Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Regiments without a doubt. It was designed only for singleplayer and got a campaign that will gave you several hours of playtime.
Plus you can always hang out and do some skirmish, the AI is capable unlike Wargame/WARNO.
WARNO on its hand also have a skirmish mode, but only 6 single player missions that are mostly done under an hour, and doesn't bring much to the table.
Eugen is struggling to balance the game since its both a Single player and Multiplayer game and their "campaign" has been in a "coming soon" state for more than a year.
Regiments has a slower feel to it, it much more about planning than reacting. almost like a puzzle game. Also, it's developped by a single person, and is overall simpler though not less challenging.
WARNO is more frantic, more vibrant, with a much higher unit variety, more colourful, and I love the music. :) Also, you play individual vehicles, not whole platoons, except for infantry where you control a group, with the smallest being 2 men.
Compared to Wargame ALB - which stands as the peak of Eugen games - Regiments is close, but lacks a dynamic campaign. In that sense, Regiments is still at the Wargame EE level - which had scripted campaigns.
In terms of function, Regiments is more stable and less buggy than RD, and the new DLC has me very excited - the addition of a dynamic campaign and new nationalities is really going to make Regiments a top-line Cold War RTS. We'll see if its better than Broken Arrow, which I'm also looking forward to, but I'd definitely put Regiments above anything Eugen offers.
Regiments is slower paced for an RTS but its much easier to grasp. You can easily react to changes in enemy units and objectives. UI elements are unobtrusive but very clear in indicating what is what. You're not looking at 50%+ of your screen being taken up by interactive elements. Didn't even need to finish all the tutorials to understand what was what and how to interact with all gameplay options. Very intuitive, Easy to grasp, easy to pickup and play.
Not to mention the campaign I've played so far. Choosing which events take place changes the entire feel of some levels. Sometimes it feels like a puzzle of which events you need to use in which phase. The variety of missions are great too. I struggle with the raids but the requirements of the raids feel like i'm sneaking units through enemy lines to cause disruption in a much stronger force. Skirmish missions are various and fun. the AI doesn't use the same tactics each time so battles still have different feels to them. The amount of units and their strengths and weaknesses are fun to mix and match too.
And the audio. Audio is very clear about what is going on, you know if you're under attack, if you're units are winning or in trouble, and you can be made aware of changes just by listening if need be. Plus the big guns sound like big guns which is always a plus.
The regipedia is also a fantastic resource to understand the details of the units you use throughout the game. Not sure whats the difference between a BMP-1 or a BMP-2? What makes the Leopard 2a1 better than the 1a4? All the statistics are in there to reference.
As a newer player Warno's tutorials and UI are abysmal. In Warno elements of gameplay ui are equal parts too hidden or horrifically taking up huge chunks of the screen. So just go through the whole tutorial right? That should show you how to access all your elements so nothing is hidden right?
Its tutorial however is junk. It will make you put units in situations it isn't meant to be used in and will cause you to fail. Then if you do use your brain to ignore their markers and use the unit as the game claims it is intended. You'll find that it lied and that unit is not remotely meant to be used in the ways they claim. Its also the first game i've ever seen where special ops squads are less effective than borderline conscripts squads of lesser size. Make that make sense.
The important audio is drowned by noise from useless ambient noise that mixes with important cues, and the music is awful in my opinion. Then the bugs like being able to hear units on the map without seeing them, so you know immediately where enemy units are when you should have no idea. Trying to get into Warno fresh from the start was a nightmare and i ended up refunding the game. Unless i see significant improvements in that game i'll never pick it up again.
So, I used to be one of Eugen's biggest boosters. ALB single-player campaign is still one of the best out there. And they used to release free DLCs with a surprising frequency. The problem began with Eugen's lackluster policing of multiplayer - which led to a lot of cheating, TKs, and trolls. Someone once dropped a flare marked "♥♥♥♥♥♥" on one of my units because they didn't like my placement. Eugen was slow to respond, and eventually put in place an extremely difficult to manage reporting system. It did little to clean up mp.
RD was terrible. It started off alright - buggy, but playable. A lot of the maps caused stuttering and framerate loss, which, to my knowledge, has never been fixed. Then they tried adding ships, quit halfway through because it was "hard", and left it half-cooked - ships make no sounds, for instance. Having been underway, I can tell you, ships do not cut silently through the water.
The mulitplayer was just as toxic as ALB - no surprise. The singleplayer campaign was a slapfight - with far too few units on the board to adequately simulate a conflict across one of the most heavily fortified borders on Earth - Korea.
Their DLCs were laughable - there was very little variation between nations, usually you were just sold re-skinned units you'd already bought.
Still, I did enjoy myself if I didn't engage with other human beings. A lesson I've remembered and kept away from trying CS2 multiplayer. I keep reminding myself I quit mp games for a reason - World of Tanks, CS:GO, Day of Defeat, Overwatch, and Wargame ALB/RD. All toxic to one degree or another. All with companies that did less than stellar jobs of keeping their mp clean (oddly, with the exception of the WoT folks - who came down hard on anyone doing Nazi bs. It was still toxic, just not fasc toxic.)
I checked out Steel Divisions II - wasn't going to play online, and it was on sale, so I thought why not. And I was really enjoying it. Up to the point where I discovered they'd released the game without any city maps. Because city maps, like ships, are - again their own words - "hard". And so an enjoyable campaign that culminated in a city battle was reduced to a literal push of the button. Two years after they'd released the game, there were no city maps.
Their halfassed conduct through the years has burned away any loyalty I've had for the company - half-baked money grabs seem to be how they do business.
No, I'll give my money to MicroProse, because it's a name that still has value all these decades later. I'll give my money to the dev who makes Regiments, because it's a solid, mostly bugless Cold War RTS. I'm going to snatch up that DLC because it sounds like it's going to address the main problem I have with Regiments - a static, scripted campaign.
My loyalty is easy to earn. Make a good product and I'll buy it. Treat me like a cash cow, and I'll go elsewhere.
Regiments is unforgiving yet fun. You bleed points if you do not hit all your objectives and then it get harder. But I love the game - and I am only a few hours in. I have not tried Warno as to me it looks like a repacking of Red Dragon which I am yet to try and play with any meaningful hours in it - but what I have tried I hated.
Steel Division 2 - Its too fast paced for me the pressure to be always doing something is too much for my head.
Regiments will release a dynamic campaign with infinite replayability potencial, there just isn't nothing WARNO can do to beat that at this point, also, the clear focus on PvP multiplayer from the WARNO developers is argument more than enough in favour of Regiments too no matter how "good" the Army General campaign is.
No need to engage in fanboy war memes. If you h8 WARNO and Eugen that's fine, but at least try to be charitable. Both games have their pros and cons, and are generally good. I'm definitely eager for the new DLC too. IMO both games scratch different kinds of itches. I've probably spent more time customizing decks in WARNO, and testing them than playing full matches against the AI. WARNO is moddable as well, Regiments isn't, although it has better difficulty, and scaling options. Meanwhile in Regiments, after finishing all Ops at max diff I moved on to try to minmax for difficulty while changing stats to more realistic ranges in skirmish. Different SP gameplay loops, and both games feel and play radically different in my view.
I have over 200h of WARNO, I like it with some reservations about some design choices, but the post has a simple question and for Single Player Regiments is just WAY better.
army general for warno just came out but I've not tried it yet and regiments just has more choice and atmosphere
Regiments if you're more interested in strategy