Recommendations for a TB Startegy Title

[magerette]

Okay--I can't take any more Titan Quest; The Witcher and Dragon Age and Hellgate:London are off on the distant horizon. I need a game.

Except for HoMM and Disciples, I stopped buying and playing strategy games quite awhile back when I got into rpgs. Now I'm hopelessly behind the times. I'm downloading a demo for the new CIV4 expansion as I type, but I haven't played any of the CIV titles. A lot of titles have been talked about on the forums but I don't know where to start.

Can anyone shine a light down the strategy aisle and point me to some good historical turn based titles that feature either unit combat(fantasy preferred) or economic/city builder dynamics. I'd like to avoid World War II and anything too futuristic.

Thanks for any suggestions. :)

[xSamhainx]

there was one I have seen yet never played, Age of Wonders and it's sequel. It's older, so prolly dirt cheap by now

[HiddenX]

Fantasy General (http://www.abandonia.com/games/345/FantasyGeneral)

[dteowner]

I recently saw a Civ Archives or some such that has all the old Civ games in one box. I HIGHLY recommend Civ2. I didn't get the warm fuzzy off Civ4, although I admit I didn't give it a fair shake (something else came out around the same time that got played instead). Age of Wonders is fairly good, although I didn't play it much. When it came out, I was due for a new rig so the AI took forever to complete which tempered my enthusiasm.

Although you're not enthused with non-elf stuff, you might take a peak at UFO:Extraterrestrials. Does a very good job recreating the original X-Com, which was an absolute classic. Squad-based TBS with a bit of real time base management thrown in for good measure.

[dteowner]

Fantasy General (http://www.abandonia.com/games/345/FantasyGeneral)I seem to remember Fantasy General getting slammed in reviews, but that might have been all the old grognards getting pissed at the "corruption" of their Panzer General franchise. The PG franchise was the premiere TBS wargame series for many years, but I never ended up playing any of them.

[VPeric]

Are you looking for something new, or will older stuff do? If so, how old?

[curiously undead]

i tried the civ iv demo this weekend too. the space setting reminded me of galciv2 and alpha centauri a bit. the first expansion wasn't even close to worth the 20 bucks i paid for it. however i enjoyed the demo quite a bit. if i can hold out 'til the gaming season starts with bioshock, with my pool of older games, i won't buy it. i might just cave in though. i'm currently playing stronghold legends which i'd recommend since it is vastly superior to stronghold 2 in nearly everyway. the evil campaign is awesome.

[magerette]

Old is fine as long as it will play on XP. I have the most background in old stuff, like MOO2 and HoMMs.
Sammy I've played Age of Wonders a bit and it failed to move me, but mostly because it has one of those tutorials that stop after showing you how to left click on your base. :( Might load it up again and retry, tho.
@dte--you boys and your space toys ;) Actually, I liked the look of X-Com when you guys rec'd it as a good wargame for my spouse. It's the gameplay that makes a strat game, after all (as long as the setting isn't too alienating.) I've had a lot of fun with Alpha Centauri and Master of Orion over the years, overcoming my fear of lasers,alien life forms, tiny figures in wierd suits and doom stars.

I also love historical city builders and have played all the old Sierra stuff. Gallifrey mentioned Anno 1701, which I'm hunting the demo for atm.

@ c.u. yes I just played a bit of it. pretty cool.

[Cormac]

Civ 4 would be your best bet. I'd also recommend Dominions 3. Try the demo (http://www.shrapnelgames.com/Illwinter/Dom3/6.htm)which comes with an excellent tutorial by Bruce Geryk. Infinite replayability with these two games. Fantasy General is also very good; what I loved most from that series (Panzer General and all) were the persistent armies that you built and fought with through the campaigns.

[magerette]

Thanks for the link Cormac. I remember you mentioned Dominions once before as a good title. I'm downloading it and the 1701 demo as I type.

Unfortunately, I'm not getting through to Fantasy Generals on that link.

@dte: Gamespot really slammed the UFO game.


Edit: Finally got Firefox to let me look at Fantasy Generals--looks promising. :)

[zakhal]

I seem to remember Fantasy General getting slammed in reviews, but that might have been all the old grognards getting pissed at the "corruption" of their Panzer General franchise. The PG franchise was the premiere TBS wargame series for many years, but I never ended up playing any of them.

Depends on the reviewer but mostly it got good reviews. My local mag gave it 90%. Everyone I know liked the game. It was was a great title.

