games similar to this?

[Milk]

Any games similar to this that anyone knows about? not just world war 2 even any games that have this kinda gameplay and ranking system with bots included? just curious

[G-R-E-G Rooster]

https://store.steampowered.com/app/242860/Verdun/

[[AK] GaroK]

Arma 3 maybe?

No game has quite the same feeling as RO2. Most of the modern realistic shooters are transport to the objective simulator.

[Milk]

Originally posted by G-R-E-G Rooster:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/242860/Verdun/

played verdun since beta. thanks for the suggestion though.

[Milk]

Originally posted by GaroK:

Arma 3 maybe?

No game has quite the same feeling as RO2. Most of the modern realistic shooters are transport to the objective simulator.

Yeah that's my problem with a lot of them. hurry up and wait simulators which make people think it's a realistic war game because they died to artillery and waited 60 seconds to spawn. games like hell let loose make me hate realistic gaming arma too lol Just wish more games were as the other dude said Verdun and RO2. Wish games wouldn't try to be realistic. Because none of them are lol

[☣ βioClone λx-45 ☣]

Actually, enlisted to be a F2P is a very decent experience and shares some points with RO

[Milk]

Originally posted by ☣ βioClone λx-45 ☣:

Actually, enlisted to be a F2P is a very decent experience and shares some points with RO

I've played that personally have a distaste for the pay to grind aspect but otherwise yeah i agree it does share some points. not a horrible game.

[CluckingBell]

Project reality

[TormenTor]

Originally posted by CluckingBell:

Project reality

I don't think so, the WW2 maps in Project Reality are awesome, and in fact the new Stallingrad map feels quite similar to RO2, but the gameplay is too different, it's focused on all that BS about squads, logi, construction system, etc. All that trendy garbage has become a cancer for tactical FPS especially in WW2, as it even happened with RO1 and its dumb mod "DH" which is a bad PR copy. And the same with HLL, post scriptum, etc, which are great games but are ruined by that boring and tedious gameplay focused on squads, construction, and huge maps, which is a failure in itself since the devs of those games assume or suppose that people will play organized as a team and that everyone who plays it has some military training, which actually is far from being the case, and it turns into a boring running simulator.
So practically the only game that still maintains some of the RO style gameplay is Day of Infamy, but it is pretty dead unfortunately.

[☣ βioClone λx-45 ☣]

Originally posted by ElMataVeNecOs:

Originally posted by CluckingBell:

Project reality

I don't think so, the WW2 maps in Project Reality are awesome, and in fact the new Stallingrad map feels quite similar to RO2, but the gameplay is too different, it's focused on all that BS about squads, logi, construction system, etc. All that trendy garbage has become a cancer for tactical FPS especially in WW2, as it even happened with RO1 and its dumb mod "DH" which is a bad PR copy. And the same with HLL, post scriptum, etc, which are great games but are ruined by that boring and tedious gameplay focused on squads, construction, and huge maps, which is a failure in itself since the devs of those games assume or suppose that people will play organized as a team and that everyone who plays it has some military training, which actually is far from being the case, and it turns into a boring running simulator.
So practically the only game that still maintains some of the RO style gameplay is Day of Infamy, but it is pretty dead unfortunately.

The thing about the squads is not really the biggest problem, (pointing at HLL) but the lack of the devs on add proper comunication methods... and near to zero information avalaible in-game related to weird mechanics...

Proper wheel coms and set rally points on a map, plus ping options are already stablished mechanics those devs simply ignores, and forces weird mechanics that even they circuvents when interested (like create a new squad then stop being the squad leader)... it is a 100% game design based on "play my game how I believe it must be played" rather "properly design it so people will find the right way for playing it by themselves."

[TormenTor]

Originally posted by ☣ βioClone λx-45 ☣:

Originally posted by ElMataVeNecOs:

I don't think so, the WW2 maps in Project Reality are awesome, and in fact the new Stallingrad map feels quite similar to RO2, but the gameplay is too different, it's focused on all that BS about squads, logi, construction system, etc. All that trendy garbage has become a cancer for tactical FPS especially in WW2, as it even happened with RO1 and its dumb mod "DH" which is a bad PR copy. And the same with HLL, post scriptum, etc, which are great games but are ruined by that boring and tedious gameplay focused on squads, construction, and huge maps, which is a failure in itself since the devs of those games assume or suppose that people will play organized as a team and that everyone who plays it has some military training, which actually is far from being the case, and it turns into a boring running simulator.
So practically the only game that still maintains some of the RO style gameplay is Day of Infamy, but it is pretty dead unfortunately.

