[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/vst/ - Video Games/Strategy


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: AOE.png (3.73 MB, 1804x2191)
3.73 MB
3.73 MB PNG
Am I asking for something impossible, /vst/?

I'm looking for a RTS that:
1.- Is based on WW2 or "modern" factions/units (90's or current day);
2.- Isn't Grand Strategy (yeah, I know about the Hearts of Iron series) or Squad based (I also know about the Company of Heroes games);
3.- It's fun to pick up and play, but it also has some depth (like C&C or AoE series).

The closest ones I know are Atari's Axis and Allies from 2006 and (ugh) C&C Generals from 2003), and both are on the sucky side of the RTS genre.

Anyone knows of a hidden gem with the characteristics I seek, or, like the proposed Age of Empires IV pictured, WW2 and current events are too controvertial to be adapted into a good RTS?
>>
>>1929547
I only know of Empire Earth I/II and >>1921109.
>>
>>1929547
Such kino pic, from the Bronze age to Space age warfare.
>>
>>1929565
Too bad AoEIV ended being up AoEII: Electric Boogaloo.
>>
>>1929555
I've played Empire Earth I and it was also kind of meh. How's Empires: Dawn of the Modern World?
>>
Wargame Red Dragon. Good fucking luck with the learning curve though
>>
>>1929573
>AoE4
>AKA We got AoE2 at home
>>
>>1929573
Honestly, there's no way to make a IV that would seamlessly work within the classic AoE formula.
>>
>>1929599
Why not? It would just be company of heroes without cover mechanics and with 5x as many units on screen.
>>
>>1929573
I listened to some faggot shill on this board and bought it expecting years of support. Fucking Relic went bankrupt right after and there hasn't been an update in almost 2 years now. Absolute faggotry.
>>
>>1929599
They coulda make a whole game from Napoleon through Victoria to WW1. The 19th century saw more shit progressing than the last 400 years combined. Franz Joseph I was raised by the generation that fought Napoleon and lived to see the end of WW1.
>>
File: file.jpg (847 KB, 1920x1080)
847 KB
847 KB JPG
>WW2 RTS
>not squad based
You're basically asking for a WW2 RTS with pre-modern set RTS mechanics. Those exist as WW2 mods for non-WW2 games and they look ridiculous.
>>
>>1929555
Doesn't have modern systems support.
>>
>>1929606
It wouldn't, because the games aren't even remotely similar, and you know how anal AoEfags get when you tinker too much with the core mechanics - see AoE3. And if you want to maintain the classic empire-building formula, there's a whole number of silly issues that are virtually unsolvable because of how modern economy and warfare are conducted.
>building a whole new empire from scratch in untamed wilderness, collecting berries, trees and gold, training troops right next to the battlezone
>rapid and dramatic progression in weapons and tactics in the 20th century, from cavalry charges and large scale human wave assaults to small expeditionary skirmishes - basically the opposite of what you do in AoE
>hardly any civs worthy of imperial status, and no parity between those that exist
>sore subject matter that's still fairly recent, plenty of butthurt
Ironically, making an AoE5 would be a piece of cake because it would be all sci-fi where anything goes.
>>
>>1929599
>I can't figure it out personally, so it's too hard for everyone and won't exist
>I have autism btw
>>
File: yeahtcqp2x951.png (1.13 MB, 800x600)
1.13 MB
1.13 MB PNG
>>1929547
Red Alert is based on the 1970s technology and some futurism in the later instalments.