Coming Soon Magazine 15.04.1996 92 out of 100 92
PC Player (Brazil) Jul, 1996 4.5 Stars4.5 Stars4.5 Stars4.5 Stars4.5 Stars 90
PC Games (Germany) Apr, 1996 86 out of 100 86
PC Player (Germany) Apr, 1996 5 Stars5 Stars5 Stars5 Stars5 Stars5 Stars 83
GameSpot 01.05.1996 4.9 out of 10 49

Warlords 4 is a nice TB strategy game too. Thats about it for turn based fantasy strategy games unless you try som real old stuff or try the handheld/console stuff (romance of x kingdoms etc). Im currently digging into homm5 + expansion which received a nice patch som time ago.

[Gallifrey]

Age Of Wonders: Shadow Magic is excellent. I don't recall what the demo covered but it's fairly easy to pick up and play.

The Civilization games are great. I'm currently torn on whether I like IV better than III.

The Anno games are solid, 1701 is the best of the bunch I think (you can get the demo here (http://www.anno1701.com/launch/index.php?lg=en&l1=downloads&l2=demo)

For city builders, the last year saw three Roman titles released - Glory Of The Roman Empire, Caesar IV and CivCity: Rome. Glory is the most accessable and the most casual of the three, CivCity is pretty solid with nice graphics and good mechanics, and Caesar IV is the most in-depth but the hardest on system requirements and a bit convoluted in it's interface.
The Impressions city builders like Caesar III and Pharaoh are superb as well. I highly recommend those.

The Stronghold games aren't bad either, but haven't managed to really captivate me.

While not being turn-based, Knights Of Honour (http://www.knights-of-honor.net/) is a solid, in-depth medieval strategy game. It's real-time but has a very slow pace and plays more like a traditional grand strategy game rather than your typical RTS.

You could also look at the Europa Universalis series (III is the most recent) or other Paradox games like Victoria: Empire Under The Sun which is an empire game in the Victorian period and Crusader Kings which focuses more on building your medieval dynasty. Unfortunately Paradox isn't great about releasing demos.

I'll post more if/when I think of them!

[magerette]

Thanks for all the input. I have three demos I'm working through now, and still reading the tutorial on Dominions 3. (This is the one with the 300 page manual, isn't it? But I like it :) I get the feeling that 'immersive' is an understatement on this one. )

The Civ IV x-pak demo is nice, but I would want to go back to a little earlier time frame for a start position--which I'm sure the actual game allows, right? It's a little pricey atm as well since I would also have to get the main game. Would it be better as well as cheaper to start earlier in the series, say Civ II or III, or is IV a really big improvement?

@ Gallifrey: Played through the four tutorials of the 1701 demo--it has quite the addictive feel to it. I liked the look of the Knights of Honour title as well. I also had Stronghold at one point but couldn't get into it. Think I gave it away.

All this should keep me out of the bars for a few days. (Just joking, at my age granola bars are a big challenge ;) )

Again, many thanks and feel free to add any not too rush-oriented rts games that someone with a distaste for pressure and no twitch skills can handle.

[Cormac]

[...]still reading the tutorial on Dominions 3. (This is the one with the 300 page manual, isn't it? But I like it :) I get the feeling that 'immersive' is an understatement on this one. )

The Civ IV x-pak demo is nice, but I would want to go back to a little earlier time frame for a start position--which I'm sure the actual game allows, right? It's a little pricey atm as well since I would also have to get the main game. Would it be better as well as cheaper to start earlier in the series, say Civ II or III, or is IV a really big improvement?


Yes, Dom3 comes with a 300 page manual, though half of it is made up of spell lists. What the tutorial doesn't teach you is how to create a pretender god, and that's a big part of the game.

As for Civ, yes you can start in earlier eras: the earliest starting date is something like 3500 BC. Civ 2 is the only one in the series I haven't played therefore I can't compare it with Civ 4, but I have played # 3 and 4 is infinitely superior in every way. I know there's a Civ 4 Gold edition that has been just released, containing the main Civ game and the first expansion, Warlords; if you're interested in buying Civ 4 it's best, in my opinion, to try and find a cheap copy of vanilla Civ 4 and not bother with Warlords. Then if you really like the game you could get the latest expansion, Beyond the Sword, which has just come out. It contains all the improvements from Warlords: the new units and wonders, the Great General, etc. You only lose the Warlords scenarios although beside the Chinese Unification one they were quite forgettable.

[curiously undead]

supposedly they are bringing back paratroopers with beyond the sword--the best part of civ2!

