW series for this IMO). Or something with good atmosphere, again like STW. Or something which can be played in shorter bursts rather than hour long sessions minimum. Or something was plenty of depth.

But two are always very important to me: challenge, and depth. If a game has those two the usually it has a chance with me, even if it has a setting I don’t like, for example space, and/or lacks in one or more of the other areas.

[Kraxis]

(1) Sacrifice
(2) Medieval
(3) Alpha Centauri
(4) X-com
(5) Homeworld

Yey!!!

(1) STW, you just felt like a Japanese Warlord.
(2) MTW/PG series
(3) Hearts of Iron II
(4) Close Combat
(5) HOMEWORLD by far!

[TinCow]

Hmm.... I think the Civ series easily has me for the total number of hours of my life sucked away. Civ I, II, Alpha Centaura, III and IV, I count ALL of them. Other games that have really impressed me over the years though:

MTW/RTW
HOMM2
Close Combat
Battle Isle/Historyline
Castles/Castles II

[TinCow]

Oops, forgot MOO2.

[AquaLurker]

Here are some of my favourites Teen hood strat games.

1.) Bahamut wars(old sega fantasy strat)
2.) Langrisser 1-2 (same as above)
3.) Koei Romance of three kingdom 1-5 (not dynasty warrior)
4.) Totalwar series (for mods Zhan Guo and RTR)
5.) Starcraft broodwars (MP is just too fun)

[HopAlongBunny]

Empires of the Middle Ages
Pax Brittanica

Both board games

[King Kurt]

For me it is MTW, Close combat and Alpha Centuri. Those have whiled away many an hour. 20 years ago I loved a Commodore 64 game called Carriers at war which was carrier battles in the Pacific. I long for something like that now - Pacific Storm looks hopeful. Finally, I would admit to enjoying AOE 1 for many years. Strangely I always wanted AOK and finally got it 2nd hand last year. By then I had been playing MTW for about 6 months and AOK felt really flat after that.

[Vladimir]

I like patched, modded, upgraded MoO ]I[ (huge and wonderful), that and of course M:TW XL.

[Geoffrey S]

1) Alpha Centauri (Classic. Spent more time with this than any other game)
2) Medieval Total War (Got me interested in history, and was a great game to boot)
3) Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance (only one of the series I've played, others may be even better)
4) Civilization 4 (Loved what I've played thus far, but I've had far too little time lately to start properly)
5) Europa Barbarorum (getting close to what RTW could have been)

[Nikpalj]

Quote:
I like patched, modded, upgraded MoO ]I[ (huge and wonderful), that and of course M:TW XL.

Whats that MoO, Vladimir - Master of Orion?

[Martok]

Well up until a couple weeks ago, Medieval Total War was my favorite strategy game. But the crown has finally been passed to a new champion: Galactic Civilizations 2. It's without a doubt the single biggest reason I haven't been on the forums here since February 28. It's literally been years since I've lost so much sleep from playing a computer game--indeed, I haven't spent this many hours playing a game since I got MTW back in early 2003. Anyway, with that said, here's my list:


1.) GalCiv 2
2.) MTW
3.) Birth of the Federation **
4.) STW
5.) Lords of the Realm 2
6.) Command & Conquer Red Alert/Red Alert 2


Basically, I ranked each game according to how many hours of my life I've wasted playing it.


** Yes, I realize people will throw things at me and say I should be committed for having this game on my all-time list. I simply can't help myself though; I love space strategy games, and I love Star Trek--which it makes it easy for me to overlook the game's myriad flaws.

[Nikpalj]

Quote:
Yes, I realize people will throw things at me and say I should be committed for having this game on my all-time list. I simply can't help myself though; I love space strategy games, and I love Star Trek--which it makes it easy for me to overlook the game's myriad flaws.

But it simply has that special, captivating something... at least as far as the space Cx4 strategies are concerned... and specially if you mod it with one of the many mods that have been made for it. Im with you, my General!

[screwtype]

Beyond that, I really liked the Panzer General games - I consider them like Total War games, in that they were historical wargames lite. They set up historical campaigns with lots of period flavour but had fun gameplay that was somewhat abstracted from that of a hardcore simulation.

I also find things to admire - particularly the challenge from the AI - in turn-based empire games like Civ4 and Imperialism2.

The Panzer General series was kinda fun, in a not-too-demanding sort of way. I quite enjoyed the first one in the series I bought, Panzer General 3D. But ultimately it just wasn't challenging or varied enough for me to put it up there as one of the greats. I think what it really lacked, more than anything, was an opportunity to do some defending. Every scenario is basically the same - capture the three or four towns on the map. Gets a bit old after a while.

