Recommend a strategy game.

[thepaqster]

Any players of Anno, Might and Magic 6 or CoH2?

CoH2 is a can't go wrong buy but how good (I'm sure there are some threads here I can read) and how is the learning curve. It takes about a year to hit the "hobby" level in a good strategy game. Endless Space was a blast but the learning curve was steep and even the best games have a lifespan of 4-5 years.

Heh, I'm not seeing many people attempting to answer your questions. Anyways, here's my input.

I really didn't enjoy HoMM6. I played it for about 10 hours, then shelved it. I will get back to it at some point, but not until I've cleared out a bunch of games I haven't yet played in my Steam library. Mind you, I'd been away from the series since the second or third installment, so I think it's just not a game for me. The combat, city management and character progression system just seemed limited compared to some of the other options out there.

I'm currently playing through Anno 2070 and I'm really, really enjoying it. The learning curve isn't too harsh, but its challenging enough that I had to read through many of the data log entries in the campaign to understand how certain mechanics work. I think I'll be playing this game for quite a while, since the various mission types seem quite interesting and (I hope) will keep the game from becoming stale.

I bought CoH:2 on sale over the holidays, but I haven't played it yet. I loved the first game, so I'm quite convinced that I'll enjoy this one as well. It's up there at the top of my to-do list before going back to HoMM.

If you want to play more of a tactical strategy game, COH:2 is probably a good call (or as others mentioned, SC2, which is also awesome). If you want more of a city management-with-combat type of game, then Anno will totally get you your fix.

Let us know what you eventually decide on!

 

[DigDog]

nonono.

supreme commander 2 is not bad. what i will grant, is that it is NOT a supreme commander game.

obviously, everyone who bought it was disappointed. but if you give it a chance, it is a really good game.

 

[shortylickens]

Supreme Commander, until you are sick of it, then Supreme Commander 2.

Supreme Commander 2 stinks.
I recommend avoiding entirely.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

Age of Mythology. Just replaced my lost copy with a new copy that included the Titans expansion for $8 on Amazon.

 

[CPA]

Age of Mythology. Just replaced my lost copy with a new copy that included the Titans expansion for $8 on Amazon.

I ended up paying $20 off of Ebay when I replaced my copy. Amazon didn't have it at the time

 

[xantub]

Has anybody really not suggested the kings of strategy games, Paradox grand strategy games? I'll tell you my story...

Like many, I loved Civilization games. Started with Civ 1, and continued all the way to Civ 4. But then, something happened. I played an old game I had in my library called Europa Universalis: Rome. It was complicated, and yet, engaging. I later found out that the same company (Paradox) also had a bigger game which I gave a try... Europa Universalis 3. Best strategy game I'd ever played (up to that point). I loved it! I could play as any country starting from any year in the late middle ages/Renaissance to the early modern era. I played as Castille as it joined Aragon to form Spain and colonize America. I played as the Mongol Golden Horde that invaded Europe from the east and fell on them like a rain of fire. I played as Austria and maneuvered my way to become the Holy Roman Emperor.

Then the same company made Crusader Kings 2. Similar to EU in core concepts, but concentrating on dynasties instead of countries. Best game I've ever played! Ally, crusade, holy war and claim your dynasty's rights to lands while securing your successor's inheritance so he (or she?) can surpass your achievements, and form a 300+ year dynasty that eclipse those like the Hapsburg or Medici.

Then came Civilization 5, and as I was such a fan of the series, I bought it on release day, I was so excited! but then, when I started playing it, my mind started saying 'is this it?' coming back from EU3 and CK2, then playing Civilization 5 felt like, I don't know, playing tic tac toe with your kid after playing Chess with the grand masters.

Paradox strategy games are not for everyone. If you want to play a quick game to pass the time, these are not it. Prepare to lose hundreds and hundreds of hours if you get into these games.

 

[Revolution 11]

I second xantub's recommendations. Paradox strategy games are the creme de la creme of the genre. The main franchises are the Europa Universalis games, Heart of Iron, Victoria, and Crusader Kings. (listed in order of preference) Each game is different in how you control units, how politics/diplomacy/culture work.

Crusader Kings is about the Middle Ages and feudal relationships, think Game of Thrones in real life. Europa Universalis is from the end of the Middle Ages to 1812 AD, the start of industrialization and covers empire expansion, exploration and colonization.