Another VERY obscure rts is the Original War, it's basically a Cold War conflict with time travel. I'd say buy it if you're a campaign player.
>>
>>1929919
It will no longer be obscure once Sseth makes a video on it
>>
>>1929895
3 and 4 both completely depart from the 1 and 2 formula and both have players. Neither is a wild sucess by 1-2 standards, but it's not implausible for an aoe5 to be ww2 themed and at least as popular as 3 and 4.
>>
>>1929547
Honestly I had fun playing in the modern eras in Rise of Nations
>>
>>1929547
crazy how neglected the modern-ish era is in rts. youd think there'd be enough demand for someone to sate it beyond relic but no
>>
>>1929895
>build empire from scratch
>like china, Italy and perisa, the empires that famously pop into existence from the 5th century dark age onwards
retard
>>
>>1930403
It's not about the history it's about gathering berries manually and hunting.
How do you fit that with modern day? With cars and shit? Roads, planes, trains, not even remotely comparable to making chariots and knights moving through grass.
>>
>>1930477
Rise of Nations managed that well: besides your regular resources, more advanced ages require metal, knowledge and oil.
>>
>>1929547
this was a really roundabout way of saying "any good 1930s+ RTS without squads?"
>>
>>1930477
that's the point, dumb fuck. You can't fit that in AoE2 either. Most civilizations were already post-agriculture by AoE2. They would start with farm from age 1 if they wanted to be realistic.
>>
>>1930570
look bud, they need to include the african civs because uhhhh, so realism needs to flex.
>>
>>1929599
That's just Sudden Strike with base building
>>
>>1930403
Anon, the spirit of AoE has always been a combination of RTS and 4X, in which the gameplay is a seamless progress from a small settlement to a powerful empire: 1 started off with prehistoric tribesmen, 2 was about barbarian settlements, 3 had you found colonies in the New World. What new frontiers would you have in a proper AoE4?
And if you're going to cherrypick for civs that don't fit the gimmick or the timeline, you might as well complain about your average 4X rosters that pit Washington, Ghandi and Ramesses against each other.
>>
File: ww3blackgold.jpg (72 KB, 720x576)
72 KB
72 KB JPG
>>1930477
>How do you fit that with modern day?
maybe don't be an autistic retard who thinks AoE games are about collecting berries manually?
>>
>>1929895
I don't remember collecting berries in C&C.
Maybe, crazy idea I know, you don't *need* the sheep & berries in your AoE IV?
Nah, there is no way a game could change something. You need to like, change 0 & 1 in the code, a monumental task.
>>
>>1930691
The early economy aspect of AoE is present in 1, 2, 3, Mythology, Online and 4.
It is an integral part of what makes the franchise.
>>
>>1930762
I remember these same arguments happening after AoE IV was announced. I believed it was gonna be a middle ages setting because that's the most successful game in their franchise and most favorable to the game's mechanics. But a lot of retards thought it was actually gonna be a industrial-modern era game because of things like the promotion ad in OP's post, because middle ages are overdone, etc. They really thought there would be an game that works exactly like AoE II or III but where you spawn riflemen and tanks out of barracks buildings and send a dozen or so peasants to mine rare earth metals and oil (kek). Luckily everyone who isn't a retard knows this is a ridiculous premise. There's a reason all WW2 RTS games are squad based and exclude direct resource gathering, and any game that attempted this (RoN, Empire Earth, Empires: DotMW) were criticized for it.
>>
>>1930791
>, and any game that attempted this (RoN, Empire Earth, Empires: DotMW) were criticized for it.

is Rise of Nations not thought of fondly amongst the gamer folk? i havent played it in ages but remember loving compstomping in it with my older brother.
>>
>>1930798
Of course it is, but not past the industrial age.
>>
>>1930801
Nta but I loved playing with tanks, planes and modern infantry in it. My favourite units were the Russian Shock Infantry and the Volksgrenadiers
>>
>>1929547
>Atari's Axis and Allies
Don't remind me of that.
>>
>>1930570
>Most civilizations were already post-agriculture by AoE2
would you care to repeat that?
>>
>>1930607
>What new frontiers would you have in a proper AoE4?
SPACE
>>
>>1930477
Why can't they scavenge the environment for supplies, salvage abandoned vehicles, and cannibalize old machinery?
>>
>>1931167
Oh, like in Extreme Tactics?
>>
>>1931141
Being a bunch of hunter-gatherers by the timeframe of AoE2 is not realistic. Most civilizations relied on agriculture by then. It's a holdover from AoE1 having the first age literally being the stone age. Instead of shaping up the formula to let you have farm from age 1 in AoE2, they just reused the exact AoE1 formula. In other words, stop being autistic. The game isn't meant to be realistic. It abides by a formula no matter the era.
>>
>>1931225
>Being a bunch of hunter-gatherers by the timeframe of AoE2 is not realistic.
Indeed. But peasants doing that on the side? Totally.
Nobility had to put a lot of effort into preventing the populace from hunting "their" game to extinction, and plenty of ancient cooking recipe use shit you gather in the wood. It's perfectly realistic to have a small medieval army / budding colony to rely on hunting&gathering for their food need, at least until they get something more durable running.
>>
>>1929574
that game felt unfinished when I played it
>>
>>1931225
>Being a bunch of hunter-gatherers by the timeframe of AoE2 is not realistic.
It is believable if you look at a match as settlers starting out on a frontier. Just like AoE 3. This is believable because there were no industrial logistics back then.
But it cannot work in an industrialized war setting because logistics made local resource gathering obsolete.
Americans didn't land in Europe or SEAsia and then start mining ore and building factories to make more tanks. Their tanks were made in America with imported resources and then shipped over to distant front lines.
>>
>>1931679
yeah... remember when they paradropped multiple cattle wagons on town centers in the new world during the colonial era? All the way from yurop... so believable
>>
>>1932079
>paradropped
If you have to make shit up then you lost.
>>
>>1932825
sorry, teleported.
>>
>>1932827
Which simulates delivery just as a unit popping out of a barracks simulates training. Which would make no sense in a WW2 setting so thanks for supporting my point
>>
>>1932895
>Which simulates delivery
If you have to make shit up then you lost.
>>
>>1929547
>WW2 to modern RTS
Assuming you mean with base building.
Obviously Red Alert 2
Generals is amazing, fuck you
Act of War and Act of Aggression, I think they suck ass but you have shit taste so who knows, you might like them
Rise of Nations / Empire Earth / Empires dawn of the modern world if you start in modern times I guess, but that's missing more than half the game's content.

