Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Beefeater1980
Sep 12, 2008

My God, it's full of Horatios!






Jossar posted:

This thread is bad as it makes me want to not actually play games, but instead just sit and write up descriptions of them.



Sid Meier's Gettysburg



Closest modern equivalent is the excellent Ultimate General: Gettysburg and its successor Ultimate General: Civil War. The former is a very deep multi-scenario remake of SMG. The latter takes that concept but extends it to the whole civil war, with a very slightly dynamic campaign. They are both tons of fun and pretty much unmissable if you liked SMG.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Beefeater1980
Sep 12, 2008

My God, it's full of Horatios!






Soul Reaver posted:

Can someone explain the appeal of the C&C series to me? Is it that multiplayer is particularly fun?

I've never been enamored of C&C in single player. The non-fighty bits are too slow, while fighty bits felt too fast (ie, units seem to be made of tissue paper) and too unit-spammy to me to actually rate as enjoyable. I liked the concept/setting (particularly Tiberian Sun) but never really seemed the enjoy the execution.

The only one in the series I actually liked was Red Alert 3 and that's largely because of how ridiculous a lot of it was and the sheer amount of ham on display in the cinematics. I literally only bought the game because of Tim Curry.

“Behind me, war-torn Bialystok...”

Beefeater1980
Sep 12, 2008

My God, it's full of Horatios!






Would legit love an updated Shadow of the Horned Rat, yes-yes.

Beefeater1980
Sep 12, 2008

My God, it's full of Horatios!






commando in tophat posted:

Hey folks. I'm making a lovely space RTS, something like a discount homeworld. And when I say "making", I mean I'm doing it alone with my own stupid engine, because I'm an idiot, and it is taking years. It is a hobby project and freeware. The game is very much unfinished (e.g. untextured ships, next to no sound), but if any of you would like to try it and give me some feedback (e.g. email, or in game form in esc menu), I would greatly appreciate it. Some new perspectives on this would help me a lot.

Here is a crappy video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtWffqyGW9w
And here is a crappy webpage https://www.soil-rts.com from where you can download it.

In short (longer version on webpage), you collect resources, take them to your base/mothership, build ships, fight other ships. Pretty standard stuff. Ships can lose turrets, engines, etc. There is something like 9 missions of which first three are more like a tutorial. Ships that you have at the end of mission are transferred to next mission (along with any damage and experience gained). I left saved games at the start of each mission for convenience (if missions are boring or problematic). The game is a bit slower paced, but can be run at 4x speed, if lovely performance allows

Sorry for spamming the thread! :unsmith:

1) this looks cool

2) I’m mentally appending “like a BOSS” to every sentence in the trailer

Beefeater1980
Sep 12, 2008

My God, it's full of Horatios!






Gewehr 43 posted:

I went ten or so pages back in the games forum and didn't see a dedicated thread, so I figure I'll ask here.

I've gotten hooked on Distant Worlds 2 this week and am really enjoying it after bouncing off it a couple times. Now that I get the mechanics of it, it's a really fun ride. What I'm struggling with right now is fleet automation. It seems no matter what I do - outside of setting a fleet to strictly manual control - they will blast off to the farthest corners of the galaxy for no real rhyme or reason.

For example, I build small defensive fleets to guard my colonies. I automated them with the "defend" command, set their home base to the desired system, and set them to remain in their own system on the tactics screen. Yet, when I look for them later, their home base is changed, they're guarding some mining dump in the middle of someone else's territory, and, best of all, they're out of gas.

So, short of setting them to manual control, is there a better way to handle small defensive fleets?

IIRC there are two or three levels at which you can apply the “guard this place” command (fleet setup, ship type?, somewhere else?) and if you don’t set them all to the same thing then there’s a chance the wrong one will apply.

Beefeater1980
Sep 12, 2008

My God, it's full of Horatios!






I had a lot of fun with The Great War. It’s not very deep for the reasons in the freshly released games thread, but the basic gameplay loop is tight and the visuals of mass charges into artillery and machine guns are spectacular.

The basic gameplay is the tactical map, which is where the game shines. You have 20 minutes to capture every enemy position (about 3-5 per map). Capturing a position means wiping out all enemies within range of it and getting your infantry there. If you capture less than all of the enemy positions, you can still win a “victory” but it won’t shift the front line. Also your troops regenerate in full between battles; all your casualties affect is the gold cost. So you basically need to go for broke every time.

Infantry in the open die to everything within 2-4 seconds. Only in trenches, or if anyone who could shoot them is actively being shelled by your artillery, are they safe from instadeath. So the basic sequence of play is you run a bunch of infantry up to just outside the enemy’s killing range, and then try to simultaneously (i) order enough of them to attack to overwhelm the closest trenches in melee; and (ii) drop artillery strikes on everyone who could fight back. Timing is crucial because as mentioned, 2-4 seconds in range but outside a trench and your dudes are dead.

If they make it into the trench and beat the defenders, the enemy will move all of its units that are in the same trench network to attack in the hopes of dislodging them. The only protection is that there is a max of 2 units of each side in the same trench segment at the same time. So you try to funnel in your guys to win the attrition battle, while never exposing any units to instadeath out in the open (ie you move just a couple of units at a time). It’s a very elegant push and pull balance and perfectly captures the essence of trench warfare. Since this is a fairly slow and involved process, and the time pressure is constantly on, it’s very hard to achieve a 100% victory without taking excess casualties.

You are limited by available supply, which is generated by the units you bring to the fight and which you spend to entrench and to summon units to the map. The supply you start with isn’t enough to mount an offensive so you really need to supplement from a global pool (which needs you to build a strategic map building in the hex you are attacking from).

The strategic section is much weaker. It is played turn based on a hex grid. The bit they get right is that you need multiple 100% victories to push the enemy back from a hex, and you and the enemy can redeploy any number of units anywhere on the map every turn. So it is really hard to get a sustainable advantage playing normally.

With efficient play you can absolutely break it over your knee though. On normal level I was able to win by turn 13 (august 1915) so, everyone home by Christmas second year. I did this by baiting the AI to surround a couple of big stacks of troops and attacking soft areas until their front was very thin, then attacking across the whole front until their morale collapsed. It still felt like an inelegant and wasteful victory and I’m curious if with better play there is a way to win by breaking through and capturing their HQ. I’m also curious to see if you can win more efficiently by going more on the defensive and then counterattacking.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Beefeater1980
Sep 12, 2008

My God, it's full of Horatios!






Kreuznach is five hexes from Luneville at game start and Paris is four from Laon. It is possible that a very patient player willing to intensively micro a whole-front attack every turn and careful enough with supply to do it without running out could create enough friction on the line to keep the 9-stacks pinned, and win through by using small stacks of exclusively elite troops on the attack. I found that on normal, French elite troops were highly capable in trench melee and regularly beat more than double their numbers in conscripts and nearly double their number of regulars.

I think the intended play is to push hard with your own 9-stacks, double up with care packages so you can attack again in the same turn, and focus defensive supply on wherever the enemy is attacking with its own 9-stacks.

The game does win a lot of points with me for making me think like Sir Douglas Haig though. Of *course* my own trenches on the attack are the lovely cheap ones, we’ll be attacking and most of the fighting will be in the enemy trenches! Of *course* it’s worth throwing another few brigades of men at that final redoubt in a desperate attempt to break through, because capturing it means the difference between capturing this hex or having it reset to fully guarded next turn.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply