lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: So this is a real RTS
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 03-04-2006, 02:53 AM   #1
jediturkey
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72
Cool Guy So this is a real RTS

This game seems to require a lot more strategy than your typical RTS' where everything comes down to who has the most units and bombarding the other guy (or AI). I believe it's due to the persistance nature of the game -- whereas you shouldn't always plan on your first battle winning a war, instead, you may have to come back for seconds or thirds; each battle taking out specific types of defenses to get the upper hand. Placement of defenses and obtaining key territories is crucial -- not just simply amassing as many units as possible.

Apologies if I seem like I'm rambling. I've been reading reviews at EB Games and some people have complaints about this game, but I think the real issue is that the game truly does force you to play strategically, not just rush this or that territory, rinse, and repeat.

Thoughts?
jediturkey is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-04-2006, 04:52 AM   #2
Orao
Junior Member
 
Orao's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 266
No such thing as persistent damage in teh game. With the present AI only good strategy is the number. The AI is rushing you and some units need to be tweaked.



EaW: Total Realism
mod....
TR mod team status: TR Advisor, programmer, map maker, Multimedia developer
Orao is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-04-2006, 05:00 AM   #3
jediturkey
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72
Sorry. I mean to say there is a persistent gain or loss -- by the numbers. Most RTS's if you lose a battle you start all over -- everything is reset. This one, you pick up where you left off persay.
jediturkey is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-04-2006, 08:36 AM   #4
vrb
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by jediturkey
This game seems to require a lot more strategy than your typical RTS' where everything comes down to who has the most units and bombarding the other guy (or AI).
Thoughts?

I think this game has way LESS strategy than most RTS I've played. In space it's a race to get the best capital ships and spam them. Then take out the enemy space station (yawn)

On land it's a race to get mines and landing spots and then blow up your enemies base (yawn)

In age of empires 3 I have a much greater diversity of units with rich depth though cards and unit bonuses and all kinds of strategies I can use to win.

I like EAW but it's not a deep game by any means. It's FUN but doesn't have much depth to it.
vrb is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-04-2006, 09:50 AM   #5
jediturkey
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72
Interesting point of view. I can understand. I think the persistence of battles and such makes this game more strategic than others I've played -- where usually it's follow steps a through f and repeat. I prefer the territorial domination of this to acquire resources, and the pick and choose style of gameplay. I guess it's all a matter of preference.
jediturkey is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-04-2006, 12:00 PM   #6
DarthMuffin
Dark Cupcake of the Sith
 
DarthMuffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 1,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by vrb
I think this game has way LESS strategy than most RTS I've played. In space it's a race to get the best capital ships and spam them. Then take out the enemy space station (yawn)

On land it's a race to get mines and landing spots and then blow up your enemies base (yawn)

In age of empires 3 I have a much greater diversity of units with rich depth though cards and unit bonuses and all kinds of strategies I can use to win.

I like EAW but it's not a deep game by any means. It's FUN but doesn't have much depth to it.
The topic of "which RTS is the most strategic" has really been beaten to death again and again. I for one found AoE3 to be incredibly inferior to other RTSs. In the end, each RTS has a different style of strategic value. In EaW, it's the mix between tactical battles and the galactic mode thing.

Racing to get better capital ships is also a strategic feature. So is trying to get the landing points before your enemy.

Basically, anything that involves you doing something to beat the bad guy can be called "strategy". Massing a single unit can also be called "strategy", since you, as the player, evaluate that this is the best way to beat your enemy.

Different kinds of strategy appeal to different kinds of people. I for one never liked the Age of X games.