Base building and non-squad gameplay didn't really work with modern settings, that's why it's mostly RTT.
>>
>ctrl+f
>"warno"
>0 results
look up warno
>>
>>1933778
begone frenchman, I already bought your game twice.
>>
>>1933146
AoE3 devs made up the delivery from home city mechanic, not me.
>>
>>1934050
you are the one claiming it's believable and realistic, and reflecting lack of industrial logistics. You are also the one claiming AoE games can't work in an industralized war setting. You are a clown. You make shit up. You are wrong.
>>
I really wish 4 had a better launch than it did because the discourse around it is still dominated by people who played it for 2 hours on release and then never touched it again
>>
>>1934637
It still looks worse than 2DE.
>>
>>1934688
>muh gwaficks
Don’t care, it plays better than 2 does
>>
>>1934797
>it plays better than 2 does
so we're just telling lies now
>>
>>1934797
in what way?
>>
>>1934801
civs have more unique gameplay features.
>>
how is aoe2 better than aoe4?
hardmode:
-no old good new bad
-no contrarianism
>>
>>1937445
My favorite e-celeb said it is
>>
>>1937445
>Much cleaner graphical design
>Twitchy mechanics create higher skill ceiling
>Wide array of civs rewards system mastery over opposed to one-trick-pony specialisation
>More robust core mechanics allow for greater map variety. Gimmicky yet central mechanics of 4 prevent that
>>
>>1937451
>More robust core mechanics allow for greater map variety
such as?
>Much cleaner graphical design
I think it's clean in both cases, I've never found myself in a place where I don't know what's happening on the screen in either of them
>Twitchy mechanics create higher skill ceiling
do you mean meme shit like quick walling and boar/deer luring?
>>
>>1937464
>such as?
Megarandom maps with no gold, just relics, to give an extreme example. Maps like Goldrush just wouldn't be possible in 4 because "muh balance"
>>
>>1937445
Well its a nonstarter of a question because 2 and 4 don't play anything alike in practice. AoE2 is very chesslike. There's a core of near universal strategies that any civ has access to at any time. The focus of the game is on these strategies and the civs provide small but nuanced wrinkles to these strategies, as well as occasionally opening up a few more novel ones (usually with a unique unit or tech).

AoE4 is kind of an awkward middle between the truly out there (AoE3, AoM) and AoE2. Civ bonuses are so strong that each civ is pigeonholed into very specific strategies, but with few exceptions not unique *enough* to open up entirely new strategies outside of the AoE2 paradigm. You're still booming with town centers, you're still fast castling, you're still rushing archers in the feudal age. Its just that now instead of having access to every core strategy regardless of civ choice, now you reasonably have access to only a select few due to how the civs are designed and the matchups between them.

Its a shame to because there are a few things I really like about AoE4. I love that each civ has unique models for their units (something I wish AoE2 would do, even if only regionally), and I generally prefer the AoM and beyond way of handling age ups. Making decisions when you're aging up is fun, though I think Mythology is still the best interpretation of it. I also like the fact that MAA are actually allowed to be good and useful throughout the game outside of early rushes. But there are a ton of flaws to its gameplay and there's a reason its mainly filled with StarCraft 2 refugees (who wouldn't know a good game if it bit them in the ass) and not AoE2 players, and its not because old good new bad.
>>
>>1937464
>boar/deer luring
>meme shit
unironically git gud retard. Stormgate was made for you - an RTS stripped of fun mechanics, designed from the bottom-up to fulfill a theoretical perfection quota (which doesn't exist and leads to shit dead games nobody wants to play)
>>
>>1938173
>pushing the deer with your scour is a fun mechanic
>git gud retard
I prefer coh2 over your gookslop
>>
>>1929547
https://store.steampowered.com/app/2566700/The_Last_General/
>>
>>1944893
How many factions in-game?
>>
>>1929547
imagine a world where the aoe 4 and 5 in this picture actually existed
>>
>>1944954
It's a world where that one faggot who insist berries are the most crucial core mechanic of AoE got aborted.
We were so close...
>>
>>1944893
this is just warno, why do people keep making the same game?
>>
File: Warzone_2100_cover.png (132 KB, 286x347)
132 KB
132 KB PNG
ENTER

Act of War is another good modern RTS that goes very under the radar on /vst/. They don't match up to the classics but they both bring something unique to the table: Warzone has extensive unit customization and Act of War has a gritty vibe and tactical gameplay which makes it feel more real than say, C&C
>>
>>1945133
I love Warzone however
>has extensive unit customization
Technically true but 99% of the time the only decision is to use whatever new part you just unlocked because it's way fucking better than what you got previously.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.