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
Against the AI though, I'm not sure how effecting spamming units will be. It is just an AI and making a good AI for a company of heroes game where unit preservation is critical is kinda difficult.
Hit and run tactics are quite powerful and the AI does disengage if the mechs attacking them get too far away. Since this is a company of heroes esque game, micro of units is heavily rewarded and hitting mechs in the sides or rear does a lot of extra damage.
Also I would heavily disagree with you that warcraft 3 (building a large army wastes money and gives free exp to heroes and warcraft 3 is very hero centric to the point that lvl 6 hero can slay an army with their ult), rise of nations (everything gets more expensive the more you spam it and counter units heavily counter the unit they are good against), brutal legends (faction differences are huge with the drowning doom having extreme options... also this is an RTT game) and galactic battle grounds (its an age of empires esque game so there's a lot of factors to consider and the AI sucks so it gives the illusion that decisions don't matter much) are games where you can win by just making a lot of units. That might work against the AI but in competitive play that fails miserably and against higher lvl AI you actually do have to plan ahead quite a bit.
While these games obviously don't reflect real military strategies they not aiming to be military simulators. You might want to try Eugen's wargames series if you want something that really demands military strategy and logistics.
Thank you for that reply, it would have been more helpful if I knew what Company of Heroes was like.
I actually really like Brutal Legend, even though I'm not into metal. There's always plenty going on in battle to keep you interested.
I have a couple of Age of Empires games, would you say those are more advanced strategy?
Also, what do you mean "the game lets you in competitive play"?
Competitive play means player vs player. If you spam units like knights in age of empires and you're not against someone who is new to the game. You are going to get countered by priests and halberdiers. Competitive play in age of empires is heavily decision based and you need to making the right decisions at the right times to survive. So in other words you use strategies to make it through.
As for age of empires being advanced strategy. I wouldn't say its really advanced, more like skill intensive. The AI in definitive edition and HD edition is really good at the game. So you might actually feel a bit more challenged by the gameplay.
Brutal legends is a good game, its more of a real-time tactics game though.
Shame you've never played company of heroes. The game is pretty much sub-genre defining.
Company of Heroes is about options, or strategy, really. If your tanks are nimble and agile, even if weaker, you can outmaneuver the enemy's heavier ones and strike them from behind and win against odds. You can play defensively, build fortifications and minefields, call in artillery and airstrikes in a pinch. These and many other things you can do give you the feeling your actions actually matter and there's some strategy element involved.
Iron Harvest though.. it's mostly about clicks per second and map control. Armored combat is pretty basic and all mechs are awfully slow. Defensive play is barely viable as there are few options and even mines actually count towards your army cap. While there are some interesting COH-esque options like train paratroopers and deploy them somewhere on the map, options like that are very few and pretty much tied to a certain faction.
I broke the stalemate by attacking with two forces simultaneously with armor on the left and main character on the right with some engineers.
The right took checkpoints while the left invaded and massacred armor and troops.
To try to retake the checkpoints they had to divide their forces which helped me push further and take out the Zubov dude who I ended up nuking with those defensive artillary shells.
No, what you desire isn't PROFITABLE, so it will never get made. Just the same garbage with new skins, over and over again.
They are so greedy and dishonest now, all of the budget is in marketing and graphics, zero in Quality Control or Product Support. Every game is a bug fest ripoff.
To get the level of depth you crave, you have to play ridiculously overcomplicated Strategy games with confusing interfaces and a learning cliff that is punishing. For example Hearts of Iron.
Yeah, it is just a really cruddy version of CoH, unplayable garbage.
Ok but what about Empire: total war? That's what I ment when I said Age of Empires.
First, in my opinion this is really not possible with the common AI found in the games you mentioned and most others. Unless purposely made or left with enough machine learning time in a particular game, “AI” (We call it that but is really just decision trees for programmed behaviors), is really dump, most of the time designed to make us feel enjoyment and “feel clever” as you say. If you really want to use any one these game’s systems as a conduit for strategy… multiplayer is the answer.
Are asking about the AI? Then no, same as others. Even in MP, mob strategy is what you will most likely see (Although some mechs in the game will make short work of them mobs) and only if you are able to keep up with build speed and tactics will you get into the real strategy. I will say this true for most RTS games.
It is fun or, at least I find it that way. In mp for example, I have lost some matches because I was winning the game with the tactics and neglected the objectives or left my base open for attack (Winning the battle but losing the war), so I do enjoy the overall strategy you can approach at any given match and how to change that in the fly. Also, pincer maneuvers are quite possible.
I agree with most of this, except the assessment about infantry. Even in the late game, you will still use them to capture, counter and battle. Also, fields canons are only present in one map, so I don’t really count them as part of the tool box.
Very effective against the AI.
Very true.
I saw a similarly toned post in the reddit the other day, I wonder if it is also you. I get the feeling, the industry is heading in a not-so-great direction, and I agree buggy, unfinished or broken games have become the norm, even for AAA. But 1) let’s remember we have enabled that behavior by still buying those games and 2) I don’t think that makes the game unplayable. E.G. the DLC broke the game real bad for MP but it was for the most part fixed by the next Monday. I don’t believe a first bad impression ruins a game forever.
The total war series is great for what you describe, at least in the battle phases and much more on the MP, though I don’t know about the more recent ones since I stopped playing after Rome II, but it is really different to AOE.
Are you confusing the man pushed cannons with the Heavy turrets you can capture on some maps?
Buy an RTS if you want to play one.
by reading the description of your desires aoe2 seems like the obvious answer. It's just so hard to flank an enemy while engaging in one battle, it's almost a genius play whenever you can pull it off. not even age's pros play like that. most of the time you probably simply lack the resources.
I've never seen a pro attack with ships and flank with transport ships on a water map at the same time.
on land it rarely happens. you simply establish a town center if anything. but it never happens that you get a ram, diverse units (arrows, melees, anti-cav (halbs), anti-arch (skirms) to attack from behind to get inside.
this would require that you establish military buildings for the front, for the pincer either establish military buildings to the side or divert from your main buildings with a waypoint all-while defending and making sure your economy doesn't idle.