The sequal to PG 3D, Scorched Earth, was not as good in my opinion. Less well balanced scenarios and units.

Civ4 would absolutely not be amongst my best, in fact I prefer Civ3 and will probably start a Civ3 campaign again soon.

Imperialism II is a great little game, I always have a campaign going, and there's barely a week goes by I don't put a little time into it. In my current campaign I thought I was about to breeze past everybody when suddenly the three major powers declared war on me at once and blockaded my port! That often happens early in a campaign but rarely in the later stages. It's nice to still be suprised by a game when you think you know it so well.

I have iron man rules for Imp II - the most important being, no trade with a major power unless you really need the item, it's too easy to get the big guys onside with a bit of friendly trade. Other than that, I always pick the weakest power and play at a difficulty rating of 362, just a bit short of the max difficulty of 400. I find at 400 it's just a bit too long and boring trying to build up your infrastructure to a reasonable level.

But apart from that, I don't really know, I know I've played some great strategy games but I never seem to be able to remember them. Age of Wonders II was okay but again a bit lacking in challenge. But I'd still rate Lords of the Realm II (Amiga version) as one of the best, building up your infrastructure and carefully husbanding your population was a blast in that game, it all made such good sense and there always seemed to be something to do. I wish someone would take that concept and bring it up to date. IMO, a Lords of the Realm II type campaign with TW type battles would be pretty close to gaming heaven for mine...

[econ21]

The Panzer General series was kinda fun, in a not-too-demanding sort of way. I quite enjoyed the first one in the series I bought, Panzer General 3D.

Well, to be honest the series was dead by then, IMO. I bought PG3D, loaded it up for an hour or so, then never looked at it again - very slow, too minute scale etc. Scorched Earth was supposed to be better, but I was not tempted. I'd recommend you try out some of the earlier ones - unfortunately, the company went belly up, so telling you how to get hold of them would be against forum rules.

The first Panzer General took several years of my life. It has linked scenarios that are vastly bigger than those in the PG3D series. For example, in the German invasion of Norway, you fight on a map that covers nearly all the country and have two sea-born invasion groups, facing the Royal Navy and tough terrain/weather. The pre-Barbarossa Balkans scenario was another standout - you have the Italians struggling stalled trying to break out of Albania while German battlegroups flank the Greeks from Bulgaria, overrunning a British expeditionary force and also conquering a vast Yugoslavia. The combat is very simplified, like PG3D, but it arguably captures the history at some higher level - I played a Balkans campaign in the much more realistic Operational Art of War and it played out just like PG1s, except it was much less fun. The ultimate problem with PG1, however, was that it became unbalanced over the campaign - the experience and money (prestige) you acquired allowed you to vastly outmatch the enemy 3-4 scenarios into a campaign. You can try to offset that using mods and editors, but sequels largely solved that balancing problem.

On the other PG games:

Allied General lacked something indefinable - it just never grabbed me.

Star General was supposed to be a flop -did not touch it.

Fantasy General: is superb, especially the music.

Pacific General: rather ugly, but excellent - at least the Japanese campaign. It's like the PG1 blitzkrieg all over again, only this time on bicycles. Some of the scenarios in the campaign are truly epic - e.g. a Japanese invasion of India that makes Norway look like a small scale training exercise.

Panzer General2: first graphics update but starts to compromise on the epic scale. For example, in the Norway scenario, you don't have the naval aspect, the landings etc, you just fight your way up part of the central (Lillehammer) valley. Also has a big bug that reduces the value of infantry. But still rather good and probably the PG game that most folk still play (lots of user made campaigns and scenario). From a graphics point of view, it is not too retro.

People's General: pretty decent updating of PG2 to contemporary (hypothetical) warfare.

As I said, these were arguably the Total War games of their time. Lashings of historical flavour (although ultimately absurdly ahistorical if taken literally) combined with very fun gameplay.

[screwtype]

Thanks for the info Simon. Maybe I'll take a look at PG2 then. It should be good and cheap by now

[Fragony]

Am I the only one who has played Sacrifice? This game should be loved to death on a forum with people with exquisite taste such as yourselves, such an overlooked masterpiece. Brilliant storytelling, brilliant characters, brilliant humour, brilliant mechanics and brilliant graphics(ok not anymore) and the best music to ever grace a videogame.