~Dark Cupcake of the Sith
DarthMuffin is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-04-2006, 01:39 PM   #7
Cheech Marin
Rookie
 
Cheech Marin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 181
Actually there's a reason why the AI rushes you. It does not use Fog of War.
Cheech Marin is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-04-2006, 03:12 PM   #8
PR-0927
Formerly Majin Revan
 
PR-0927's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,468
Current Game: BF3
I think that this game was designed brilliantly. There is plenty of strategy involved. In the Rebel Campaign, I managed to repel five Imperial-class Star Destroyers, six to eight Victory-class Star Destroyers, four Acclamator-class Assault Ships, hundreds of TIE Fighters and TIE Bombers, and several Immobilizer 418 Cruisers with a pathetic fleet of two Assault Frigate Mk. IIs, two Nebulon-B Frigates, and two squadrons of T-65 X-wings. I also attained two CR90 Corellian Corvettes and one Nebulon-B Frigate through the Space Station reinforcements (Level 4 Space Station).

I have to disagree with the notion that there are no tactics involved, or that the only tactic is numbers. Play the Rebel Campaign, you may love a ground mission where you use only Han Solo and Chewbacca against hundreds of Imperial units.

- Majin Revan




- Former Star Wars: Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy, Star Wars: Battlefront, and Star Wars: Battlefront II modder. Used to go by the name "Majin Revan."
PR-0927 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-04-2006, 04:52 PM   #9
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
To some, strategy is building up your civilization, to others it's getting workers to mine ore and chop wood and to the rest of us, it's E@W


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-04-2006, 04:57 PM   #10
Kurgan
Headhunter
 
Kurgan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1997
Location: The Dawn of Time
Posts: 18,316
LFN Staff Member 10 year veteran! 
Has anyone played Emperor: Battle for Dune? The two games are very similar in many aspects (minus the space battles).


Download JK2 maps for JA Server|BOOT CAMP!|Strategic Academy|
(JA Server: 108.178.55.189:29070)


"The Concussion Rifle is the weapon of a Jedi Knight Player, an elegant weapon, from a more civilized community." - Kyle Katarn
Kurgan is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-04-2006, 07:37 PM   #11
Heavyarms
The Buckeye Maneater!!!
 
Heavyarms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: America, the Land of the Free, and the Home of the Brave!
Posts: 2,473
There's definitely a tactical element. I'm really into space, but there's a lot of jocking for position and figuring out when to retreat and restrategize in skirmishes. It's not just a massive spamfest in skirmish. Yes, there's a flat out race to tech 5, but while that's going on you'd better get the mines and you'd better not lose the, or you can attack their station and try to win early. I was in a 3v1 and I tried that trick, almost maybe did it.


Proud to be an American.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."-Edmund Burke
Heavyarms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-04-2006, 11:14 PM   #12
DS_Vespidbat
Rookie
 
DS_Vespidbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavyarms
There's definitely a tactical element. I'm really into space, but there's a lot of jocking for position and figuring out when to retreat and restrategize in skirmishes. It's not just a massive spamfest in skirmish. Yes, there's a flat out race to tech 5, but while that's going on you'd better get the mines and you'd better not lose the, or you can attack their station and try to win early. I was in a 3v1 and I tried that trick, almost maybe did it.
i dont rush to getting the cap ships.If ur playing someone that is rushing to get to t5, then just go o t2 and make lots of acc cruisers/neb-bs,tartans/corvettes, and boba.It will work since ur enemy wont have a big defence.


DS_Vespidbat is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-05-2006, 02:36 AM   #13
jediturkey
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72
Cool Guy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth54
The topic of "which RTS is the most strategic" has really been beaten to death again and again. I for one found AoE3 to be incredibly inferior to other RTSs. In the end, each RTS has a different style of strategic value. In EaW, it's the mix between tactical battles and the galactic mode thing.

Racing to get better capital ships is also a strategic feature. So is trying to get the landing points before your enemy.

Basically, anything that involves you doing something to beat the bad guy can be called "strategy". Massing a single unit can also be called "strategy", since you, as the player, evaluate that this is the best way to beat your enemy.

