Your opinions on this game as an RTS?

[Gryphonheart]

Hi everyone,

As a fellow fan of RTS and RPG games alike I'm very interested in this game. I've been considering purchasing it for a few days now although I shy from EA games lately...

I haven't played any Spellforce games before and honestly not particularly interested in them except for the storyline. Saw their store page and some videos and not gonna deny that I cringed a bit since they looked kinda awful graphically even if they were released on 2014 (some of the Spellforce 2 ones looked as if released in the 90's).

I like the artistic design of the game: the portraits, the map design, and the overall feel of it in a graphical aspect which is a plus. The strategic aspect of it looks interesting, as if focusing towards multiplayer with the sectors; Hero leveling looks pretty limited sadly but I'm glad there is a rather decent pool of "classes" to choose from; the 3 races look kinda interesting but would have liked one or two more, although if they are well defined, each with their own playstyle its all good.

I want to know more of your opinions regarding this game as an RTS/RPG, I have no means to compare it to the older releases of this fanchise but I definitely like RTS games, specially those that add new features to the genre (the mix of RPG/RTS looks neat and the sector division of the map as well).

[Omar]

SF1 and SF2 was released in 2003-2005, with a cool graphics considering that years. And was two masterpiece, the only saga to join RPG and RTS very well. Playing beta, I think that SF3 worth every coin!

[Whitehaven]

RTS side what i have seen from the beta so far:
Base building is in my oppinion very competently made. The game is made in a way that prevents you from camping yourself out in your base. You can't tower yourself up because you have limited number workers and towers require them to work. You have to explore and capture different zones for limit and resourses. The races still need some work on them for better diversity but the devs are working on that as we speak. All in all it looks promising in my eyes.

RPG side - The preview is rather limited, but we see that we have main quests and side quests implemented in the game just like the previous titles. The "heroes" might need a little boost for the single player campaign because they are lacking a bit right now in durability and strength-but that might be just because they had poor gear in the beta missio. They seem ok for multiplayer as they act more like support units/champions to your main army.

[Gryphonheart]

Originally posted by Whitehaven:

RTS side what i have seen from the beta so far:
Base building is in my oppinion very competently made. The game is made in a way that prevents you from camping yourself out in your base. You can't tower yourself up because you have limited number workers and towers require them to work. You have to explore and capture different zones for limit and resourses. The races still need some work on them for better diversity but the devs are working on that as we speak. All in all it looks promising in my eyes.

RPG side - The preview is rather limited, but we see that we have main quests and side quests implemented in the game just like the previous titles. The "heroes" might need a little boost for the single player campaign because they are lacking a bit right now in durability and strength-but that might be just because they had poor gear in the beta missio. They seem ok for multiplayer as they act more like support units/champions to your main army.

The missions you speak of, do you mean the ones in the campaign? It would be cool if you got some sort of objectives in skirmishes or scenarios. Sounds like a pretty traditional RTS, not like its a bad thing.

Do you happen to know about the design of the campaign? I'm wondering if its a linear campaign or something more dynamic where you can choose what missions/scenarios to play as you advance.

[Keaton]

From what I remember that was told over time was that, when you select a mission for group A you support, group B won't like that at all. So some missions are exclusive for the 'road' you take in the story.
Could be wrong about it, I read it on the official forums some time ago.

[Whitehaven]

I believe they mentioned we will be able to revisit the campaign maps as we like, so i guess this would suggest the quests are dynamic like the previous games. Also, the multiplayer we have seen in the beta is skirmish mode, i do not know if will have free play mode like the in SF2 where we had quests and stuff. But we will have cooperative campaign so that's a thing.

[Bludshed]

If you're interested in it for the RTS aspect (like I was - having played the beta though made me just as eager to get stuck into the campaign!) you should be pleasantly surprised. There's a bit of strategy to building and expanding your "empire" as you have limited building space and resources need to be carted around your sectors so you can't just build things willy nilly. In terms of what it plays and feels like, imagine WC3, C&C and TA:Kingdoms had a baby and raised it to become a real time fantasy 4x and then, at some stage, it became influenced by it's rpg peers.

The RPG side (hero skill trees spacifically) feels like the weakest and most unpolished aspect of the game to me. You unlock powerful skills way too quickly and those skill trees just seem dumb considering you can only have 3 active skills at a time. You'll also unlock all of the skills before you know it which means you don't really get much sense of personilization of your heroes. This is pretty sad when all of the rest of the game seems so well thought out and polished. Though, the RPG side of the game works as a great means of keeping the "missions" fresh as it throws objectives at you which not only drive a deeper story, but also give you a more meaningful reason to explore or conquere each map.