The thing about the squads is not really the biggest problem, (pointing at HLL) but the lack of the devs on add proper comunication methods... and near to zero information avalaible in-game related to weird mechanics...

Proper wheel coms and set rally points on a map, plus ping options are already stablished mechanics those devs simply ignores, and forces weird mechanics that even they circuvents when interested (like create a new squad then stop being the squad leader)... it is a 100% game design based on "play my game how I believe it must be played" rather "properly design it so people will find the right way for playing it by themselves."

The problem is that it's difficult or practically impossible to solve that, that is, to have good communication in any massive multiplayer game with people who speak different languages, in PR for example the average squad is composed as SL by an Indian guy who speaks English not very fluently, and the squad members a guy speaking in Russian, another guy a Brazilian speaking in Portuguese and making weird sounds with his mouth, and the rest of the squad does not communicate..
And in PR at least in most squads nobody talks or uses the mic, and everyone is scattered around the map, and that happens in PR in fact that it is known for recommending and requiring the use of mic, so for the others it is the same. And practically the only people who communicate and play organized in those games are the clan squads, which will always be a minority. Furthermore, these devs assume or take for granted that SLs know the game or have some military training, when actually many SLs are noobs or don't even know how to play well.
So, that kind of squad-focused gameplay is and will always be a failure, since for it to work people must communicate or coordinate, especially because of the rally points issue, something pretty arcade btw, especially DH rally points that can be placed practically anywhere (but even so the average DH SL is a guy who doesn't place rallies and with that the gameplay most of the time feels like a dumb running simulator).
And I wasn't referring to a squad system per se, but to the project reality type squad mechanic, which all the others copied, HLL, post scriptum, DH, etc. Because RO 1 and 2 actually have a squad system, but it's much more efficient and makes more sense, since the SL is a class in itself with its respective functions and own skin, while in DH for example the SL can be any guy and doesn't even need to use a special kit, something pretty arcade, unrealistic and dumb.
On the other hand, the mechanics of these games are not so difficult to learn, like the construction system and logi, but they are tedious, they take away the intensity of the gameplay, and they necessarily require a huge map, which turns a game that can be good and have good gunplay into a boring running simulator when there are no rally points or FOBs.

[travo Clu]

cant believe no one has said Hell Let Loose yet

[Milk]

Originally posted by travo Clu:

cant believe no one has said Hell Let Loose yet

Hell let loose is a very different sort of game. If you ever watched stalingrad the old one you'd get a better idea of the kinda game I'd be interested in. rising storm 2 captures that kinda warfare style and that's what I enjoy personally. Obviously I don't mean to speak for everyone as hell let loose isn't a awful game but teamwork is non existent and the point of squads is kind of useless to just draw out features that a video game doesn't require. I personally don't like dying from a random headshot from across the world and running 80 miles to get back into combat just to die again. Some people do but most people don't. It's not realism it's just grinding with more steps. Just my personal opinion on the matter of the game. and why I don't believe it's considerably close besides just being apart of a world war 2 genre. So I get it. but Personally it's a farcry from something like rising storm where combat is most closed in and less hurry up and wait mentality and more run and gun arcadey style of fighting with hints of realism. So no offence just how I see it personally as I just don't think it's very relatable otherwise.

[Milk]

Originally posted by travo Clu:

cant believe no one has said Hell Let Loose yet

Infact too if you wanna read the post above someone did mention something about hell let loose shortly essentially bringing up the same fact that it's just more of a "military" sim then a actual game to enjoy for a lot of people.

[TormenTor]

Originally posted by Unrizzable Queena:

Originally posted by travo Clu:

cant believe no one has said Hell Let Loose yet

Hell let loose is a very different sort of game. If you ever watched stalingrad the old one you'd get a better idea of the kinda game I'd be interested in. rising storm 2 captures that kinda warfare style and that's what I enjoy personally. Obviously I don't mean to speak for everyone as hell let loose isn't a awful game but teamwork is non existent and the point of squads is kind of useless to just draw out features that a video game doesn't require. I personally don't like dying from a random headshot from across the world and running 80 miles to get back into combat just to die again. Some people do but most people don't. It's not realism it's just grinding with more steps. Just my personal opinion on the matter of the game. and why I don't believe it's considerably close besides just being apart of a world war 2 genre. So I get it. but Personally it's a farcry from something like rising storm where combat is most closed in and less hurry up and wait mentality and more run and gun arcadey style of fighting with hints of realism. So no offence just how I see it personally as I just don't think it's very relatable otherwise.