[VPeric]

Well, I was thinking a bit and this gem came to mind: Conquest of the New World (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conquest_of_the_New_World). Unfortunately, I'm not sure if it'll run on XP (would have to try installing my own copy to see), but it's still a great game!

[txa1265]

I had never played much TBS until GamerDad recommended that I just *had* to play Civ IV ... and I have absolutely loved it. The Warlords expansion was nice, but the upcoming Beyond the Sword looks magnificent with loads of options and new modes. Paratroopers and espionage and 'events' ... cool stuff.

I also loved Anno 1701, though the combat is really pretty weak. Not a big distraction though, the overall game is quite good.

[Gallifrey]

Thanks for all the input. I have three demos I'm working through now, and still reading the tutorial on Dominions 3. (This is the one with the 300 page manual, isn't it? But I like it :) I get the feeling that 'immersive' is an understatement on this one. )

I was going to add Dominions to the list this morning, but I see you're already on to it!


@ Gallifrey: Played through the four tutorials of the 1701 demo--it has quite the addictive feel to it. I liked the look of the Knights of Honour title as well. I also had Stronghold at one point but couldn't get into it. Think I gave it away.

1701 is addictive. It's just the right balance of casual and strategic gameplay, and the graphics, sound and music are really well done. It's just a great game to play. Combat in city builder games is always weak, I never expect it to be otherwise, but it plays such a small role it's not really worth spending the time on.
Do check out Knights Of Honour. I've played the heck out of it and always enjoyed it immensely. While everything happens in real-time, it's not fast paced and you can slow it down to a real crawl if you need to. But you'll see armies moving and have time to respond accordingly, you don't get mobbed by gangs in the RTS fashion (it's not at all rush-oriented). Battles are fought in real-time, but you can pause and command, or just use an auto-resolve to skip the control completely, and the autoresolve is quite fair in how it governs the battle.
The graphics are quite nice and the music is about the best I've ever heard in a PC game.

.... I have played # 3 and 4 is infinitely superior in every way.

I don't really agree. I far prefer the look of Civ3, I find it has a lot more character whereas Civ4 is pretty bland. Although I do like the extra map details (like showing cottages and towns and other improvements) but I just find the 3D art style dull. Civ4 is immensely better in how it handles the border expansion of cities as it loses that stupid X shape expansion in favour of a more realistic spread. In terms of the interface, I'm on the fence over that one. I get a more hands-off feeling from Civ4, but then I'm still very new to it. I really miss the tech tree layout for research that Civ3 had. Having just a list of items to research without seeing where they go is annoying, as is being unable to just click on your target research and your queue being filled with the proper research path.

I think I'll need to start a new game. My current Russian empire is just breezing through everything. I'm not sure what difficulty I set the game at, but it's been really easy. I think I put it at the same level I always played Civ3 at, and there it gave me a challenge. Right now, I just build Culture improvements and gradually expand my empire, and everybody likes me, even if I swallow up one of their cities.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

I can recommend AoW: SM as well (stands for Age of Wonders : Shadow Magic, and is a standard abbreviation used by fans).

If you plan to buy it, look out at the unofficial patch 1.4 at aow.heavengames !
The most recent official patch is 1.3, but the unofficial 1.4 got at least an "okay" by both Triumph and Take2.

[Gallifrey]

I totally neglected to mention the historical strategy games from Slitherine (http://www.slitherine.com/). They've done a whole bunch - Legion (Gold), Legion: Arena (and the Cult Of Mithras expansion), Chariots Of War, Spartan and Gates Of Troy.
Legion is a grand strategy turn-based game set in the ancient Roman period, Chariots Of War is the ancient Middle East and Spartan and it's sequel/expansion Gates Of Troy are pretty self explanatory. Legion: Arena takes the combat model from Legion and beefs it up to include more customization and personalization of your legions, but it's more a war game, there's no diplomacy or empire management element. You essentially take your armies from one battle scenario to the next.

Out of the larger strategy games, Spartan and Gates Of Troy are the best, with the most features and are the most fully realised of the series.
In these games, you do the usual empire management things, make sure your resources are kept up, people are happy, that sort of thing. Cities have limited building areas so you have to decide which ones will specialise in what areas, and some cities have resources you need, so you'll need to expand and conquer.
Battles are real-time, but you lay out your unit positions, assign formations and marching orders before starting the battle. Once the battle has started, you have very limited control (you can rally, retreat or a charge), which I really like, it's more realistic than the Total War model where you can control nearly every footstep of your army if you want, which is kind of silly.
Diplomacy is a bit on the passive side. You can send diplomats to other empires and try to achieve various things, and the longer they stay the more experienced they get and can carry out greater acts of diplomacy. So you don't spend any time personally managing discussions, but the effects are there nonetheless.