Different kinds of strategy appeal to different kinds of people. I for one never liked the Age of X games.
Very well written. Worth a full quote.
jediturkey is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-05-2006, 09:31 AM   #14
jedi3112
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurgan
Has anyone played Emperor: Battle for Dune? The two games are very similar in many aspects (minus the space battles).
I played that one, indeed very similar. There's the sandstorms, infantry cover (though infantry can still be run over in this game, making the cover less usefull) and even the sandworms and natives. Though not really exactly in the same proportions as in Dune. I always preferred to play Atreides and build lots of mongooses (good vs everything and can target anything) after I finished my defense. The same goes for EAW, with other units off course. I don't know if you may lose 2 battles in a campaign, haven't tried that yet. Always unlocking as many movies as I can. Main difference is the experience that's not in EAW.

I always considered the Rome to be quite strategic, except I also always find the balance to be lost (main drawback is the overpowered cavalry and overpowered romans). Force Commander also had some nice strategic features, though most of them can also be found in Rome.

EAW is a good game, but it still has lots of room for improvements, like experience (combined with naming units it makes for a realy nice game) and I don't like the hero respawn, I think that when a hero dies you should be able to revive them, but it should be very expensive and take quite long (but not for R2 and 3PO).
jedi3112 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-05-2006, 10:03 AM   #15
DarthMuffin
Dark Cupcake of the Sith
 
DarthMuffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 1,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by jedi3112
I always considered the Rome to be quite strategic, except I also always find the balance to be lost (main drawback is the overpowered cavalry and overpowered romans). Force Commander also had some nice strategic features, though most of them can also be found in Rome.

EAW is a good game, but it still has lots of room for improvements, like experience (combined with naming units it makes for a realy nice game) and I don't like the hero respawn, I think that when a hero dies you should be able to revive them, but it should be very expensive and take quite long (but not for R2 and 3PO).
Rome is a fantastic game as far as strategy is concerned. Yes, the Romans are overpowerd. But the thing is, the campaign made you play as the romans and you eventually had to beat the crap out of almost everyone else. Let's not forget that, historically, the romans *did* have a powerful and organized military.

Hero revival is a great idea, in my opinion. I'm a WarCraft player, and I don't hide it. Reviving should cost money (medical expenses) *and* time (convalescence). Heroes are very powerful units, and it should be "drastic" to loose one. Just like in WC3.


~Dark Cupcake of the Sith
DarthMuffin is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-05-2006, 10:23 AM   #16
jedi3112
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth54
Hero revival is a great idea, in my opinion. I'm a WarCraft player, and I don't hide it. Reviving should cost money (medical expenses) *and* time (convalescence). Heroes are very powerful units, and it should be "drastic" to loose one. Just like in WC3.
That's exactly what I was thinking, and currently in EAW you only have to wait (long) and pay the very expensive absolutely nothing fee to revive them. Though some heros require a ship (and maybe some require a unit, but I haven't gotten that far yet, only have the game for a few days). Currently you can just take your hero units, stuff in a large fleet and do some random killing. I believe there are some mods that make heros dead permantly, but that would give other problems with the game as it is. Mostly for the Rebels, I mean if you lose either

R2 and 3PO
Luke

That would give you some huge problems with the technology or the DS. This would take the fun out of the game as it is too easy to use spies and a bounty hunter to take one of these out. So that's not much of an solution unless worked on.

BFME also uses the system I proposed, but in that system the heros are very cost effective and don't take too long. Furthermore I think that using the naming and experience of units is a very effective way of creating your own heros or specialised troops. Such as an elite squad of stormtroopers that guard the emperor or coruscant.


I am also thinking about modding EAW, but I prefer to play the game a bit as it is first. This should give me a better view of what could be done better. And maybe Petroglyph (hopefully) has made some tools and a nice guide of what can be done and how to do it by that time. Though I suspect a few modders will have to make the guide.
jedi3112 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-05-2006, 10:30 AM   #17
Orao
Junior Member
 
Orao's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 266
Quote:
I have to disagree with the notion that there are no tactics involved, or that the only tactic is numbers. Play the Rebel Campaign, you may love a ground mission where you use only Han Solo and Chewbacca against hundreds of Imperial units.
I've finished two campaigns long time ago and the part on Cadrila was the only ground battle where I have to use a tactic. All other battles finished up by me rushing the reinforcement points first and then landing maximum reinforcements.

