RTS vs. turn-based strategy

Which do you prefer and why?

RTS - competitive
turn-based - casual

>Prefer
user I love my AOE just as much as I love my HoMM.

I've never seen Warlords Battlecry 1. Jesus. I prefer rts.

bull shit, turn based has much more depth.

Whichever is the better game.
Though I generally prefer my RTS to wrk with formations, facing etc. instead of single guys.

Is there any turn based strategy with a competitive multiplayer scene? I've played civ and paradox games and it usually ends up as just abusing the retarded ai after a few hours. Until then I'll stick with RTS.

I feel like that is comparing apples to oranges.

They are different.

TBS is like chess where you can take your time to micro-manage everything and make the best decision possible, this allows TBS games to add increible amounts of depth and detail which is fun but most are not very engaging when it comes to competitive multiplayer, it adds stuff like time restrictions in which case you're better off playing RTS anyway, that's why there isn't much of a TBS competitive scene to speak of.

RTS forces you to take decisions constantly in different places against the clock with whatever information you can gather, which is great and engaging for competitive play but doesn't allow for very much depth because it would be overwhelming.

depends

RTS is the more autistic of the two though

RTS is how fast you can click. Turn based actually requires thought.

>RTS vs TBS
>Which do you prefer and why?
I prefer turn based tactics, fuck your shitty non-genres.

mote def TBS, i can enjoy some good RTS game. SC, DOW.

But you just can not compare the flexibility on gameplay and tactic depth, that a good TBS can offer.

No, RTS requires both. If you can't make your decisions faster than the other guy you lose.

RTS. I have tried getting into the TBS genre and just cannot do it. The controls are wonky, the units frustrating, and I have no idea what I am supposed to do. Empire just is so tedious in comparison to Age of Empires. Civilization 1 was more complex, sure, but it felt boring and still very clunky. Maybe my problem is that every significant TBS game was on the DOS.

>JA2
>tactical depth
don't make me laugh

I prefer any strategy that doesn't turn into a mess of micro, because micro is fucking ass.

For RTS that's basebuilding. The only at least somewhat fun RTS with basebuilding are CnC games. Otherwise give me something like DoW2 or World in Conflict.

For TBS, HoMM on maps with 4-6 players and no more than 14 cities is really good.

What if i make the right decisions?

no, most of the time turn-based games only give the illusion of depth and are actually pretty casual

tfw tbs is dead

I like them both tbqhf

That's a moronic comparison, yeah if they other guy goes full retard of course he loses.

There is small-ish community around HoMM3, but god the competitive meta in this game is so min-maxy that it's ridiculous how much it differs from the way one would play it casually.

>min-maxy
it's called playing effectively, that's what strategy games are actually about

>remove 90% of the roster
>restricted to playing in this specific way

Playing effectively sure sounds fun.

then it's the games fault for being an unbalanced game

>implying any turn based game can be truly balanced

It is because you're playing to win against other people playing to win so you do this thing called strategies and "making a plan"

...

I know, but some of the ways in which it needs to be efficient is kind of dumb. Basically the whole meta is around logistics and making supply chains of 1-turn-reach heroes and juggling the doom stack and defence artifacts from one end of the map to another, which eliminates pretty much any enjoyment from the game that is about making the best hero that you get attached to

Which one does Total War come under?

It's been a while but I did prefer HoMM 5 multiplayer. It that was a blast especially how rather closely balanced the factions were and the battles themselves felt more diverse. I still believe that game had more strategy and tactics involved compared to its predecessors, just the cartoony graphics sucked ass.

I like Total War

bad

It's kind of a hybrid but honestly most of the decisions in the campaign are made on the map, so I'd put it under TBS.

If you're good with the management on the campaign map, you'll have no problems steamrolling the tactical battles, which have like 2 or 3 real mechanics that you need to learn.

hybrid
depends on what iteration in the series you're talking about. I'd say 4/5 TW games are bad and the 5th is a gem

I'd say after the first couple you're into inexcusable rehash territory

Is the blitzkrieg serie any good?
What would be the best game in the serie to start with?

Turn based has always bored me.

RTS - dead
TBS - not dead

As the rare unicorn on Sup Forums who actually plays video games, the choice is more than obvious.

