I'm feeling like a new strategy game, and I can't decide between Imperial Glory, Knights of Honor, or Supreme Ruler 2010. I know, they're all on different subject matters--Napoleonic, Medieval, and Modern. But they all sound good, and I can only buy one for now. I just want to get a really good strategy game.
Here's some things I need to consider:
-I really like the grand strategic type of games with a lot of diplomacy.
-I like games where you can influence your neighboring countries rather than always having to conquer them.
-I like games with a variety of victory conditions.
-I like games with a lot of depth and that "one more turn" or "just need to try this" feeling.
-I like games that have so much strategic variety that you think about options you can take even when you're not actually playing the game.
Any advice? I'm pretty much equally on the fence with each one.
I cannot comment on IG or SR2010, but Knights of Honor clearly excells at your requirements of Grand Strategy with *lots* of diplomacy and large amounts of strategic variety as well as diplomatic influence. Victory conditions are either total conquest (unlikely, given the number of nations), Election (become one of the top 5 nations of hundreds and be voted in by the three not in the election) and a minor victory which involves the acquisition of 10 trade advantages (which in turn requires acquisition of scad-loads of trade goods, so that requires diplomacy or conquest). Hard to comment on "one more turn" since it is all realtime, and my limited experience so far shows that the early game involves a lot of 'hurry up and wait' while your economy gets going, but once you own several provinces, things start cooking.
I plan to keep an eye on IG, and SR2010 will need a lot more publicity on gameplay to get my interest.
Thank, Freyland.
Another question to add-->does anyone know if any of these games keep track of your scores (winning scores of each game played), kind of like the Civilization games did?
SR2010: Models everything including the kitchen sink. An interesting computer game experiment for those who thought Campaign for North Africa was an interesting board game experiment.
Knights of Honor: The first 3 hours of game play are great! Too bad it gets old before the next 3 hours are over.
Imperial Glory: I would advise against it based on the craptastic demo. Then again, I always advocate punishing publishers for releasing craptastic demos by not buying said games.
Jeff V wrote:SR2010: Models everything including the kitchen sink. An interesting computer game experiment for those who thought Campaign for North Africa was an interesting board game experiment.
Jeff V wrote:Imperial Glory: I would advise against it based on the craptastic demo. Then again, I always advocate punishing publishers for releasing craptastic demos by not buying said games.
Err.. Hmm.. I thought the demo was pretty good. I thought most people did if I recall.. Bards Tale, now that was a craptastic demo.
I am sitting here starring at three boxes one each for the games you mentioned... I bought them all.
I cant figure out which one to dive into. I kinda wnat to get cozy with a game for a long time, but between bouts of Laser squad nemisis and FATE I still havent even tried one of these out! (though the demo for SR2010 got me inerested)
Actually it's kind fo nice to have three good title to choose from.
I would like to point out that, while everyone is entitled to their opinion of course, and I normally listen to veteran reviewers with great anticipation, my reading of Jeff V's posts on this matter suggest he has taken almost an Inquisition-level distaste for this game. Take this as you may.
Personally, I would go for SR2010. Jeff is off his knocker with this one. All the depth you could ever hope for, with the addition of dedicated devs who will continue to support the game and manage to stay extremely active on the game's forums. It's rough around the edges, but I still like it.
Either way though, stay away from Imperial Glory. Craptastic all the way.
Either way though, stay away from Imperial Glory. Craptastic all the way.
Wow. I couldn't disagree more. Sure the real-time battles have a lot of problems (which will hopefully be moded or patched away), but the turn-based campaign is far better than that in the Total War series. (See my posts in the IG impressions thread).
For what you are looking for in a turn-based game, go with Imperial Glory.
I spent 90% of the money I made on women, booze, and drugs. The other 10% I just pissed away.
Samurai wrote:Personally, I would go for SR2010. Jeff is off his knocker with this one. All the depth you could ever hope for, with the addition of dedicated devs who will continue to support the game and manage to stay extremely active on the game's forums. It's rough around the edges, but I still like it.
Either way though, stay away from Imperial Glory. Craptastic all the way.
Huh, so you think I'm off-base suggesting it has a crushing amount of detail? Wow, they must have taken an awful lot out of it since the beta I played.
The beta was loaded with trivial details that could be tweaked but didn't really matter and were more of a distraction than anything. I thought the game lacked focus because of it. I guess they came to their senses and tightened the thing up. In the beta, you had to manage such things as healthcare budgets and unemployment tax rates.
I've been browsing through the 2010 forum and from reading http://www.bgforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=4200, I'm thinking I'll put SR 2010 on the backburner for now. The post says that the diplomacy is great on paper, but the AI is "passive and unresponsive" regarding diplomacy. If that's true, maybe I'll pass for now.
So--I'm looking at IG or KoH. Both look good. I like what tgb says about the turn-based part of IG, so I'm starting to lean more toward that.
Knights of Honor: The first 3 hours of game play are great! Too bad it gets old before the next 3 hours are over.
Jeff V, I was just re-reading through some of these posts, and this comment caught my eye. I'm curious--what do you mean by saying that it gets old? Can you elaborate a bit on that? Thanks!
Knights of Honor: The first 3 hours of game play are great! Too bad it gets old before the next 3 hours are over.
Jeff V, I was just re-reading through some of these posts, and this comment caught my eye. I'm curious--what do you mean by saying that it gets old? Can you elaborate a bit on that? Thanks!
