Strategy games

[Northery]

I actually think World in Conflict is one of the best games i've played in a while both online and off but the game that started it for me was Age of Empires still play it to this day.

 

[H0ncho]

I can't stand the old-style micro resource management build you base and zerg the target garbage from old. I could never get too far into the Warcraft, Stacraft, and all the C&C clones.

Uh? Those games you mentioned are among the ones with the *least* amount of resource management, partcularly warcraft.

The Total War series doesn't really have all the resource micro-management at least during the battles.

No, but in total war battles are only half the game at best. The total war series forces you to think a *lot* about resources and how to spend them.

 

[Sardonac]

I can't stand the old-style micro resource management build you base and zerg the target garbage from old. I could never get too far into the Warcraft, Stacraft, and all the C&C clones.

Uh? Those games you mentioned are among the ones with the *least* amount of resource management, partcularly warcraft.

The Total War series doesn't really have all the resource micro-management at least during the battles.

No, but in total war battles are only half the game at best. The total war series forces you to think a *lot* about resources and how to spend them.

Well I find the warcraft and age of empires games don't spend as much time on resources as other games but they are an extremely important part of gameplay whereas in total war money is less of a factor. In warcraft, you may need 50 more wood to build a tower structure that will produce X to protect you from Y. If you don't get it, you lose. Period. In total war, unless you have massive armies or a terrible economy you can always buy men that are well worth their salt. Using the schiltron formation in MTW2 allowed my six groups of levy spearmen to hold off the mongol invasions in jerusalam. Money can inhibit, but it doesn't make the game in the same way resources do in warcraft.

In warcraft the player builds a base to defend and produce. In the Total War series, the player builds an army to attack and defend. At least, that's how I see it.

 

[The_Deleted]

I find the whole resource management quite thereputic. I do wish more games would give you the option to turn it off, though.

 

[LordCraigus]

I dislike RTTs for the reason that there is waaay to much micro in them, and more importantly it removes the feeling of building up something. If all units are available from the start, like in world in conflict, getting that heavy tank doesn't feel special.

I find I get that feeling with RTT games anyway, if I'm given a lot of nice, powerful units at the start (or as reinforcements mid-mission). That way I also know I'm in for a tough fight if I don't use them properly.

Also the economy is an important aspect of a sttrategy game. Rush or increase income? It's a strategic consideration that adds to the game.

That's why it's called Real-Time Tactics and not Real-Time Strategy, of course neither can help coming under the general label of Strategy games.

 

[ComradeRussell]

Hmmm, I do like to turtle occasionally. Personally i found the single plater WIC to be ostensibly boring. Whereas Sup Com did offer depth and if you got something wrong; you could rebuild and try again, instead of quick load and try again.