The games aren't that impressive in the graphics department but they are perfectly adequate. Music is on the bland side though, and there isn't a lot of fiddly in-depth stuff that can really pull you into the game, but it still has that one more turn feeling.

[Jaz]

Pity about your non-futuristic slant, magerette - otherwise, I'd recommended the Battle Isle games.

[Gallifrey]

For sci-fi there's the great Galactic Civilizations series. I loved the first one, and I'm sure the second is excellent, but I'm just rarely in the mood for that sort of setting.

[magerette]

Pity about your non-futuristic slant, magerette - otherwise, I'd recommended the Battle Isle games.

Jaz it's good to see you around, and with a snazzy new avvie, too :)
I'm not ditching futuristic completely-- if it's a really good game I'm interested. It's just I find guns and weapons trees difficult to get lost in--I would say it was my hippie pacifist roots:meditate:, but that doesn't prevent me from wasting continents through necromancy and heavy dependence on the Fireball spell, so it has to be something else. Is the game really old and really hard? (have mercy...I am a weak sister)

@ Gallifrey :We seem to be in agreement on GalCiv--I have all the games but I rarely play them.

I am presently printing out the seventeen page tutorial for Dominions. I find it quite well written and entertaining, so much so that I am putting a new quote in my sig.

[VPeric]

Ah yes, how could I forget? Battle for Wesnoth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_for_Wesnoth) is a great game! Heartily recommend it.

Also, I've tried out Conquest of the New World, and it works fine with Dosbox, if you're interested. But, eh, Wesnoth is free, so I guess you'd probably want to try that one first. ;)

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Pity about your non-futuristic slant, magerette - otherwise, I'd recommended the Battle Isle games.

*Very* popular once here in Germany !

I bought the last game of this series a few months ago on a flea market here.

[magerette]

Ah yes, how could I forget? Battle for Wesnoth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_for_Wesnoth) is a great game! Heartily recommend it....
... But, eh, Wesnoth is free, so I guess you'd probably want to try that one first. ;)

That looks really interesting, and after i wade through my current assignments I'm on it.

Alrik, this looks like one you would like! Very cheerful. :)

[Alrik Fassbauer]

I've heard about it and it is on my radar for some time now. :)

I just wanted to wait until it is more polished. :)

[txa1265]

Been meaning to download this for a while ... well, now I did. Now there is the time aspect ...

[magerette]

I am always amazed that you can even remember the games you play with your huge cross-platform "caseload", Mike. ;)

I look forward to playing this one someday too, but I have a feeling I'll be playing Dominions for a while. It's really really a big game, and so far just the tutorial in the demo has taken four or five hours, though it was more fun than work and well worth the research time to figure out how to play it :) Not that it's awkward or difficult, it's very simple and intuitive in many ways--there's just so much there (600 different magic spells, 7 schools of magic, four or five types of elemental spells within each school, hundreds of different, individualistic units, etc).

Many thanks to Cormac for turning me on to this one. And to everybody else for their excellent suggestions as well. :)

[Pladio]

I'd say Battle For Wesnoth is very nice. I played it for a month or two, I mostly like them multiplayer though. I'm waiting for their new version to be complete, the 1.3.x is still in development but you can play the 1.2.x perfectly. It's nice if you download some add-ons for the game too.

Conquest of the New World, like Vperic said is very nice and challenging too. It's been a while since I've played it though.

About the Civilizations, I preferred Civ 2 the most, I liked the way everything worked. Civ III was nice, but I thought it was Civ II all over again with just better graphics. Civ IV is very nice, I like all the new features. It's quite easy on the easier difficulties while in Civ II I could hardly survive on Chieftain I think.

I do believe they're all very good, but they can take a long time. If you like that then there's an option in the fourth game to make games last longer :)

Age of Wonders seemed very good, but I never bought it, I just played the demo.

The Heroes of Might and Magic series were quite nice too and if you have some friends over for like a few hours every day you can have even more fun.

Castles II isn't really TB but I thought and still think it's a great game, I don't think it works on XP though.

Risk is a very good game and very hard too.
Master of Orion II (I didn't like the third) is a very nice Space TBS. It has very nice features and it's a game that's easy to learn and hard to master, somewhat like Battle for Wesnoth I believe. It had a similar tech-tree to Civ except it's in space :)
Btw, there's freeciv, which is an open-source version of Civ II out there. It's free, so if you want to try out some kind of Civ II (they changed some features, added others...) it's a good place to start to see if you'll like the Civ series.