[Avicenna]

Rome: Total War wins hands down.

Nothing else is even close in my point of view.

[Mount Suribachi]

Hmm, in no particular order

Alpha Centauri - another vote for this one. Had all the gameplay and addictive qualities that made Civ II so great, but then threw in a unique setting, a great storyline, and factions that each genuinely offered a different playstyle. Superb diplomacy engine, and of course the ability to design your own units was a masterstroke. Getting to Doctrine: Air Power first was always the key for me And then there was that blasted Human Hive with their fortified cities...

Panzer General/Allied General/Panzer General 2 - played PG and AG on my playstation back in the day, still play PG2 on my wifes laptop. When you start getting some experienced tank units, upgraded to decent tanks, steamrolling the enemy is great fun

Does the Championship Manager series count as a strategy game?

Arnhem/Desert Rats/Torch - showing my age here. Classic WW2 strategy games from the 80s by the legendary R.T.Smith (now a CA employee). Arnhem was great, but was the same every time, and once you learned to pre-empt the German reinforcements was easy. Desert Rats was probly my favourite of the series, played it all summer long on my mums Amstrad 464. It was one of the first strategy games to successfully introduce the concept of supply - you had to keep your units in contact with their supplies, and unless your army was all at "good" or "very good" you better not launch an offensive. I particularly liked the way the game featured the ebb and flow of the desert war as each side would receive reinforcements, advance, overextend supply lines and get bogged down. It also had a very nice "auto-speed-up" that would run through a load of turns in one go if both sides were building up supplies and reinforcements. Excellent game.

Shogun/Medieval/Rome Of course

Shogun - for the unparalleled atmosphere, for the superb balance of the units on the battle map - only 12 units, and every one had their use. Loses points for the fact that after a while it was just you and endless stacks of the Hojo Horde. Gains points for being such a revolutionary game - I still remember all those threads on the old usenet forums with countless stunned strategy gamers. Oh, and the fog! That helpless feeling when you know the enemy is out there somewhere but you can't see them...

Medieval - for its epic nature strategy map, for the music, for those wonderful pencil drawings, for the epic battles that would sometimes last hours, for the variety of factions. Vices and Virtues. Oh for a decent diplomacy model to go with it.

Rome - Graphics to die for. Strategy map light years ahead of STW and MTW. The family tree, traits (who ate all the larks tongue pies?), retinues, (nay, nay and thrice nay!). The feeling of power, that vicarious thrill of conquest as your glittering legions dispatch stinking barbarians by the thousand. I can live with the historical innacuracies, I just wish the battles lasted a bit longer. I've only had a couple of MTW style epic battles, and they were with BI.

[Crandaeolon]

Am I the only one who has played Sacrifice? This game should be loved to death on a forum with people with exquisite taste such as yourselves, such an overlooked masterpiece. Brilliant storytelling, brilliant characters, brilliant humour, brilliant mechanics and brilliant graphics(ok not anymore) and the best music to ever grace a videogame.

I loved Sacrifice, even played multiplayer semi-actively. Sac is a good example of a game that's original, has high production values, is a critical success yet tanks in sales. Maybe it was a bit too weird.

It's funny when people are being snobbish and denouncing mainstream games while demanding originality, but when you ask if they have played (and consequently supported) "different" games like Sacrifice, Planescape: Torment, OP:Flashpoint (in the US), Grim Fandango, Terra Nova, System Shocks etc, the answer is no. Somewhat hypocritical.

[Kekvit Irae]

Alpha Centauri
Civilization II - Test of Time
MTW: VI (given)
Age of Empires II: Age of Kings (with expansion pack)
Star Wars: Rebellion
Romance of the Three Kingdoms 8 and 10

[Fragony]

I loved Sacrifice, even played multiplayer semi-actively. Sac is a good example of a game that's original, has high production values, is a critical success yet tanks in sales. Maybe it was a bit too weird.

It's funny when people are being snobbish and denouncing mainstream games while demanding originality, but when you ask if they have played (and consequently supported) "different" games like Sacrifice, Planescape: Torment, OP:Flashpoint (in the US), Grim Fandango, Terra Nova, System Shocks etc, the answer is no. Somewhat hypocritical.

sniff sniff there is at least one that knows a good game when he sees it! Don't know if it was it's weirdness, the system requirements were outragious when it was released, I played it 2 years later, got it with my new videocard and was instantly hooked. It is just criminal that so few people played this gem.