Just face it ppl. This game is fast paced and you have no time to think any elaboreate strategy.

Only strategy or tactic which works with this game is :

I got attack by unit A ok I'll use unit B which counter it. If you call this tactic or strategy then I suggest you to open an english dictionnary and search for the words.



EaW: Total Realism
mod....
TR mod team status: TR Advisor, programmer, map maker, Multimedia developer
Orao is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-05-2006, 01:49 PM   #18
wedge2211
Commander, Rogue Squadron
 
wedge2211's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ithaca, NY
Posts: 2,320
From dictionary.com:

tactics
1. ...Maneuvers used against an enemy: Guerrilla tactics were employed during most of the war.
2. A procedure or set of maneuvers engaged in to achieve an end, an aim, or a goal.

So, even "capture all the landing zones and drop maximum reinforcements into the battle, then invade the enemy base" fits the definition. That's your personal set of tactics. You're not complaining that there are no tactics involved in the game, you're complaining that you've found a single tactic that works in general.

strategy
1. a. The science and art of using all the forces of a nation to execute approved plans as effectively as possible during peace or war.
b. The science and art of military command as applied to the overall planning and conduct of large-scale combat operations.

That's what the entire galactic map is. Strategy is the large-scale stuff that you don't see in the individual battles (that's why the game calls them "tactical battles").


wedge2211 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-05-2006, 02:56 PM   #19
Heavyarms
The Buckeye Maneater!!!
 
Heavyarms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: America, the Land of the Free, and the Home of the Brave!
Posts: 2,473
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS_Vespidbat
i dont rush to getting the cap ships.If ur playing someone that is rushing to get to t5, then just go o t2 and make lots of acc cruisers/neb-bs,tartans/corvettes, and boba.It will work since ur enemy wont have a big defence.
That works if you are playing 1v1, but 2v2 or 3v3 usually has someone upgrading rapidly and the others fighting (or at least that is what I do) and when I hit T5 I usually have a ton of funds so I get the big cap ships and pummel my enemies.


Proud to be an American.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."-Edmund Burke
Heavyarms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-15-2006, 12:29 PM   #20
DarthBalls9
Rookie
 
DarthBalls9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: i live in chewelah, wa
Posts: 15
Thumbs up

get good, go fight, and win
DarthBalls9 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-17-2006, 09:09 AM   #21
akito272
Rookie
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 11
This is a good game but with short comming especialy on land...land is a rush to
reinforcement points. Space is good, becuse big ships can die easily so if you dont go to lv 5 you can still win....but this game is very C&C feel...this game with a more roman:total war aproach would be a lot better.
akito272 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-17-2006, 09:41 AM   #22
†Saint_Killa†
Junior Member
 
†Saint_Killa†'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: At home listening to Slipknot...
Posts: 279
R:TW land battles. Hmmm.... can't imagine it. But it would be good otherwise. Space battles are good enough but not that good.



"You cannot kill which you did not create."

-Duality
†Saint_Killa† is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-18-2006, 10:39 PM   #23
Spiralarchitech
Rookie
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37
I think the strategy in this game is excellent i'll explain, in most other rts games i find you use a single good strategy to beat your opponent if it fails its rare you have enough resources to change mid game.

In EAW i find i have to use different strategys in every battle, now i know in some reveiws of this game they said that having a paper scissor stone rts was bad as units either do no damage or max damage depending on the opposing unit.

But i admit the Paper scissor stones style is better as normally in other rts games i need maybe 2 or 3 units to win a game in this i find i have to use at least 4-5 different types of units and at least 1 or 2 hero's at any one time and a variety of different strategys (on the fly might i add) to beat my opponent.

