I'm looking to play some of the best RTS games, and see how they approach certain ideas - base building, resources, game progression. I've already played: Warcraft II Dune II (& 2000) C&C & Red Alert Total Annihilation Z These are all a little old now so what else should I look at? I don't have an amazing PC (I have an 800MHz GF2 one and a 1.6GHz GF6200 one) though. I'm thinking that maybe Warcraft III and C&C:Generals might be a good idea, but what other games actually added something other than 3D to the RTS formula?

Try stronghold. I liked it although I hate RTSes

Play warhammer 40,000: Dawn of war.

The squad-based dynamic, and the reinforce-in-place mechanic really work well to keep the game flowing, and you start to care about units that are doing their job well, such as holding a line etc.

The way resources and base building work is also good.

Plus it's just a good, fun game, if a little short. :-/

Oh, the toolset for it is excellent too, for level editor ideas.

Quote:

Original post by _winterdyne_ Play warhammer 40,000: Dawn of war. The squad-based dynamic, and the reinforce-in-place mechanic really work well to keep the game flowing, and you start to care about units that are doing their job well, such as holding a line etc. The way resources and base building work is also good. Plus it's just a good, fun game, if a little short. :-/ Oh, the toolset for it is excellent too, for level editor ideas.

Does it matter I know nothing about Warhammer whatsoever apart from that some people paint little models of it?

you left out some really good titles...

warcraft 3 for one. it introduced the idea(or atleast to my knowledge) of the hero class character. definately worth checking out.

also starcraft, which was one of the most balanced RTS's ive ever played. give each of those a shot. you can find them for about $10-$20 now a days.

I hear that the original Command and Conquer is coming back out. Man that game was leathal!

I have quickly played Starcraft but didn't really like it. I seem to remember finding the artwork really depressing and drab; and thought it was just "Warcraft II in sci-fi". I take it this is innaccurate?

Quote:

Original post by d000hg I have quickly played Starcraft but didn't really like it. I seem to remember finding the artwork really depressing and drab; and thought it was just "Warcraft II in sci-fi". I take it this is innaccurate?

It's probably a fair enough take on the artwork, although I definately thought it was pretty enough for it's time, and still holds it's own. It is however a very good example of balance, containing 3 teams that actually have somewhat different play mechanics but are very well balanced.

Age of Empires II might also be worth a look, you should be able to pick up a copy pretty cheap these days. The gameplay is once again just a bit different, and the use of resources in the game is somewhat more complex than some of the others. The concept of progressing through different 'ages' was also a nice touch, especially when balanced against the option of spending those resources on units and potentially mounting an earlier attack instead.

I'd would definately recommend taking a look at Dark Reign, for one specific reason. This game allowed you to set up the behavior of your units very nicely by setting preferences for independence, damage tolerance, and some other option, and had a pretty robust waypoint system, which combined allowed you to get some very cool behaviors out of your units. Other than that it was nothing particularly special IMO. The sequel isn't really worth a look.

Check out the Ground Control serie. The first one is now legally downloadable for free which of course makes it extra interesting to get. :)
This serie doesn't make use of base-building, instead, it lets you select a group of units and equipment before the mission starts. In GC II this is extended with a points system, where you'll receive points depending on the area's under your control and the amount of units you already have, which you can spend during the mission to call in reinforcements.
There's some interesting concepts in these games, I recommend checking them out.


Years ago I played Warzone 2100. Nowadays its old and it's graphics don't really hold anymore, but it was a fun game to play, focussing heavily on ongoing research. I believe the total tech-tree runs into the thousands, but it's worked out well, I really enjoyed that aspect.
It also allows you to create your own vehicle designs by picking a body, a transport type and a weapon turret. You can really fit your army the way you want it. It has other interesting ideas as well, such as having a solid base throughout the campaign, which you expand over time. Some missions have you defend this base, others let you send units with a dropship to another location.
This game is also downloadable for free, as far as I know. It may give trouble with XP but there are solutions to that.

The idea of a base lasting over the course of several missions is one I've looked at before. In some ways it's be cool if each map took several days of gameplay - not just a huge battle but because as one scenario ends, something else crops up. The idea of a pretty big map where you end up with several bases is cool but obviously you'd have to take extensive steps to stop the player losing after 3 days and having to start again - one thought on this subject is that winning or losing a territory is not so black and white. Many games make you repeat a level until you beat it; but it would be better if once you've played a level you move to another - the outcome of preceding missions affecting the difficulty of later ones maybe.

Oh and the idea of customising units - is this seen as a gimmick (so it can be plastered on the box "Make your own unique units!") or is it ever actually useful? I particularly liked the 'levelling' upgrade system in Warcraft II as another way to make your units more interesting.