RTSes with good naval combat?
>>1733042nope
Nappy and Empire TW
ta
>>1733042Supreme Commander
What does naval RTS combat even mean?Is it regular unit gameplay BUT on a blue field?Is it the extreme logistics of moving vessels thousands of miles?Is it the borderline guesswork of firing at enemy vessels dozens of miles away?What is it?
>>1733080Glue all units of a battalion together and make some into easy targets to wipe out a unit. Control scheme where the direction your units face impacts which directions they can move in, and where much of the game is spent trying to avoid hits by the enemy's artillery.
>>1733078Seconded, each ship fits a role and requires you to build a mix of ships just like irl. Ranging from short range frigates to giant battleships to submarines
Red Alert 3, yeah you heard me! For all its faults it does a phenomenal job in meshing land and naval combat together.
>>1733042Empire total war
>>1733149>mix of ships just like irlMan o' war spam go brrrrrDestroyer+CV go brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
>>1733164this, but unironicallygod I still have flashbacks from terror drones infecting battleships and slowly tearing them from inside outfor such a silly goofy game ra3 had some damn good ways to counter mono armies
>>1733042>ctrl+f rtw>0 resultsDisappointing desu.Rule the Waves 3 is the quintessential RTS if you want naval combat. Including the appropriate amount of autism.
>>1733042Submarine Titans
Aoe 3
>>1733042Man of War II if it wasn't so ancient and had better graphics, better controls and better AI. But apart from that it's great!
>>1733042
Naval play in RTS is the worst. You get to compete over featureless puddles, you have to painstakingly ferry your units across, the balance is always off with navy being too strong or land units that can sink vessels with ease, and all it takes to invalidate those units is moving away from the shore.>>1733395Good one, lmao.
>>1733042Naval warfare was always irrelevant
>>1733207Rule the Waves is real time tactics, not RTS.
>>1733042How about RTS with worst naval combat, I nominate Stormgate>Update frigate>No botes because we are incompetent blizzard devs>m-m-mods will fix it
>>1733516Meh so are all the rest mention in thus thread by that metric.
>>1733078this>>1733531supreme commander 2
>>1733617Yeah. You can't really have a full naval RTS unless it's something like that one submarine Starcraft clone.
>>1733674Submarine titans? that game was fun, too janky nowadays
>>1733674>>1733681ST devs also made Ancient Conquest which is another RTS where you only use navy units.
>>1733207the actual battles are by far the most boring part of the game though
>>1733042Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts
>>1733490Literally cockblocked Napoleon from having a good economy and helped him lose in the Peninsula war
>>1733837
>>1733047>>1733176Not an rts but yes I agree. It's a crying shame that CA never developed a full fledged age of sail game given for all the bad in empire, the naval bits were actually great.
>>1733837Anglo revisionism, no proof of this blatant propaganda piece
>>1733972May I interest you in the battle of Trafalgar, monsieur?
>>1733042War on the Sea
>>1733042Empire: Total War, Napoleon: Total War, and Ultimate Admiral: Age of Sail are all on Steam and will keep you busy for some time, although I prefer Empire between the two Total Wars for its naval combat (Napoleon gets into steamships and paddleships, which I have no interest in). Man of War and Man of War II: Chain of Command are good if you can find them, especially the second. You can get John Tiller's Age of Sail on Matrix Games with their Napoleonics pack. Age of Sail II: Privateer's Bounty is good if you can get it running, it's developed by the same people who made the Sea Dogs games. "Man of War: Grand Tactical Combat Under Sail, 1765-1815" by Simulations Canada from 1993 is an esoteric choice, as is Wooden Ships and Iron Men by Stanley Associates from 1996, but both are worth playing. I'm sure some of these don't count as RTSes but hopefully they scratch that naval itch.
>>1736033Wooden ships iron men was amazing, shame you really couldn't tackle anything larger than HMS Leopard and have a realistic chance of victory. Though that's realistic I suppose.
>>1734051No proof it ever happened, anglo (((historians))) making bs out of thin air as usual to make shows on the big black cock network
>>1733194>destroyer and CV and attack submarines, and strategic missile submarines, and and missile boats, and ASW corvettes, and ocean-going frigates, and auxiliary oilers, and amphibious assault ships, and missile cruisers, and missile cruisers being classed as destroyers, and helicopter carriers, and VTOL carriers, and VTOL carriers being classed as destroyers, and hospital ships, and
>>1733042World of Warships?
>>1733042Empire: Total War
>>1733042Very weird recommendation, but try Foxhole. It's not strategy, it's an MMO persistent war simulator with logistics, ships, and so on.You don't control any ships yourself, instead, you work as a steam to control ships.Do note that ships can be quite expensive, so you may have to ask around for a clan that has ships.Sometimes people just have public ships laying around, but even then you need friends.
>>1738148This person is a tranny trying to get you into their tranny cult.
>>1738162but enough about wardens