The art and presentation (gui, voice acting, music, etc...) are all AAA+ top notch. Holy cow are they top notch!

The sector aspect will probably be what makes or breaks it for most. You either like, hate or don't mind it. Regardless, it's handled probably the best way it possibly can, encouraging base expansion, without getting to in the way of development strategies.

The devs have done a really good job with this one. I'm so greatful to finally get to play an RTS that is more than a competition of APM. Playing the beta, it's a game that I am happy to have pre-ordered and honestly can't wait to get my hands on the final release. I can't remember the last RTS I felt this excited about... perhaps Red Alert 2! Though it definitely needs a little refinement and balancing.. some heroes are just waaaay too OP.

[Cheebameister]

Im a big fan of the first Spellforce and played it a lot.

Regarding Spellforce II im a big sceptic.

I like the strategy part of the game a lot, it feels smooth and nice.
I also like the atmosphere and backgrounds / detail in world itself.
But whats currently a big problem in my opinion are the not at all existing animations.
Hope they get build in last, because if they wont i think Spellforce misses a big chance to become a great rts again.

The fighting animations of the units in the current state, especially the skills of the heroes are so unsignificant that youre only able to say that your champion used a skill based on the dmg the attack did.
But the animations of the units and skills etc look like age of empires hd edition and even Spellforce 1 had the same / better effects regarding skills etc.

Its a very big downer for me.
But dont take me wrong, otherwise i like the game a lot just hope they will add some better animations until december because currently i lose a lot of intrest when it comes to the fighting part of Spellforce.
It just looks boring especially for 2017 and i realy miss a good rts and like the base gameplay of spellforce currently a lot.

[NixBoxDone]

While I can't dispute your mention of the rather badly aged graphics (I can assure you that when I first played the first two games, they were actually rather good for their time!), I'd have to say that I really loved the gameplay.

I had a few issues with some aspects (depending on how thoroughly you canvassed maps you may have overpowered heroes that made clearing maps pretty easy, or if you breezed through them you might find yourself stonewalled vs much higher level enemy units they just can't beat) I overall really enjoyed the idea of building a crack squad of fighting experts to use as a core for the otherwise rts gameplay, with nice lengthy sections of rpg gameplay to improve said core and keep you from becoming bored with the whole "start map, build base, crush enemy" routine.

It was a fresh idea quite similar to the Majesty, Tzar and Seven Kingdoms series in that it mixed th Command & Conquer and Starcraft menu up a bit and introduced nice little elements to distinguish itself.

If this newest title is anywhere near what the old ones have been I will be very surprised if it disappoints.

Especially happy with the resurgence of older studios and titles at the moment (first Age of Wonders and now this, + all the old titles available now on Steam or gog? What a time to be alive :D).

[Blitzwing]

As RTS its really good.


The Hero and economy system does offer a lot of variety in strategy.

For Example I did play Orc vs Orc, I did go necromancer + mass spam of goblins+ build huge eco.
One of my enemies did focus on medium tech, upgrades and healing/buff hero.
While I was sending wave after wave and winning a lot of games, he did after some time master his strategy and defeat me with even with 4 sectors vs 8 sectors, and even my 10 times bigger army.

Another Strategy I did was fast and mass raid with Wargs/wolves riders, he did faster level up his heroes, so he could win even with 2 sector remaining, becouse I did only spam Wargs/wolves riders and forgot to level up my heroes.

One time I did level up other heroes, so could in endgame summon a lot of support units , while he did use elite units.


I love this game for deep and immerse gameplay.

Try it for yourself, ask for a beta key.

[Blitzwing]

By the way , if economy is too difficult for you to handle , you can play CO-op with AI in same faction or with a friend in same faction, its like Archon mod in Starcraft2, really funny to share same faction.


This if one of the best RTS I did ever play.

[Warnoise]

The biggest question is: Have they finally made different factions/heroes feel/play different from each other?

Or do we still have the dumb Orc paladin?

[Keaton]

Originally posted by Warnoise:

The biggest question is: Have they finally made different factions/heroes feel/play different from each other?

Or do we still have the dumb Orc paladin?

The 'dumb orc paladin' has been changed for almost 2 months now?

Yours Truly
Everything that is wrong with the gaming community