• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Recommend me a (recent) RTS!

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
I bought into CC3 after all the hype here. Game was boring and not very lifelike to me...just like Supreme Commander. Haven't gone back to either since. Games like that make me wish I could sell em off easily to get some money back.
 
SupCom is, unique.

Its clearly an awesome game, its just, somewhat difficult to unlock that awesome ness.

I'm no slouch in the RTS field, but every game I have played online using the auto match by ability do dad has seen me be absolutly annihilated, not beaten, not even beaten badly, I was just completely and utterly overmatched in every way possible.
So, either I'm so bad theres no one any where near my levels of uselessness, or the game cant assign by ability well.
So, that brings us to skirmish mode, where it would be hard to describe the computer AI as tactical, let alone strategic. If you blow up a building, it will rebuild it, in the same place, with the same defences, and once your nearby turret blows it up again, it will rebuild again, and again, and again. Unlike in TA, where the computer bases would expand as far as land mass and unit limits let them, SupCom seems to behave more like C&C, this is the spot for a base, and this is what a base contains.
There also seems to be a slowdown issue, Games with an AI get slow at 20 minutes and become all but unplayable at 40, this has been true with one AI on a 5km map and 7 AI's on a 40km map. Its not legitmate path finding, because after blowing up everything that can move, it doesnt correct itself, I suppose it could be trying to path find for dead things.

Which brings us to the campaign, which is a lot of fun.

Its a shame because the game is clearly brilliant, its just unclear how you can get to that brilliance.

You can pick up SupCom and FA for £20 now anyway, and its worth that just for the campaigns.
 
I quite like the DoW games, they're just a bit to fast paced for my liking, there also tends to be a disproportionate number of kids playing it, who, after sending everything they've got to claim one res point, call you a noob because you couldnt fight off the two other guys at once...
I've been off C&C since they went from RA2:YR, pickled awesomness, to Generals, which involved being America and building lot of tanks.
Sins is a games for windows, and I just am not buying one of them.
 
SC and FA have roughly 40-60 hours of Storyline game play easy. IMO its is nice.
Homeworld series... General all around can't beat it wish they'd make another
Sins of a Solar Empire: Yes no story line til the expansion gets released, then again if you play skrimishes alot, they have no story lines at all either. Great fun long games if need be.

C&C3: still lost the original C&C feel to it :(
World in Conflict: Not horrible, if you like Ground Control alot thats this one.

Not sure if power is an issue in the long term of such a flight but Sin's is pretty decent on the power. Not heavily graphic orientated yet not horrible CPU usage either. Seems quiet good in big fights even on slower systems.
SC is a power hog, if you don't have dual core and an nVidia card it will get choppy in longer games.
Homeworld is just like sim's older game definatly light on the power consumption and theres even some nice mods out there for it.

C&C3 is decent on power consumption. Below Supreme Commander surely but it still uses all the might of the power given.
World in Conflict is high on power usage as well. Pretty bad actually so its like SC, high Power usage.
 
Back