Need a new RTS!

Looking for a new RTS to play. I'm looking for a "sword and shield/fantasy" game.

I own/played and didn't like the following:
-Stronghold series

-AOE series

-Total war series

-Warcraft 3

You didn't like Total War or AOE? :o May God have mercy on your soul!

Try something like SupCom or Company of Heroes.

You didn't like Total War or AOE? :o May God have mercy on your soul!

Try something like SupCom or Company of Heroes.

bangell99

I'll quote it here because you missed it:

Looking for a new RTS to play. I'm looking for a "sword and shield/fantasy" game.

xfootballx

• Warcraft 3 Battlechest
• Rise of Nations: Rise of Legends
• Age of Mythology
• Demigod
• Black and White 2

You didn't like Total War or AOE? :o May God have mercy on your soul!

Try something like SupCom or Company of Heroes.

bangell99

[QUOTE="bangell99"]

I'll quote it here because you missed it:

[QUOTE="xfootballx"]

Looking for a new RTS to play. I'm looking for a "sword and shield/fantasy" game.

Ein-7919

• Warcraft 3 Battlechest
• Rise of Nations: Rise of Legends
• Age of Mythology
• Demigod
• Black and White 2

I own/played and didn't like the following:
-Stronghold series

-AOE series

-Total war series

-Warcraft 3

xfootballx

lords of realm 2 & 3

lords of magic

[QUOTE="Ein-7919"]

I'll quote it here because you missed it: [QUOTE="xfootballx"]

I own/played and didn't like the following:
-Stronghold series

-AOE series

-Total war series

-Warcraft 3manningbowl135

Sorry. Just wanted to make a smart*** comment.

Nah, I didn't miss it...but I didn't say Warcraft 3, I said "Warcraft 3 Battlechest" (if the OP has Warcraft 3, he/she said nothing about Frozen Throne). Plus, since Warcraft 3 is the epitome of sword and shield/fantasy, I figured it bore reiteration.

EDIT - plus, fixed your quoting errors

I'd recommend Battle for Middle Earth 2. However if you open up to Sci-Fi, Dawn of War + expansions and Dawn of War 2 are great games.

Armies of Exigo? I played the demo when it came out like 6 years ago (i don't know the actual time) and it was meh, but considering how you didn't like any of the games i like then you may like it. Or you could try out Age of Mythology. Made by the team of AOE, but it feels extremely different (at least to me it did).

Black and White 2 is one of the best RTS's I have ever played... You play as a God and can do pretty much whatever you want... you can make massive cities that are very wonderful and convince people to migrate from the enemy cities as a peaceful route, or you could make massive armies and simply invade enemy cities... or anything in between (neutral with nice cities and big armies which is what I do most of the time)...

Ein, stop trying to save face. Its obvious if someone mentions Warcraft 3, the exp pack is included. Just next time actually read the whole post before trying to sound smart.Begemott

No...when somebody mentions Warcraft 3, unless it's expressly stated, they mean just that: Warcraft 3. When somebody says that they play WoW, do you instantly assume they mean Burning Crusade or Wraft of the Lich King? Or how about The Sims? Does that mean Sims 1 or 2? How about expansions? No. In fact you do NOT know what they mean and can only go by what people write. Assumptions are dangerous. Which is why I take things as they are written. If the OP says Warcraft 3 (no modifiers), then I am going to go with the safe side and interpret that as vanilla Warcraft 3 (i.e. Reign of Chaos).

[QUOTE="manningbowl135"]

[QUOTE="Ein-7919"]

Ein-7919

Sorry. Just wanted to make a smart*** comment.

Nah, I didn't miss it...but I didn't say Warcraft 3, I said "Warcraft 3 Battlechest" (if the OP has Warcraft 3, he/she said nothing about Frozen Throne). Plus, since Warcraft 3 is the epitome of sword and shield/fantasy, I figured it bore reiteration.

EDIT - plus, fixed your quoting errors

Just thought of a couple more games you could try out (if you can find them).

• Dungeons and Dragons: Dragonshard
• Battle Realms + Winter of the Wolf

I'll break this one down into two parts:

No Ein, no. Warcraft is an old game, when people refer to it --"Warcraft 3" -- they mean RoC and TFT, otherwise they would say WC3 RoC. I'll tell you again -- just stop, and next time read the post.

Begemott

Age of the game shouldn't even enter the picture. Let me ask you this: if you were to join into a discussion labeled "Favorite missions of Warcraft 3," would you jump in and talk about what happens at the end of Frozen Throne? I sure wouldn't, and for two reasons: 1) the last discussion I entered on this subject ruined the ending of TFT for me. And before you bring up the age of the game, this happened to me just before Burning Crusade came out. So, no...absolutely NOT. Assumptions should NOT be made in spite of the age of a title. Shoot, to this day I absolutely refuseto go into any discussion of the Longest Journey or Grim Fandango because I'm still playing them and have yet to finish either game. And reason 2) my very first postin that thread would be for a clarification on whether it is Reign of Chaos or Frozen Throne that the discussion is about.

As for the name "Warcraft 3," the title can imply EITHER Reign of Chaos OR Frozen Throne. It does NOT mean Reign of Chaos AND Frozen Throne. Are you seeing the ambiguityhere?

Which brings me to the point of, EVEN if by some chance you're actually that 'silly', then he stated that Warcraft 3 didnt interest him. So even if he only played RoC, he's not going to be interested in more of the same.Begemott

The OP clearly stated that he/she "owned/played and did not like"...to break it down (which the OP did in the fifthpost) the OP owns or has played and did not like the games listed. Again, the slash does not mean "and." So, going by what was stated, the OP owned andplayed Warcraft 3...nothing was said on whether he/she liked or disliked the game.