Victoria is from early 1800's to early 1900's, covering industrialization and the rise of factory economics, focusing heavily on economics and production and political revolutions such as communism and liberalism. Heart of Iron is from the 1930's to the 1950's, covering World War 2 and focusing on granular unit production, wartime decisions and production, and very detailed unit combat taking into account terrain, morale, supply efficiency, flanking, etc.

 

[Revolution 11]

Shifting away from the detailed complex games of Paradox to the other end of the scale, you should play the classics such as Total Annihilation, Medieval Total War (the first game), and the Command & Conquer games like Red Alert 1 and 2. I personally love the first two Age of Empires games.

All of these games involve basic base building, resource gathering, and basically making one horde of units and pushing.

 

[xantub]

I second xantub's recommendations. Paradox strategy games are the creme de la creme of the genre. The main franchises are the Europa Universalis games, Heart of Iron, Victoria, and Crusader Kings. (listed in order of preference) Each game is different in how you control units, how politics/diplomacy/culture work.

My order is Crusader Kings, Europa Universalis/Victoria (I like both the same), Heart of Iron last. I just prefer the whole kingdom/country evolution with politics, diplomacy, economy, etc. over the more warfare focus of HoI. But yes, these games are where real strategy is at.

 

[norseamd]

Chivalry Medieval Warfare or Mount and Blade

those are good

you have to try mount and blade if you have not already

 

[norseamd]

Total Annihilation, Medieval Total War (the first game), and the Command & Conquer games like Red Alert 1 and 2. I personally love the first two Age of Empires games.

all of these are good

what is wrong with the medieval total war 2

never actually played the first one except for the demo

 

[norseamd]

I second xantub's recommendations. Paradox strategy games are the creme de la creme of the genre. The main franchises are the Europa Universalis games, Heart of Iron, Victoria, and Crusader Kings. (listed in order of preference) Each game is different in how you control units, how politics/diplomacy/culture work. Crusader Kings is about the Middle Ages and feudal relationships, think Game of Thrones in real life. Europa Universalis is from the end of the Middle Ages to 1812 AD, the start of industrialization and covers empire expansion, exploration and colonization. Victoria is from early 1800's to early 1900's, covering industrialization and the rise of factory economics, focusing heavily on economics and production and political revolutions such as communism and liberalism. Heart of Iron is from the 1930's to the 1950's, covering World War 2 and focusing on granular unit production, wartime decisions and production, and very detailed unit combat taking into account terrain, morale, supply efficiency, flanking, etc.

so if you like complex strategy games so much how come you do not like complex strategy and gameplay in planetside 2?

 

[xantub]

so if you like complex strategy games so much how come you do not like complex strategy and gameplay in planetside 2?

isn't planetside 2 a shooter MMO?

 

[norseamd]

isn't planetside 2 a shooter MMO?

yep but he wanted simplified mechanics and the developers to regulate the game more to force larger battles

all for some of what he thought however the game needs to be more unrestricted than it already is

there is something about complexity through user gameplay or something which eve 2 and star citizen are about

 

[JoJoDawg]

Oh and almost forgot Panzer Corps from Slitherine. If you liked Panzer General from the 90s you'll love this remake with tons of extra campaigns.

This ^ and it just recently came out on Steam even though game 2 years old. Picked it up from Tequila post, thx.

 

[murban135]

How about Age of Empires 2 HD?

 

[norseamd]

Has anybody really not suggested the kings of strategy games, Paradox grand strategy games? I'll tell you my story... Like many, I loved Civilization games. Started with Civ 1, and continued all the way to Civ 4. But then, something happened. I played an old game I had in my library called Europa Universalis: Rome. It was complicated, and yet, engaging. I later found out that the same company (Paradox) also had a bigger game which I gave a try... Europa Universalis 3. Best strategy game I'd ever played (up to that point). I loved it! I could play as any country starting from any year in the late middle ages/Renaissance to the early modern era. I played as Castille as it joined Aragon to form Spain and colonize America. I played as the Mongol Golden Horde that invaded Europe from the east and fell on them like a rain of fire. I played as Austria and maneuvered my way to become the Holy Roman Emperor. Then the same company made Crusader Kings 2. Similar to EU in core concepts, but concentrating on dynasties instead of countries. Best game I've ever played! Ally, crusade, holy war and claim your dynasty's rights to lands while securing your successor's inheritance so he (or she?) can surpass your achievements, and form a 300+ year dynasty that eclipse those like the Hapsburg or Medici. Then came Civilization 5, and as I was such a fan of the series, I bought it on release day, I was so excited! but then, when I started playing it, my mind started saying 'is this it?' coming back from EU3 and CK2, then playing Civilization 5 felt like, I don't know, playing tic tac toe with your kid after playing Chess with the grand masters. Paradox strategy games are not for everyone. If you want to play a quick game to pass the time, these are not it. Prepare to lose hundreds and hundreds of hours if you get into these games.