The Total War series are worth trying too. Lords of the Realm II (I think there's a third out there too though) is nice, battles are a bit cumbersome, but it's a nice game. Lords of Magic too. Both are TBS, Lords of Magic is in a fantasy realm though. I couldn't get it to run on XP though.

Quite a long post and I think that's all I know about TBSs so...

Oh, Gangsters : Organized Crime, great, great game.... Unlike anything you've ever seen and really, really difficult, at least for me.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Oh, Gangsters : Organized Crime, great, great game.... Unlike anything you've ever seen and really, really difficult, at least for me.

I see organized crime every day on my TV - so why should I buy me such a game ?

(Sorry, couldn't resist. ;) I just don't like these types of games. ;) )

The only game in that direction I really want to try out is the famous (at least here) "Pizza Connection". ;)

[VPeric]

Lords of the Realm is a great game, heartily recommended. Get II, though - in III the gameplay was vastly changed, and I don't think it's for the better. Lords of Magic is interesting too - they describe it as a mix of HoMM 2 and Lords of the Realm 2, and I kinda agree with that. Gangsters is... less than interesting, at least for me. I'll agree that it's a very hard game, though (maybe that's why I didn't like it?).

Hmm, thinking back, I'd have to say the late 90's were the "golden age" of TBS games.

[Pladio]

I agree, Gangsters isn't for everyone, but I liked the concept a lot and found the challenge very nice. I also like all the options and the way the game worked. I had never played a game like that before and never have since. I would recommend trying it even you might not like it it's a nice experience, I believe. I had lost my copy so I bought the game bundled with Gangsters II a few years ago for €10, about $14.
I didn't really like GII (Gangsters II) though, it seemed oversimplified!

If you like very old TBS, the games from KOEI are very nice, all are about the same which makes them a bit repetitive after you played one of them.
I got Nobunaga I and II from Home of the Underdogs I think. Romance of the Three Kingdoms 1 through 7 or 8 are nice too. I only played one of them I think. Other good abandonware TBS include Centurion, The Sword of the Samurai and several others I forgot the name.
Europa Universalis II was a bit too sandboxy for me, but maybe you'll like it. I might have not liked it because I was expecting a superb game with a Civilization touch to it, but it's a TBS too.

[Gallifrey]

About the Civilizations, I preferred Civ 2 the most, I liked the way everything worked. Civ III was nice, but I thought it was Civ II all over again with just better graphics. Civ IV is very nice, I like all the new features. It's quite easy on the easier difficulties while in Civ II I could hardly survive on Chieftain I think.

The difficulty levels are dialed back a lot in CivIV I've noticed. I also don't like how quickly the ages advance, and the absence of a tech tree showing the research progress through each age is a step back as well.


Master of Orion II (I didn't like the third) is a very nice Space TBS. It has very nice features and it's a game that's easy to learn and hard to master, somewhat like Battle for Wesnoth I believe. It had a similar tech-tree to Civ except it's in space :)


Oh the time I've lost to MOOII! Such a great, great game. III was a complete disaster though, and I'll never forgive Atari for allowing Quicksilver to create that piece of crap and insult to the Master Of Orion name!

[zakhal]

www.matrixgames.com is full of TB games. Direct d/l. Lots of goodies if youre into wargames.

[magerette]

It's really encouraging to see so many of you have played my favorite games. The very first game I ever played on the computer(besides Free Cell ;) ) was Master of Orion 2. I'll never forget the first time I defeated the Psilons, Humans, Sakkra and kicked the Antarrans out of the known universe. I still have it on my hard drive and play it monthly at least.
The second game I ever played, and the first game I bought and picked out myself, was HoMM II. Gem, the lovely Gem...and the green guy, Halok? or something. Many many hours there. I remember actually calling the 3DO office to order the expansion. :)
Lords of Magic was a great game also, (loved the Elves/Life faction) and I actually got it to run in XP, but the thrill was just gone--the graphics looked absolutely unreadable and pixellated on my widescreen...I may replay it again someday on my older computer. I will look out for Lords of the Realm 2--I have LoR III somewhere but never got around to playing it.

Have to agree about MOOIII--what a nightmare. I've had more fun with an excel spreadsheet than I ever had trying to play that game.

Thanks again for all the great suggestions. I've tried to follow all the links and bookmark them for eventual consumption. I guess if nobody makes any super games in the next few years, there will still be plenty of excellent time sinks like these to dive into. :)

[chamr]

I'm going to throw another vote in for AoW: SM. By far the best TBS I've played on a comp. The tactical map really makes for some engrossing battles.