Just my 2 cents
Spiralarchitech is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-22-2006, 08:58 PM   #24
wherryj
Rookie
 
wherryj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by vrb
I think this game has way LESS strategy than most RTS I've played. In space it's a race to get the best capital ships and spam them. Then take out the enemy space station (yawn)

On land it's a race to get mines and landing spots and then blow up your enemies base (yawn)

In age of empires 3 I have a much greater diversity of units with rich depth though cards and unit bonuses and all kinds of strategies I can use to win.

I like EAW but it's not a deep game by any means. It's FUN but doesn't have much depth to it.
This doesn't totally apply. I've found that it is possible to take vastly superior enemy positions (both their fleet AND a strong space station) by using tactics. It is possibly mostly due to the AI not always making good decisions, but it isn't totally a matter of numbers.
wherryj is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-22-2006, 11:14 PM   #25
jediturkey
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72
I'm finding Act of War: Direct Action much more appealing. You can get it online at EB Games for $19 and there is a expansion coming soon. The game is very strategic and requires a lot of thinking - vs. just rushing masses of units against the enemy.

Not bashing EAW. I love it. But once I've done an entire campaign, it feels very been there done that -- Act of War feels unique through-out the game.
jediturkey is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-23-2006, 08:16 PM   #26
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Huh...amazing...E@W feels like it's «been there done that» but the C&C clone doesn't...


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-24-2006, 02:36 AM   #27
jediturkey
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72
The C&C clone (as you call it) has a lot more variety.
jediturkey is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-24-2006, 12:16 PM   #28
conmanguyler
Rookie
 
conmanguyler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 82
ive never really liked RTS' or RPg's but this game is really good, its probably because its different from anyother RTS ive ever played, so it differs, maybe it should be a new type of game, an RTS with something i dunno RTSA or something (real time strategy action game (crappy attempt))


CG
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match
for a good blaster at your side kid" - Han Solo

[SoL]ÑÌĞĦŢĤÅŴĶ
conmanguyler is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-24-2006, 09:25 PM   #29
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jediturkey
The C&C clone (as you call it) has a lot more variety.

That's not what you said. You said it felt unique through-out the game even though it just recycles things.

E@W recycles things too BTW.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-25-2006, 11:59 PM   #30
jediturkey
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72
What I said is:

"Not bashing EAW. I love it. But once I've done an entire campaign, it feels very been there done that -- Act of War feels unique through-out the game."

I never mentioned recycling. Don't put words in my mouth or typing.


Last edited by jediturkey; 03-26-2006 at 12:12 AM.
jediturkey is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-27-2006, 09:50 PM   #31
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jediturkey
What I said is:

"Not bashing EAW. I love it. But once I've done an entire campaign, it feels very been there done that -- Act of War feels unique through-out the game."

I never mentioned recycling. Don't put words in my mouth or typing.

O...k...

Quote:
Originally Posted by jediturkey
it feels very been there done that
That means using things that have been done before, thus, recycling.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-28-2006, 03:02 AM   #32
jediturkey
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72
Angry

I mentioned EAW is been there done that, not AOW. You are stating that I said AOW feels recycled -- it doesn't and I didn't say that.

jediturkey is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-28-2006, 03:43 AM   #33
DarthMaulUK
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Empire at War has never out to set the world alight in terms of its strategy. The acutal brief was to make it fun, and accessible - which they have done and as a result, it has sold very very well.

Once you play a little more, you do find that there is some strategy - although not as indepth as say Rome Total War, or even Rebellion, EaW offers something different, especially on the campaign/galactic map mode where you need to think fast.

Space combat is excellent. The hard point idea is a really good one and just before your enemy jumps to hyperspace (I do hate the way it does that) you target the engines, so that ship(s) go no where!

EaW delivers on what it set out to be, and once they revamp the online set up (PLEASE!!!!!) I will be playing alot more online than I am.

When you look at other RTS games, especially AOE 3 - it reminds me of how tired that game has become. It has had the SAME strategy in the game since day 1, and online. Tech up fast, Pikeman rush, game over, all inside 15 minutes. The graphics are a little fresher than previous games but essentially, its the same old thing.