Knights of Honor: The first 3 hours of game play are great! Too bad it gets old before the next 3 hours are over.
Jeff V, I was just re-reading through some of these posts, and this comment caught my eye. I'm curious--what do you mean by saying that it gets old? Can you elaborate a bit on that? Thanks!
You pretty much are limited to 9 knights, which effectively cap the resources you have to work with. After about 3 hours of play, you have reached this limit and extended these resources to the maximum territory they can effectively control. The next three hours are spent moving these resources around putting out fires as they crop up. You're growth is effectively halted by this time, you are just managing a slightly malleable empire. At about the 6 hour point, it dawns on you that this is all there is to the game, and the tedium sets in. The 8 hour mark is when I put it away for good.
Even un-modded, I feel Jeff V's opinion is missing the point: economy plays a huge role in this game, and should be the number one priority in your decisions, including military ones. Modded, which I have yet to try, increases this focus more so (assuming Glory of God mod, but there are others)
Bad Demographic wrote:Moving to Games in General (because it's discussion of multiple PC games).
Thats stupid. 3 games means it cant be discussed in the games by title!?!? even though the three titles are part of the thread? gimme a break, how bored were you whne you though that little gem up?
Samurai wrote:Personally, I would go for SR2010. Jeff is off his knocker with this one. All the depth you could ever hope for, with the addition of dedicated devs who will continue to support the game and manage to stay extremely active on the game's forums. It's rough around the edges, but I still like it.
Either way though, stay away from Imperial Glory. Craptastic all the way.
Huh, so you think I'm off-base suggesting it has a crushing amount of detail? Wow, they must have taken an awful lot out of it since the beta I played.
The beta was loaded with trivial details that could be tweaked but didn't really matter and were more of a distraction than anything. I thought the game lacked focus because of it. I guess they came to their senses and tightened the thing up. In the beta, you had to manage such things as healthcare budgets and unemployment tax rates.
Sorry, I misunderstood your post. Yeah the game is VERY VERY complex, though they have ministers that can handle many things for you now. I've played hours of the game without even looking at my social services screen, or worry about how much I'm putting into education. Cabinet members can do a lot for you in that game.
Darrell999 wrote:I've been browsing through the 2010 forum and from reading http://www.bgforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=4200, I'm thinking I'll put SR 2010 on the backburner for now. The post says that the diplomacy is great on paper, but the AI is "passive and unresponsive" regarding diplomacy. If that's true, maybe I'll pass for now.
So--I'm looking at IG or KoH. Both look good. I like what tgb says about the turn-based part of IG, so I'm starting to lean more toward that.
I completely agree with the assesment of SR2010's diplomacy. The model is sorely lacking. Hopefully the next patch will improve it, as the devs are promising. When its released I'll be sure to post here and let you guys know of any changes.
Jeff V wrote:SR2010: Models everything including the kitchen sink. An interesting computer game experiment for those who thought Campaign for North Africa was an interesting board game experiment.
Is that pasta I smell cooking?
Got a big laugh out of this. Many, many years ago I was a big boardgame player. I had just gotten married and moved into a two bedroom apartment. My wife knew of my hobby and was supportive, but I didn't know how much till I came home from work one day to find she had built me a ten foot by thirty inch table in our second bedroom so I could leave Campaign For North Africa set up all the time. It remained set up for over a year.
3 games means it cant be discussed in the games by title!?!? even though the three titles are part of the thread? gimme a break
Actually, I have to agree with that. These are three very specific titles, not a discussion about PC gaming in general. Not that it really matters, but on principle, PC gaming in General should be about PC gaming in general. When specific titles are discussed, they should go in the title forum, even if a few specific titles are discussed in the thread.
My opinion.
Anyway, I just picked up Imperial Glory--going to go back to it now to check it out!
3 games means it cant be discussed in the games by title!?!? even though the three titles are part of the thread? gimme a break
Actually, I have to agree with that. These are three very specific titles, not a discussion about PC gaming in general. Not that it really matters, but on principle, PC gaming in General should be about PC gaming in general. When specific titles are discussed, they should go in the title forum, even if a few specific titles are discussed in the thread.
My opinion.
Anyway, I just picked up Imperial Glory--going to go back to it now to check it out!
I mentioned this when this forum got started, but was not supported by the forum admins. It's just STUPID that threads get moved because of the numbers of things discussed in an article. One title is fine, but two is not? WTH?
Re: IG/KH/2010, KH does get boring unforutnately. You guys are persuading me to pick up IG today, <pocketbook sighs>. I have 2010 but am not playing it til the diplo gets fixed.
I haven't played the other two, search through the forum though and you'll see my review thread on Imperial Glory. My short take:
RTS combat is poor and vastly inferior to TW series.
Strategic Game is decent but vastly inferior to say, EU II.
To me it was a game that by trying to be everything wasn't very good at anything.
All the depth you could ever hope for, with the addition of dedicated devs who will continue to support the game and manage to stay extremely active on the game's forums. It's rough around the edges, but I still like it.
I was a big boardgame player. I had just gotten married and moved into a two bedroom apartment. My wife knew of my hobby and was supportive, but I didn't know how much till I came home from work one day to find she had built me a ten foot by thirty inch table in our second bedroom so I could leave Campaign For North Africa set up all the time. It remained set up for over a year.