I'll also say how dull I find CivIV. Lots of pretty graphics and a pile 'o stuff jammed in (long list of techs, units, bldgs, etc.), but just not a lot of substance. It boils down to some very, very simple gameplay dressed up with a whole lot of "stuff" that doesn't really amount to much. And the combat is dreadfully simplistic. That's perhaps the biggest disappointment for me.

P.S. Thank the heavens! Jaz change her avatar!!!! :)

[magerette]

P.S. Thank the heavens! Jaz change her avatar!!!!

I kind of miss the old pervert. :)

[chamr]

I kind of miss the old pervert. :)
:lol:

Just thought of another: Axis & Allies, the old Hasbro version re-creating the fantastic board game on the comp, not the newer Timegate, RTS version. One of those "simple but deep" games that I can always come back to.

[Pladio]

I can't run A&A on Xp, nor Conquest of a New World, nor Castles II, nor Lords of Magic... I have no idea why...

Axis and Allies gets my vote too though, very nice game. Good difficulty too.
Hard is hard, easy is easy and normal is normal.

About Civ IV, I don't think it's a bad game, and there were very nice additions made to the game, but I find it boring after a while. I do think it's better than Civ III in that it innovated the game. Civ III to Civ II really didn't change anything except for the culture thing added to the game. I think I'll download Freeciv now :D

magerette, have fun.

[Gallifrey]

I'll also say how dull I find CivIV. Lots of pretty graphics and a pile 'o stuff jammed in (long list of techs, units, bldgs, etc.), but just not a lot of substance. It boils down to some very, very simple gameplay dressed up with a whole lot of "stuff" that doesn't really amount to much. And the combat is dreadfully simplistic. That's perhaps the biggest disappointment for me.

I have to agree, though I'm still finding it reasonably fun. While playing, I keep wishing I could mix and match bits of CivIII and CivIV since each have their good and bad points.
CivIV lacks a sense of immediacy, it's very much all about hitting "end turn" and waiting for things to happen. CivIII had a greater sense of strategy, I think. Now granted, I've only been playing with IV for a couple of weeks versus III for a couple of years.
Combat in Civilization has always been simplistic and I agree, it's a low point. More tactical options would be extremely welcome, though Meier has repeatedly said Civ is not a war game.

Right now, my biggest compaint with IV is that I don't really feel the passage of the ages, or that the time spent in them is important, they seem to be there only as phases to get through, as spaces of game time to facilitate tech researching, and that's it, no sense of importance. With CivIII I felt that each period meant more.

[Jaz]

I kind of miss the old pervert. :)That's just because you don't know Rudolf (my current, and former avatar - No. 4 IIRC) as well as I do ;).

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Master Of orion is an old classic among AoW fans. I've heard a lot about it, yet I haven't played it ever.

Edit : I just remember I wrote an review of Age of Wonders II at the Dot ...

[xSamhainx]

I dont know why I cannot play the Civ games. I wish I could, it's like sports or something that I wish that I liked so I could talk to other people about it and feel normal. They just dont interest me at all. I tried, I even have Civ III, a friend gave to me to try and hook me, but I just cannot seem to get interested in it!

[Pladio]

I played so many games over the years (and I'm still young), a lot of games either took time for me to adjust and want to play them and others are just on the table gathering dust. It's quite normal I believe to like some games and dislike others.

Another good TB game is Risk and its alternative versions. Very nice.

[Zakhary]

Age of Wonders II is the best strategy game I've ever played. Its better than AOW1 or AOW3 imo. It's also much better than any of the HOMM games (especially the later ones). It features some RPGish elements and it's high fantasy. It's combat is turn based with really imaginative and beautifull units.

I would higly recommend this game.

[magerette]

Is it AoW: Shadow Magic expansion you mean or is Wizard'sThrone equally good? I have that one but got rather frustrated with it--it's been a long time so I can't remember the details but I think it was the interface.

[danutz_plusplus]

I would recommend Civ4 or Civ3. They're pretty good. The best I've played in TBS/RPG are HOMM 3 and 5. I hated the 4th installment. And Disciples 2, along with it's 3 or 4 addons(don't remember how many).

I've also tried both Age of Wonders, but didn't like them. HOMM impressed me much more. Plus, HOMM5 has a pretty good story. Something I didn't feel in the other HOMMs.