Medieval 1, Medieval 2, Shogun 2, Warhammer, Empire/Napoleon (I have no idea which is better) are all fairly divergent in the campaign play
Battle-map has always been the same though

Wait, since when has TBS been not dead and RTS been dead? What is Starcraft II?

a dead game?

literally the opposite for me
>casual
turtling in RTS, creating massive armies and performing sieges
>competitive
Chess

although I never got into HOMM so I guess i've never experienced true comfy TBS

Starcraft 2 is like a 9 year old games

Since when?!? Even the original Starcraft is still heavily popular. Next you will say Age of Empires still doesn't have thousands of players.

No? It just came out last year, I haven't had the time to play it yet so I know it can't be too old, or are you saying it is for 9 year olds?

Besides a few established games (that were out for 7 or more years), the genre is completely dead though. Just look at Grey Goo, for example. It's completely stomped by the Dotalikes now.

depending on the mood at the time desu

Grey Goo? Dotalikes? Okay, you lost me. That is why I said Starcraft II. I would rather it be AoE, but I acknowledge AoE is a bit older.

>man i sure do miss RTS
>it was a great genre that i love
>why dont they make em anymore

And then when an RTS comes out nobody buys or plays it. And when it dies, people go back to complaining.
Its cool to talk about how much you love RTS, but its apparently not cool to buy and play RTS.

Pls respond

>Wait, since when has TBS been not dead and RTS been dead? What is Starcraft II?

Starcraft 2 is an ancient game that is quickly losing popularity and even at its peak had nothing on TBS staples like XCom, Civilization...
TBS is not dead with franchises like Master of Orion, Age of Wonders, and others getting new games. It also produces new successful IPs like Endless Legends, Endless Space, Banner Saga,...

RTS hasn't released a popular game since 20 fucking 10 and the last original IP to take hold was what, Company of Heroes from 2006?

>And then when an RTS comes out nobody buys or plays it.

People are dumb as hell. News at eleven.

People talk about missing the old games but that is bull. They won't play these same games with a different skin.

You either make an original game that brings something new with it (viz Wargame) or you're dead in the water and simply digging your own grave.

Have fun explaining that to the nostalgiafaggotry-ridden Sup Forums or internet in general.

Starcraft 2? Ancient? Really, now you are just exaggerating. Plus games made in 2006 are still extremely new. Civilization was rather boring in my opinion, I rather play Age of Empires, Rise of Nations, or Empire Earth any day.

Both have problems, both are good. Turn based is more strategic. Rts is more about micromanagement.

>RTS
More dynamic, action packed, and active. Require fast-thinking and adaptability to what your enemies are throwing at you.

>Turn-Based
It's kinda like chess. You need to plan your moves more carefully than in a RTS. Also turn-based games are even deeper and complex than most RTS games.

Both are fun in their own ways.

>cossacks 3

Shut the fuck up. That was such a blatant, despicable cash grab. It's *literally* exactly the same game as the original. They were even autistic enough to re-use all of the original art assets, turning sprites in to 3D models. The buildings are completely identical. It doesn't get a pass just for being an RTS; it's a remaster and i'm not going to spend money on something i've already owned for over a decade.

I want GSC to die. I want Sergey to crash his Ferrari in to his Lamborghini and finally stop harming the industry. STALKER 2 died for this stupid fucking cash grab and I am SO MAD.

those tbs games are certainly not popular if starcraft 2 is below your baseline for popularity

and tbs games lose popularity much faster than rts games due to lack of multiplayer

This was entirely by design and it was advertised.
Its Cossacks for modern operating systems and widescreen monitors, with Steam multiplayer.

thats called following the meta you picked off from some russian mathematical genius who calculated the most efficient unit composition in it's decimals and everyone else doing the same fucking thing

You can really balance the game around that, because youll either end up with rock paper scissors or everyone being rock trying to outrock other rocks

cant*

>those tbs games are certainly not popular if starcraft 2 is below your baseline for popularity

You're delusional.
Civilization 5 or 6 both absolutely stomp Starcraft 2 into ground. Civilization is a cultural icon, even my 60+ year old uncle knows and plays these games.

>Plus games made in 2006 are still extremely new.
Jesus almighty. Get a grip, man!
11 years is a fuckhuge amount of time. It's how much time passed between Quake 1 and Crysis.