Really realistic games or simulators are Arma, Escape from Tarkov, or Dayz, but many people wrongly associate Hell Let Loose's gameplay with realism, that is, the squad system, construction, logistics, rally points, or for the simple fact that it has huge maps. But in fact almost all that takes away a lot of realism from the game, especially the construction system that is totally arcade since it makes no sense that you can build AT weapons or similar stuff with a shovel in a seconds.
And the big problem with that game mode, which as I said has become trendy lately, is the fact that you depend on other players to make the game playable, that is, you depend on the guy who is your SL to set up rallies and your team in general to build FOBs, otherwise you will have to walk kilometers to get to the combat place, like it happens in project reality at least, where in each round you enter most of the time you have to spawn and walk from the main base to the combat zone, and with 1-minute of respawn time, because people don't even want to share vehicles. Also, what's the point of a huge map if you can build rally points? Which in general is like a kind of backpack that allows you to spawn closer, But even so it seems like the SLs are all noobs or don't read the game manual because in all the rounds nobody cares about setting up rallies.

So, that's the real reality of all those games, SLs noobs, the community is selfish with assets or vehicles, nobody communicates with each other, everyone is scattered around the map, if that wasn't enough there are a lot of teamkillers, and also most of the community is toxic and hostile with new players, and nothing can change that, no matter how many devs of those games make guides or force people to use mic and play in teams.
And btw, another game that is more or less similar to RO2 and that is quite little known, is Easy Red 2, I have only tried the singleplayer version and it feels quite like RO2, although maybe it's a more arcade

[Milk]

Originally posted by ElMataVeNecOs:

Originally posted by Unrizzable Queena:

Hell let loose is a very different sort of game. If you ever watched stalingrad the old one you'd get a better idea of the kinda game I'd be interested in. rising storm 2 captures that kinda warfare style and that's what I enjoy personally. Obviously I don't mean to speak for everyone as hell let loose isn't a awful game but teamwork is non existent and the point of squads is kind of useless to just draw out features that a video game doesn't require. I personally don't like dying from a random headshot from across the world and running 80 miles to get back into combat just to die again. Some people do but most people don't. It's not realism it's just grinding with more steps. Just my personal opinion on the matter of the game. and why I don't believe it's considerably close besides just being apart of a world war 2 genre. So I get it. but Personally it's a farcry from something like rising storm where combat is most closed in and less hurry up and wait mentality and more run and gun arcadey style of fighting with hints of realism. So no offence just how I see it personally as I just don't think it's very relatable otherwise.

Really realistic games or simulators are Arma, Escape from Tarkov, or Dayz, but many people wrongly associate Hell Let Loose's gameplay with realism, that is, the squad system, construction, logistics, rally points, or for the simple fact that it has huge maps. But in fact almost all that takes away a lot of realism from the game, especially the construction system that is totally arcade since it makes no sense that you can build AT weapons or similar stuff with a shovel in a seconds.
And the big problem with that game mode, which as I said has become trendy lately, is the fact that you depend on other players to make the game playable, that is, you depend on the guy who is your SL to set up rallies and your team in general to build FOBs, otherwise you will have to walk kilometers to get to the combat place, like it happens in project reality at least, where in each round you enter most of the time you have to spawn and walk from the main base to the combat zone, and with 1-minute of respawn time, because people don't even want to share vehicles. Also, what's the point of a huge map if you can build rally points? Which in general is like a kind of backpack that allows you to spawn closer, But even so it seems like the SLs are all noobs or don't read the game manual because in all the rounds nobody cares about setting up rallies.

So, that's the real reality of all those games, SLs noobs, the community is selfish with assets or vehicles, nobody communicates with each other, everyone is scattered around the map, if that wasn't enough there are a lot of teamkillers, and also most of the community is toxic and hostile with new players, and nothing can change that, no matter how many devs of those games make guides or force people to use mic and play in teams.
And btw, another game that is more or less similar to RO2 and that is quite little known, is Easy Red 2, I have only tried the singleplayer version and it feels quite like RO2, although maybe it's a more arcade

I agree heavily with that statement. Worded it better then me I just don't want it to come off as if I am ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ on the game because I'd rather not offend people over a simple question. Not saying you are just saying if I tried saying it this way i'd screw it up (lol)

Easy red 2 is for sure a amazing game. I've personally supported it since launch and love it. Personally I get annoyed over this one "survive without dying achievement but otherwise it's a fun as hell game for AI and progression through not rank but straight through the battlefields of world war 2. especially with all the different factions too such as poland commonwealth Uk USA germany etc and now even tobruk russians and all. Love that game definitely worth a try for anyone else seeking a good singleplayer battlefield style objective kinda based game.