[magerette]

I really enjoyed HoMM 5 and played all the campaigns when I first got it. I thought Nival did a good job of getting the HoMM setup right. But then Hammers of Fate came out with the patch that retro'ed back into HoMM5 and made it too easy, and boring for me. Someday I'll uninstall/reinstall without HoF.

I'll be curious to see how this Tribes of the East expansion stands up.

[danutz_plusplus]

I really enjoyed HoMM 5 and played all the campaigns when I first got it. I thought Nival did a good job of getting the HoMM setup right. But then Hammers of Fate came out with the patch that retro'ed back into HoMM5 and made it too easy, and boring for me. Someday I'll uninstall/reinstall without HoF.

Me too. I also thought they did a great job. I really liked the character design for the units.

Did HoF introduce the random map generator that was promised?

Oh, and I just remembered another TBS game I found to be really fun. Silent Storm. It's a turn based tactical game, similar in a way to Commandos. Developed by the same Nival.

[txa1265]

Oh, and I just remembered another TBS game I found to be really fun. Silent Storm. It's a turn based tactical game, similar in a way to Commandos. Developed by the same Nival.
I haven't played the original Silent Storm, but have played 3 games based on it - Hammer & Sickle (not so good), Night Watch (pretty good) and some of Day Watch (rush-job).

[danutz_plusplus]

I haven't played the original Silent Storm, but have played 3 games based on it - Hammer & Sickle (not so good), Night Watch (pretty good) and some of Day Watch (rush-job).

Yeah, I heard those were poorly done. You should try Silent Storm. It's much better imo.

[dteowner]

Did HoF introduce the random map generator that was promised?Anyone answer that one? I'm interested, too.

[VPeric]

Anyone answer that one? I'm interested, too.

Yep. (more characters)

[txa1265]

Yeah, I heard those were poorly done. You should try Silent Storm. It's much better imo.

The thing I loved about Night Watch was the integration of magic and weapons, which was handled excellently - the combat system was easily the best part.

[bjon045]

Best Fantasy TBS is Birthright:The gorgons alliance.

The possibilities for victory are nearly endless in this game and I still sometimes play it to this very day. I have probably finished it at least 10 times.

It does have mixed reviews but it is one of those games that divides people, it has a fanatical fan base.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Possible recommendation :

"Warhammer 40.000 Squad Command"

I just got a newsletter from THQ where it is announced.

But it's only for PSP & DS.

Strange indeed : More & more TB games for portables, less & less for the PC. This just strengthenes my theory that the publishers are building out the image and the position of the PC as an "action-only" platform.

[magerette]

Anyone answer that one? I'm interested, too.

Yes. Actually I think it was introduced in the 1.3 patch released prior to HoF. There are a lot of good fan-made maps for HoMM5 (and the earlier HoMMs also) at Celestial Heavens. (http://www.celestialheavens.com/)




Edit:OOPs. Sorry VPeric. missed your post.

[Gallifrey]

Is it AoW: Shadow Magic expansion you mean or is Wizard'sThrone equally good? I have that one but got rather frustrated with it--it's been a long time so I can't remember the details but I think it was the interface.

Age Of Wonders: Shadow Magic is a stand-alone and basically adds more races and such to what was in Wizard's Throne. Gameplay and graphic-wise, WT and SM are the same.
The biggest problem with the game is (as ususal) the AI. Some of the races have units with a camouflage ability, but the AI can see them and responds accordingly, and the AI also plays very cautiously unless it's clear you are seriously and irredeemably out-gunned.
So playing against the AI usually results in either a really easy game, or a game which you will in all likelihood lose. There may be mods to fix that now, I don't know.
Fortunately it has a very robust multi-player set up, including PBEM and hotseat.

As for the 40K Squad Command, I'm buying a DS for that one (amongst others). I miss Chaos Gate, and Squad Command looks like a nice successor to that game.

[Lucky Day]

I was just playing Freecol (http://www.freecol.org/) the other day. I actually got commented on by my wife for playing games all night.

I had never palyed Colonization before. The inventory management is much more important. This version has little if no sound just to warn you.

[chamr]

The biggest problem with the game is (as ususal) the AI. Some of the races have units with a camouflage ability, but the AI can see them and responds accordingly, and the AI also plays very cautiously unless it's clear you are seriously and irredeemably out-gunned.
So playing against the AI usually results in either a really easy game, or a game which you will in all likelihood lose. There may be mods to fix that now, I don't know.