also have europa univeralis rome

bought it after playing the demo

also have sengoku

have yet to get too much into them to understand them

 

[code65536]

Europa Universalis III is one of my favorite games of all time. Very steep learning curve, though. But once you get the hang of it, it's fracking awesome.

Europa Universalis Rome was also pretty fun, but not as fun as EU3.

I also have Crusader Kings II and the new Europa Universalis IV, but I haven't gotten around to sitting down with them yet.

And if you have 32-bit Windows (or a virtual machine running 32-bit Windows), I'll say that the best 4X strategy game that I've ever played is Stars! (I've tried many games in the 4X genre, and I've yet to find something as good, and yes, I consider it better than the Master of Orion games) (I still have fun with that game even today) (you need 32-bit Windows because it's a 16-bit windows 3.x program, so it can't run on 64-bit Windows).

 

[Revolution 11]

yep but he wanted simplified mechanics and the developers to regulate the game more to force larger battles

all for some of what he thought however the game needs to be more unrestricted than it already is

there is something about complexity through user gameplay or something which eve 2 and star citizen are about

My reasoning, which you can disagree with, is that Planetside 2 is about large battles. That is what it does well, what it is known for, why it is fun. So the developers should emphasize that. I like Paradox games for their realistic simulations of historical eras, even if it is through complex and detailed restrictions and concepts. That is what the game is all about and I play them for this aspect.

Just because I like simplicity in one game (and my ideas for Planetside 2 are actually more complex than the existing ones) doesn't mean I can't like a complex game. I am not looking for shooting enemies in Paradox games and I am not trying to create a fake Casus Beli so I can declare war in Planetside 2. :awe:

 

[Revolution 11]

all of these are good

what is wrong with the medieval total war 2

never actually played the first one except for the demo

Nothing is wrong with it per say, in fact it is a excellent 3D units-focused tactics game. But the battle soldier blobs don't seem as realistic as the ones in Medieval 1 which look more realistic despite the ancient graphics.

In general, the new Total War games have soured me on this entire category. I find myself going back to either games like Europa Universalis or simple RTS titles like Red Alert.

 

[norseamd]

Nothing is wrong with it per say, in fact it is a excellent 3D units-focused tactics game. But the battle soldier blobs don't seem as realistic as the ones in Medieval 1 which look more realistic despite the ancient graphics.

In general, the new Total War games have soured me on this entire category. I find myself going back to either games like Europa Universalis or simple RTS titles like Red Alert.

some of the stuff they put in shogun 2 and rome 2 like the food mechanic looks interesting

however i am dissapointed that they got rid of most of the buildings

sega and creative assembly seem to be streamlining

have first decade installed

the first 2 command and conquer games are my favorites. anything after that except for the original generals are not as good

you are right that the big battles are the focal point of planetside 2 as even i tend to go to them over smaller stuff. would be nice if they can make larger battles without restricting gameplay. they need more players and more maps for that however

will talk more about this tomarrow when i have more time to think

 

[xantub]

also have europa univeralis rome

bought it after playing the demo

also have sengoku

have yet to get too much into them to understand them

EU: Rome was my 'gateway drug' into Paradox strategy games. Simpler than the 'big ones' but complex enough. It's outdated now but still fun in its own way.

I can't recommend Sengoku though unless you're into Japanese Shogunate history. It's basically Crusader Kings 2 'lite' (as in, seems to me they used it to test the system they would use in CK2 later), like it has families and character traits, but much more simplified from what you get in CK2. Also while in CK2 you can do a lot of things outside war, in Sengoku you're doing something wrong if you're not at war with anyone all the time.

 

[burninatortech4]

Hearts of Iron 3