Do you want to back down now, or do you want to continue hijacking this thread?

If you have Windows XP, you should go old school and get Warlords Battlecry II.

It was game of the year when it came out, and I still find it fun (even after playing Age of Empire, Warcraft, Warhammer, and Company of Heroes). It is a cross between an RTS and RPG. You customize and upgrade a hero which gets XP per kill/battle. The RPG aspect is very in depht.

The RTS area of the game is great. This is a fantasy+sword and shield game with humans, undead, high elves, dark elves, dwarves, barbarians, daemons, and more!

If you have Windows XP, you should go old school and get Warlords Battlecry II.

It was game of the year when it came out, and I still find it fun (even after playing Age of Empire, Warcraft, Warhammer, and Company of Heroes). It is a cross between an RTS and RPG. You customize and upgrade a hero which gets XP per kill/battle. The RPG aspect is very in depht.

The RTS area of the game is great. This is a fantasy+sword and shield game with humans, undead, high elves, dark elves, dwarves, barbarians, daemons, and more!

xialon

What? Your second paragraph is nonsense. Discussions of game's mission? What does that have anything to do with? "And before you bring up the age of the game, this happened to me just before Burning Crusade came out. So, no...absolutely NOT. " What happened to you before BC? Seriously stop writing gibberish.

And no, Warcraft 3 means BOTH -- TFT and RoC. You even contradicted yourself at the beginning when you entered "Fav Missions of Warcraft 3" thread and people talked about TFT in there. *YOU* need clarifications, but anyone who actually played WC3 knows that the name [Warcraft 3] now-a-days stands for both vanilla and exp pack.

And don't accuse me of hijacking the thread when you derailed off topic to talk about how you don't want to discuss game story, especially in Longenst Journey and Grim Fandango. (What does have to do with ANYTHING?)Begemott

I have had enough of your derailing this thread (even if our discussion continually bumps this thread up to the top of the page) and am instead going to take all further responses into PMs. As a courtesy to others, I suggest that if you have any more gripes with ANYTHING that anybody else writes here, you do likewise.

LOTR Battle for middle earth (1 is much better than 2), Cossacks ain't bad and i doubt you've played it.... Europa Universalis 3 may be worth a look but i reccomend you try the demo firstmarkop2003

On the contrary, I think 2 is better than one. What with more units, more variation in units, and different races. Not to mention you can build whereever you want and are not confined.

I have to add that not liking the Total War series and AOE makes it very suspicious whether you should be playing this genre at all. I respect your opinion and to each their own, but you are talking about the best games in the genre. I will have to admit that it took me a little time to warm up to Total War due to the learning curve - I was kinda just getting into the genre (now my favorite) at the time - but once warm it grew hot very quickly.

Anywho, I agree that Battle for Middle Earth (both are very good) may be up your alley. The building/maintenance aspect is easier that AOE with somewhat similar combat despite the magic aspects. Unfortunately, I have not been able to get it to run on my vista machine.

Another series you might enjoy is Dawn of War 1 (and all expansions). It's futuristic fantasy warefare, but it's extremely good and addicting. Age of Mythology is another obvious choice. However, it's the same maker as AOE. Yet you have the added fantasy aspect and maybe just a slighty toned down building maintenance. It's several years old now but the graphics were so spectacular that it holds up well today.

Not exactly an RTS, but with some strategic elements, is an indie game called Mount & Blade. It's a sandbox RPG with the best and most realistic medieval combat I've seen. It's swords and shields (and bows) galore. I highly recommend it.

[QUOTE="markop2003"]LOTR Battle for middle earth (1 is much better than 2), Cossacks ain't bad and i doubt you've played it.... Europa Universalis 3 may be worth a look but i reccomend you try the demo firstshakmaster13

On the contrary, I think 2 is better than one. What with more units, more variation in units, and different races. Not to mention you can build whereever you want and are not confined.

Company of Heroes: Gold Edition /end threadgamerguy845

[QUOTE="bangell99"]

You didn't like Total War or AOE? :o May God have mercy on your soul!

Try something like SupCom or Company of Heroes.

Ein-7919

I'll quote it here because you missed it:

Looking for a new RTS to play. I'm looking for a "sword and shield/fantasy" game.

xfootballx

• Warcraft 3 Battlechest
• Rise of Nations: Rise of Legends
• Age of Mythology
• Demigod
• Black and White 2

Dragonshard is actually a pretty decent game. Good luck finding it now though. There's also Spellforce 2.... it's pretty limp IMO, but someone might like it.

The most bizzarely fun game I've ever randomly stumbled across was Heroes of Annihilated Empires. It's a bad game, but there's still something maddeningly appealing about it. It works for some reason, just stay away from the campaign. Cossacks is the same developers, it's the same engine, but a vastly different game.

DoW 2 isn't worth the time (EPIC FAIL RELIC). No one really plays it. You're better off with CoH or the first DoW. The LOTR games are EA crap at it's finest, avoid if you actually like RTS or LOTR.

Universe at War is actually solid, if a little dry. ...No one plays online though so you'd be stuck with skirmish.

Red Alert 3.... This is the only EA RTS that doesn't suck monkey ball juice through a monkey flesh straw. It offersstandard unit counter gameplay, it's fast-paced, and is simple enough for any RTS player to grasp and play reasonably well.