The fan patch, 1.4, over at AgeofWondersHeaven, may fix both those. Can't remember. However, the game does come with something like 5 different levels of AI, so you should be able to find a happy medium between too easy and too hard. Also, the camouflage units don't have to be important at all, if you don't want them to be. It's only a couple of races, out of something like 8 or 10, that can make significant use of them anyway.

@magerette: the interface does take some getting used to, but it shouldn't take you long. Once you get into the swing of it after an hour or so, it's not hard to remember. Play around with the copy you have, and if you like it, I'd recommend upgrading to the Shadow Magic version.

[Prime Junta]

Hum, this may be a bit off the wall, but... Medieval: Total War and Rome: Total War can be played as entirely turn-based. You'll just miss out on the battlefield action, since the game will resolve the battles for you abstractly based on force balance. Both are deep enough to work very well played purely from the strategy map -- I've played a few campaigns this way and very much enjoyed them.

What's more, if there's any game out there that can lure you into RTS, those will be them. What with R:TW Gold (includes the Alexander expansion) going at bargain-bin prices by now, it may be worth a try.

[Gallifrey]

The fan patch, 1.4, over at AgeofWondersHeaven, may fix both those. Can't remember. However, the game does come with something like 5 different levels of AI, so you should be able to find a happy medium between too easy and too hard. Also, the camouflage units don't have to be important at all, if you don't want them to be. It's only a couple of races, out of something like 8 or 10, that can make significant use of them anyway.

I'll take a look at that patch when I next get the urge to play. As for the camouflage units, it's true there are only a couple but it's a nice ability to use and makes those low-level units more viable. The Halflings in particular suffer from not being able to use it, as it's a pretty useful one for them.

As for the interface, I don't recall it being tricky at all, but then I could just be remembering being accustomed to it.

Hum, this may be a bit off the wall, but... Medieval: Total War and Rome: Total War can be played as entirely turn-based. You'll just miss out on the battlefield action, since the game will resolve the battles for you abstractly based on force balance. Both are deep enough to work very well played purely from the strategy map -- I've played a few campaigns this way and very much enjoyed them.

What's more, if there's any game out there that can lure you into RTS, those will be them. What with R:TW Gold (includes the Alexander expansion) going at bargain-bin prices by now, it may be worth a try.

Yeah, Rome is quite playable without the battlefield action, I usually play it that way. Medieval I'm not so sure about.. It does have the auto-resolve but it's quite skewed in favour of your enemies I found. And in Medieval, I didn't find the campaign map portion to be all that engaging. I haven't tried Medieval II so I'm not sure how that compares.

Rome Total War Gold comes with the Barbarian Invasions expansion, not Alexander. Unless there's a Gold Edition I'm not familiar with. The Total War Eras set included Alexander, however. And that whole set can be found on eBay for less than $30 these days.

[dteowner]

I didn't give Medieval:TW a fair shake when I played it, but I think it actually would play pretty well as TBS. Of course, my opinion is probably colored by the fact I got my butt handed to me regularly on the battlefield.

[Prime Junta]

@dte -- M2TW isn't that hard to beat on the battlefield. Remember that the key to victory is morale -- you win by routing your enemy, not going toe to toe and hoping to come out on top. The best way to do this is to try to get an enemy unit between two of yours. Say, use a row of spearmen to pin it down, flank it with cavalry, charge their rear, and watch them run. Very few units will be able to take this situation and keep fighting, even if the units they're fighting are much weaker.

Another thing to keep in mind is morale: a good general will make your men way less likely to break and run.

Yet another is high ground: a cavalry charge downhill will punch through just about everything, your missiles will have much more range, and the enemy will get tired slogging up the hill in heavy armor.

The AI is also pretty boneheaded in some ways; for example, if you can get some missile troops on higher ground it'll just stand there and take it rather than taking cover or attempting to charge them. I never feel good winning battles this way, though; it's too much like cheating.

If you already have the game, I say give it another shot. It's good clean fun.

[magerette]

Thanks for the rec, PJ et. al. I remember curiously undead had a high opinion of Medeival:TW and was happy with the auto-resolve. That's something I really wish the Impressions city builders had, because as I've mentioned before, the combat mechanics in those are worse than prehistoric.

I actually enjoy a little RTS; played Spellforce and SP Warcraft III thru Frozen Throne, and I enjoy them right up to the point where they become more of a stress-filled job than a game(which is usually right after the fifth time you've had that experience dte mentioned ;) )

[dteowner]

I've got M1:TW, not M2. Thing is, I do combat in all my games with a sumo mentality--slam into them until someone falls down. There's a certain level of strategy to being a good sumo, but it still doesn't leave much room for proper application of combined arms.