[Kraxis]

I loved Sacrifice, even played multiplayer semi-actively. Sac is a good example of a game that's original, has high production values, is a critical success yet tanks in sales. Maybe it was a bit too weird.

It's funny when people are being snobbish and denouncing mainstream games while demanding originality, but when you ask if they have played (and consequently supported) "different" games like Sacrifice, Planescape: Torment, OP:Flashpoint (in the US), Grim Fandango, Terra Nova, System Shocks etc, the answer is no. Somewhat hypocritical.

While I have only played System Shock and OP Flashpoint of those mentioned, I didn't like the feeling (no atmosphere, just... well not me I guess) of either the Grim Fandango or Planescape: Torment, though I must admit that they were well made and different. It was like when I say Brokeback Mountain, I didn't like it much but I could see it was a good movie regardless.
But I haven't heard much about Terra Nova or Sacrifice...

Take a look at these games. When people complain and haven't played them it could very much be because those games haven't been exposed very much. Not everyone go out and looks for special games, especially if they don't know they existed.
So take the complaint to be directed at the big ones. About the most original big game out there is RTW! That says something.

[orangat]

I don't play or like strategy games in general. The TW series however is a niche in the rts genre with its tactical battle gameplay. There are other similar games but they seem to be arcadelike and primitive compared to TW.

One important feature of RTW is its ability to set the difficulty the tactical and strategic campaign separately. Since I prefer the tactical portion, I lower the campaign difficulty.

[Samurai Waki]

1. STW (This was the very first strategy game I played, and really attached me to CA's Style)
2. Hearts of Iron II (Not as big of a fanatic as I used to be, but I still play when theres nothing else to play)
3. MTW (Played this for years and still play from time to time)
4. Combat Mission (I loved each and every installment of the CM genre)
5. RTW (Although I feel like CA back tracked in a few areas with RTW, overall, the game is still fun, especially playing it with the many many mods that are available).

[GiantMonkeyMan]

1) Command & Conquer: Red Alert - when i was younger i used to get up at 5 in the morning before school just to get in a skirmish battle for this game
2) Alpha Centauri - i still play this game all the time on my laptop, it is so fun and the AI is actually quite good sometimes
3) Shogun: Total War - my first taste of TW for a fiver... aren't i so glad
4) Castles - this game was so fun and really hard to understand but i was hooked for a bit
5) (i am sorry guys) Age of Empires - i really used to like this game but now i never play it

Rome for me is about 7 behind red alert aftermath and civ 3

[Crandaeolon]

But I haven't heard much about Terra Nova or Sacrifice...

Take a look at these games. When people complain and haven't played them it could very much be because those games haven't been exposed very much.

They were both critic darlings at the time, so I don't think it's lack of exposure. TN got eclipsed by Mechwarrior 2, but I'd be hard pressed to call MW2 a "better" game. Just a better brand.

Anyways, on topic: (fav TBS or RTS games, in no particular order)

Total Annihilation
Master of Orion 2
Age of Wonders 2: Shadow Magic
Dominions 2 (as PBEM)
Combat Mission
Steel Panthers: World at War

I might sound a little blasphemous here, but i don't like the Total War series all that much. I've never finished a single campaign in any of the three games, it's mostly been about multiplayer only. And TW multiplayer has suffered from serious flaws since day one... in retrospect, it was rather sucky. Other games are so much smoother, dunno why i bothered in the first place. Maybe because there were, and still are, few alternatives to get that epic battle feeling.

[Navaros]

I loved Sacrifice, even played multiplayer semi-actively. Sac is a good example of a game that's original, has high production values, is a critical success yet tanks in sales. Maybe it was a bit too weird.

I personally never touched Sacrifice on principle because they take the Lord's name in vain on the package. That made me determined to look away instantly and never touch it; not want to actually pick it up or give it any thought as I'm sure the "genius" marketing guy who had the idea to put that offensive quote on the box thought it would. I realize not everyone is offended by game packaging taking the Lord's name in vain on it, but it certainly did cost Sacrifice some sales, including from me.

As for the Planescape packaging, well it wasn't exacty attractive. I'm sure the ugly picture of the actor they put on the front there played a large part in it's horrible sales.

As for my favorite strategy game of all time, it is another game that almost no one played. Emperor: Battle for Dune. The singleplayer was not that good, but the multiplayer portion was a masterpiece until it died a horrible death thanks to EA abandoning the game 6 months after Retail with many crucial bugs and deficiencies still present. I've never played another game that comes anywhere close to matching it in strategical and tactical depth.