Entente WWI version when?

balancing a game around the most effective playstyle is the ONLY way to balance a game, you can't just act like its ungentlemanly and ignore it

There are plenty of recent good TBSs, even bad ones like Civ VI/BE are good to some degree

>It's *literally* exactly the same game as the original
sounds fucking great

Well, this explains why I am sorely underrepresented here. Yet /vr/ focuses on really old stuff. Where am I represented?

This looks like the right place to ask. Are there any TBS games that play like tabletop wargames?

it boggles my mind how people can spend so much time painting minatures when the end result is a competely unaesthetic clusterfuck like this picture

Where THE FUCK can I download this, tpb has a single file with a single seeder and everyone complaining in the comments.

Warmachine: Tactics and Mordheim: City of the Damned are almost direct copies of the games they're based on.
Provided, it is usually a minus because video games and tabletop games are two completely separate kinds of entertainment that both require different approaches.
Then there's the TT Simulator which has just about every wargame under the sun.

RTS = less depth, but you have to perform in realtime so it requires more skill. Hardcore gamers only.

TBS = more depth, but you have virtually infinite time to think and decide each move so it requires no skill. Casual shit.

>Casual shit.

Okay, XxXinternettoughguy1999XxX

Which one do you prefer?

It's more of a problem because everyone wants new Starcraft 2. At some point the entire genre got perverted.

To be fair user, chess is pretty casual. it only has 6 different characters and even a child can learn the rules in a few minutes. Just because Chess has been around for hundreds of years doesn't somehow make it any less casual, it just makes a very known and traditional game.

Be case it is a remake of the original? What they shouldn't have done is numbered it as the third game.

Warmachine feels like Chaos Gate. But instead of Grimdark 41st (now 42nd) Millennium, we have Full-Metal Fantasy that is at the very beginning of a industrial revolution.

nobody buys and plays them because all the new RTS games that come out are fucking shit
More of the same isn't good enough

Always liked the meso-american fortress, even though it doesn't look like a fortress at all.

>They were even autistic enough to re-use all of the original art assets
one quick look at the screenshot you posted makes it clear you have no idea what you're talking about

>Warmachine: Tactics

how is it? from what I remember it got bundled real quick.

Its on steam for like $2 but will seriously only work with ancient computers. Spent hours to try to get it to work on my main PC, no luck. Tried installing XP on an older laptop, didn't work. Fired up fucking old POS dell with XP and ancient garbage GPU - runs like a dream.

>God Tier
Middle Eastern

>Top Tier
Central European
Western European

>Mid Tier
Far Eastern
Eastern European
Mediterranean

>Low Tier
Mesopotamian

>We Wuz Tier
African

>a sequel which is like the original

WHAT A CONCEPT

PEOPLE WANT MORE BUT BETTER

What would you say is an enjoyable rts/4x/turn based game that is fun in and the multiplayer scene doesnt requiere you to min/max or cheese to win?

What game would you say has open and flexible strategies mid game?

i could not get into homm because the first few turns make or break your game and losing and early skirmish can cost you the game. Same thing with vase building rtses, if you dont follow the very strict build order, you might as well not even play

>dat feel when real-time tactics lie forgotten

>I play chess I'm so mature and intelligent xD

Wine on Linux is actually kind of a good way to go about playing these kinds of older games, because somehow it emulates the old WinAPI better than Windows does. Not sure how this thing runs on it, but tons of really old games run on it without any problems

No dude, it came out in 2009 or so.

Actually, I prefer it when the sequel takes a complete 180 and feels like a totally different game.

>Civilization 5 or 6 both absolutely stomp Starcraft 2 into ground
there are currently ~20k people on na starcraft 2. civ 6 peaks at ~20k a day and civ 5 peaks at ~30k a day globally. i don't doubt civ is more popular, but it isn't a stomp

I prefer TBS but still play RTS with friends.

Turn based. It's more about problem solving, while RTS is more about being able to juggle many things at once very fast.

most people disagree

2009 doesn't feel that far to me. Honestly all your recent stuff feels the same.

Everyone calls RTS they don't like RTT today when they never played Ground Control

As a guy that hates basebuilding, but loved tactics in RTSes (World in Conflict was my jam when it came out), I fucking loved DoW2 much more than I could ever enjoy DoW1

>most

Loudest will