DMUK
  you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-28-2006, 04:42 PM   #34
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jediturkey
I mentioned EAW is been there done that, not AOW. You are stating that I said AOW feels recycled -- it doesn't and I didn't say that.


Re-read the last few posts and then re-post.

I never said that you claimed that AoW felt recycled. I did. What you said is that EaW is "been there done that", which in other words means recycling elements. So I said that AoW also recycles old elements and doesn't feel unique at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DMUK
When you look at other RTS games, especially AOE 3 - it reminds me of how tired that game has become. It has had the SAME strategy in the game since day 1, and online. Tech up fast, Pikeman rush, game over, all inside 15 minutes. The graphics are a little fresher than previous games but essentially, its the same old thing.
It's actually the same strategy in 4 games and 3 expansions. It follows the old RTS "codes" that are now considered overused and obsolete. I don't think that AoE3 sold that well or even had a decent impact on the RTS world for that simple reason.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-28-2006, 07:42 PM   #35
ScorLibran
Rookie
 
ScorLibran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Coruscant
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthMaulUK
Space combat is excellent. The hard point idea is a really good one and just before your enemy jumps to hyperspace (I do hate the way it does that) you target the engines, so that ship(s) go no where!
That's cool - I was wondering about that. When I get the enemy "jumping to hyperspace in 8 seconds" message, I'd immediately target and destroy the engines on whichever cap ship I'd be beating on at the moment, but was never sure if that alone would keep it from jumping. Good to know it does.
ScorLibran is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 03-29-2006, 09:24 AM   #36
DarthMuffin
Dark Cupcake of the Sith
 
DarthMuffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 1,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthMaulUK
Empire at War has never out to set the world alight in terms of its strategy. The acutal brief was to make it fun, and accessible - which they have done and as a result, it has sold very very well.

Once you play a little more, you do find that there is some strategy - although not as indepth as say Rome Total War, or even Rebellion, EaW offers something different, especially on the campaign/galactic map mode where you need to think fast.
I agree here. EaW's strength doesn't lie in unique new features, and the designers really succeeded in making the game fun and accessible despite that.

*However*, LucasArts will never make a name for Star Wars in the RTS pantheon by keeping a "let's make something accessible and simple" philosophy. If they really want to make a popular SW RTS, they need to make something unique.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthMaulUK
Space combat is excellent. The hard point idea is a really good one and just before your enemy jumps to hyperspace (I do hate the way it does that) you target the engines, so that ship(s) go no where!
It is, but I think the maps (and thus the overall battles) are too small. I know, the game does not "cover" RotJ, but Iwould have liked to build a huge fleet to really stew some crap in the galaxy. And when you think of it, it doesn't make much sense for your ships to "wait" outside of the map when your population is full. Ground battles also suffer from a similar problem, but it's just less noticeable, IMO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthMaulUK
EaW delivers on what it set out to be, and once they revamp the online set up (PLEASE!!!!!) I will be playing alot more online than I am.
This is hands down the worst aspect of the game. If you succeed in getting past the log in screen (a difficult feat indeed) you are greeted with only a couple of games.

I'll say it again (for the hundredth time) : LA - should - make - a - Battle.net rip-off. And please don't say that they don't have enough money to keep servers...

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthMaulUK
When you look at other RTS games, especially AOE 3 - it reminds me of how tired that game has become. It has had the SAME strategy in the game since day 1, and online. Tech up fast, Pikeman rush, game over, all inside 15 minutes. The graphics are a little fresher than previous games but essentially, its the same old thing.

DMUK
I always thought that the AoE games were crap. Thus, I did not care at all about AoE 3's release and what you say just makes me glad I did not even waste time in downloading the demo.


~Dark Cupcake of the Sith
DarthMuffin is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > Empire At War > EaW General Discussion > Galactic Discussion > So this is a real RTS

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:56 PM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.