1. Rise of Nations - The best rts that has come out, in my opinion. So much depth on so many levels. If theres any reason to complain, its that the micro can become a little overwhelming late-game. Still, I think this game is the most well-put together rts that has ever been released. 2. Dawn of War - Very groundbreaking, I think. Paved the way for modern rts games. CoH was a further evolution, and DoW2 a refinement of that (though with arguably less depth). Too bad the campaign wasn'
cpugeek13
I've played a few games online of Sins and many games offline vs computer, but I find that I spend more time managing the more strategic elements of my empire than the tactics in battles. The AI seems to handle it decently, but I still have the feeling that I should be babysitting my ships more. But I don't want one battle to distract me from other empire responsibilities. I know it should be a balancing act, but I'm wondering how much you micro your ships in battle? Also, if you could explai
Hi, I just bought this excellent game a week ago and am having a lot fun with it. There are some things that concern me though. From what I've been reading, this game often turns into a spamfest with carriers and strike craft. I've also read that several ships are just plain useless. So many people have praised this game highly, but with such stark gameplay imbalances is it really that well put together? Maybe I'm just too used to playing rock, paper, scissors rts games with hard counters, th
So i just sold spore and i'm looking into getting a game with more depth that will run on my laptop. I played a considerable amount of the Sins demo this summer and was considering getting it, but several people have tried to convince me to get Civilization 4 instead. Right now, i'm slightly leaning more towards Civ4 but i was wondering if you guys could tell me why Sins might be a better purchase. I'm especially concerned with balance and replayability. And, please don't tell me to just play