>Tier 1: Super popularStarcraft 1 and 2Warcraft IIIAge of Empires II>Tier 2: PopularCompany of Heroes 1 and 2Age of Empires III>Tier 3: IntermediateThey are BillionsAge of MythologySupreme Commander: Forged Alliance (inc. Forever)Command and Conquer franchiseHalo Wars 2NorthgardIron Harvest>Tier 4: NicheAnno seriesSupreme Commander 2HomeworldPlanetary AnnihilationDawn of war I/II/IIISins of a Solar EmpireAge of Empires IBattlefleet Gothic ArmadaOpenRAHalo Wars 1Star Wars: Empire at WarStronghold and Stronghold Crusader franchiseOffworld Trading CompanyBattle for Middle Earth 1/20 A.D.LittlewargameTotal Annihilation seriesTooth and TailMen of War seriesAshes of the SingularityCossacks seriesWarcraft I and IIRise of NationsProject Celeste>Tier 5: Very niche/almost deadSettlers seriesBattle RealmsGrey GooStar Wars: Galactic BattlegroundsEmpire EarthSpellForce Rusted WarfareArmy Men RTSAmerican ConquestImpossible CreaturesAncestors LegacyEmpires ApartZero-KAI WarAxis and AlliesKKnD SeriesBlitzkriegEarth 2150Empires: Dawn of the Modern WorldFaces of WarEvonyForged BattalionKnights of HonorLand CrisisLambda WarsAct of War: Direct ActionGlobulation 2Submarine TitansDune IIUniverse at War: Earth AssaultBeyond All ReasonBannermenSpellforceImpossible CreaturesWhat else do I miss?
>aoe3>2.8k players>popular>aoe4>7.2k players>not on the list
For me is AoE2 and 3, AoM, Anno is a city builder btw, Stronghold, MoWAS2, RoN, SW:GB, EE, AC, the rest never catched me
>>1754512>What else do I miss?You missed actually gathering the data to prove whatever point you're trying to make instead of just making shit up based on how you feel.
>>1754512Has anyone played offworld trading company?I really wish their servers werent made of potato.
>>1754512While we are pulling stuff out of the ass maybe it was popular in the past but I don't think warcraft 3 is a cultural force in gaming anymore.AoE3 was never all that popular and it's still isn't. It's smaller than even the maligned AoE4 that you don't have on the list.FAF despite the reputation is deader than half the list.Also bunch of the list is random selection of shovelware games that never had notable multiplayer component to begin with if not SP-only games so discussing the idea of it having an alive playerbase is pointless when steam charts peak is one guy who happens to be replaying the campaign for some reason.So shit list, doesn't reflect what games are actually popular right now, were in the past or even how significant they are considered to the genre.
>>1754732Yeah. It's alright for what it is.
>>1754512you missed Paraworld and Star Trek Armada 1 and 2.
>>1754512I have never played Starcraft (1 or 2), is it good?
>>1754512>Ctr+F settlers>Very niche>Ctrl+F rise of le>NothingOh, it's zoomer time
>>17548611 is a classic, 2 is run-the-mill experience. For the sheer completionist approach, you should give original a shot. It has solid campaigns, which is what makes it stand out to this day
>>1754861Starcraft 1 has horrible UI, unit controls, pathfinding and collisions to the point where it's basically unplayable. It's a cosmic accident game became as popular as it did in korea and became the esports game. People have gaslit themselves into believing that having to fight the technical issues and design rapidly becoming outdated as genre developed were actually a features that expressed skill.Admittedly I don't know if the remake addresses that and to what extent so maybe it does, but the original is unplayable if you are a human in 2024.Starcraft 2 is much more playable game and campaigns were fun enough with varied missions even if the story takes a nosedive at some point.
>>1754512>no ruseits joever
>>1754861it sucks
>>1754861Both of them are good, campaign for 2 is very fun (ignore the story though).Shitters get mad at it because the multiplayer ego-checks people who think they're strategic gods, but the game (2 at least) is way less scary than people make it sound. And the campaign can be tailored for any difficulty.
>>1754867>>1755023>you can only select 12 units at a timewtf, why?!
>>1755231Yeah, also pathfinding is bad and they will get stuck so have fun playing a round of simon says every time you need to move units somewhere. See >>1754905Even in 98 it would have been questionable and quickly became woefully outdated.
>>1755231I can almost get it for a game released in 1998 with the fancy unit selection UI they tried to go for.What I don't get is the same thing happening in Warcraft 3 in fucking 2002.
>>1755269Warcraft has a much smaller unit cap so it's less obvious it's the case, but yeah, it's absolutely stupid they still went with that.
>>1755269Tzar (published but two years later) didn't have such nonsense and that's with it being the first game of a bunch of bulgarian developers
>>1755270>>1755281>>1755245>>1755231https://www.codeofhonor.com/blog/the-making-of-warcraft-part-1Not a limit, but intentional design. Starting from Warcraft 1>Later in the development process, and after many design arguments between team-members, we decided to allow players to select only four units at a time based on the idea that users would be required to pay attention to their tactical deployments rather than simply gathering a mob and sending them into the fray all at once. We later increased this number to nine in Warcraft II. Command and Conquer, the spiritual successor to Dune 2, didn’t have any upper bound on the number of units that could be selected. It’s worth another article to talk about the design ramifications, for sure.
>>1754512>AoE 1>NicheYou do not realize how many people in Vietnam play this game
>>1754512>no Warrior Kings Battle>no Seven Kingdoms 2>no Warlord Battlecry>no TzarCasul.
>>1754861no
>>1754512how is command and conquer not in tier 2?it was THE RTS of the 90s
>>1754512>AoE3 with only 2.8k players is popular>Empire at War where mere individual mods can have several hundred thousand subscribers is only niche
>>1754905StarCraft had dogshit gameplay (albeit, no worse than most RTS at the time) but the setting, voice acting, music, story, cutscenes, sound effects, etc., were all top notch, especially for that time period. That got people invested in it, and in large numbers, which is what you need to be a successful e-sport: you need the perception that the game is a big deal and worth sinking a lot of time into getting really good at it.Just coming out with a game that's meant to be an e-sport directly tends to fail hard (see: DoW2). You need the game itself, the campaign especially, and the casual multiplayer, to be engaging and draw people in. You need the game to be popular on its own, and if it is, you can build e-sports on top of it.
>>1762244We're in 2024, grandpa.
>>1762432By that logic you can disregard 80% of the list
>>1762448Exactly.
>>17545120 AD should be almost deadAlso this list is shit, games are at the wrong places.
>>1754512>What else do I miss?You forgot to kill yourself, you worthless retard. Fucking pointless thread.
>>1754866>rise of leIn this, you are my brother.
>>1754866God, I miss RoNRoL. I'm a complete shitter when it comes to skill, but that game was fun.
>>1754512>no The Protectors>no Warlords Battlecryjesus casual
>>1763085Such a great soundtrack. I just wish they really went balls in the Vince vs Alin maingame only with the Cuotl as its own expansion so the faction could have had more time in the oven.
>>1754512>Men of War series>Faces of War as a separate entry>no mention of CtA and GoHLooks like a shitty list. Not having Majesty (1/2) is also a pretty shitty decision.And since you're not differentiating between RTS and RTT, where's World in Conflict?
>>1763818I dunno about that, I love Vinci, I find Cuotls really interesting, but I don't care for Alins.Most of my games are Vincis vs Vincis, with some Vincis vs Cuotls.
>>1754975It has not been superseded by steel divison 2?
>>1763748Is it worth playing the original Warlords games?
>>1762335>StarCraft had dogshit gameplayI love how zoomers hyperbolize everything through the lens of current day and age. Yeah people complained about moving dragoons down the ramp, but the only alternative at the time was tiberian sun with its own lack of QoL features
>>1766767What did Tiberian Sun lack in terms of QoL features that made StarCraft a clear upgrade by comparison? I recall the unit responsiveness and pathfinding to be much better in C&C in general.
>>1766777You could only queue up 5 units in total in TibSun. Granted it's much better than single unit production of TD/RA1. In SC by comparison a single building could queue up more units and each building had a separate queue anyway.
how the fuck do I rotate my camera in Empire Earth
>>1767451nvm its F2
>>1766767Imagine calling anyone a zoomer when it's clear you weren't even born back then. StarCraft was, in mechanical terms, not just a step down from Total Annihilation but an entire flight of stairs.
>>1767090In SC queue per building is 5, you need to click on them individually and you pay upfront making balancing it more of a hassle so I think it evens out. Sure, you can have more units queued at once compared to tibsun but it's more clicks overall compared to the signature sidebar system where you can always see what is being produced, add units from anywhere and in advance even if you don't have resources. In c&c units also generally build relatively fast to your income so saturating production lines is less likely to be an issue overall.
>>1764274No steel division sucks
>>1754512when are we getting a new settlers game???
