Best RTS of All Time??

[QUOTE="inoperativeRS"]

[QUOTE="Hoi-Yant"]StarCraft. Hands down.
Judging by all the people who thinks the same, I think we all now know what the best RTS is.
basersx

The only thing we know is how many that haven't played Dawn of War ;)

I played DoW. Its exactly the same as CoH but just with a cheesy theme and older graphics. If you want to play that game just get CoH. I guess if you have an older system that cant run CoH, DoW might be a decent alternative but that's about it.

what's cheesy about warhammer 40k? do you really actually know anything about it?

i own both, and they definitely aren't exactly the same - coh is much more about running around with small groups of units trying to sneak out resource control until the game escalates to tank stage... dawn of war has far fewer resource points, and units are more readily available, meaning there's a much stronger focus on actual combat as units meet more often, and at fewer points

coh has much better tactical elements, but it completely loses on combat - in coh the combat is a means to an end, but in dow it's an end in itself... there is just nothing as cool and as brutal and as beautiful as the infantry battles of warhammer 40k, and dawn of war does a great job of conveying that 

i think if you'd actually played dawn of war - i'm guessing you've perhaps spent time with the demo and little else - and played it before coh - i'm getting the impression you played company of heroes long before you played dow - or knew anything about warhammer 40k, you'd not make such out of hand comments

dow and coh compliment eachother very well, because they're about different things - and both are extremely good games... dow is a poor man's coh as a tactical game, but if you're looking for brutal combat with a focus on infantry, a science fiction /fantasy setting or 40k specifically - coh is a very poor man's dawn of war

Little green monsters running around with swords are VERY cheesy to me.  CoH is the same game but set in WWII which is a lot cooler.

Little green monsters running around with swords are VERY cheesy to me. CoH is the same game but set in WWII which is a lot cooler.

basersx

I bet you find space odyssey 2001 cheesy as well? I mean, spaceships and monkeys... And CoH and DoW are totally different games.

Sci-fi is different than fantasy.  And yes 2001 is my least favorite Kubrick film.  And I have both CoH and DoW, they are the very same game, except CoH is a lot better.

Sci-fi is different than fantasy. And yes 2001 is my least favorite Kubrick film. And I have both CoH and DoW, they are the very same game, except CoH is a lot better.

basersx

2001 is IMO still unprecedented as the best sci fi movie ever made. And CoH and DoW play totally different, but whatever. It's hard to argue when we both have such strong opinions.

[QUOTE="basersx"]

Sci-fi is different than fantasy. And yes 2001 is my least favorite Kubrick film. And I have both CoH and DoW, they are the very same game, except CoH is a lot better.

inoperativeRS

2001 is IMO still unprecedented as the best sci fi movie ever made. And CoH and DoW play totally different, but whatever. It's hard to argue when we both have such strong opinions.

2001 wasn't even really a sci-fi movie.  The monkeys were not futuristic at all; they were just regular monkeys that encountered the monotih.  Same with the space parts.  They were just people is a some what realistic possibility in futuristic space that also encounter the monolith.  There was nothing sci-fiction about the monolith, they did not represent advanced technology they were a symbol of the religious/spiritual unknown. 

The movie was fantasy/horror at its core which is probably why you like it.  2001 is much more of a fantasy movie than it is a sci-fi.

Of course it has some fantastic sci-fi elements like all the ship and station scenes because everything Kubrick does is perfect but the Clark story was much more of a fantasy story at its core than a real Sci-Fi.

Company of Heroes.. hands down

I cant wait for Opposing Fronts 

I couldn't possibly say decide on the best rts ever, so I'll just list my favs: CoH, warcraft 3, age of empires 3, LOTR: BFME 1 (2 ruined it).Agent_13

In order: 

1. Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War
2. Starcraft
3. Command and Conquer series
4. Warcraft series
5. Homeworld series
6. Supreme Commander
7. Rise of Nations
8. Company of Heroes

Starcraft. Hands down.

Great storyline, imaginative units, and the best ballaciing of thre completely different races I have ever seen. 

Supreme commander is my personal fav, althoguh lots of people will disagree.

Company of heros takes second place. 

[QUOTE="inoperativeRS"][QUOTE="basersx"]

Sci-fi is different than fantasy. And yes 2001 is my least favorite Kubrick film. And I have both CoH and DoW, they are the very same game, except CoH is a lot better.

basersx

2001 is IMO still unprecedented as the best sci fi movie ever made. And CoH and DoW play totally different, but whatever. It's hard to argue when we both have such strong opinions.

2001 wasn't even really a sci-fi movie. The monkeys were not futuristic at all; they were just regular monkeys that encountered the monotih. Same with the space parts. They were just people is a some what realistic possibility in futuristic space that also encounter the monolith. There was nothing sci-fiction about the monolith, they did not represent advanced technology they were a symbol of the religious/spiritual unknown.

The movie was fantasy/horror at its core which is probably why you like it. 2001 is much more of a fantasy movie than it is a sci-fi.

Of course it has some fantastic sci-fi elements like all the ship and station scenes because everything Kubrick does is perfect but the Clark story was much more of a fantasy story at its core than a real Sci-Fi.

Why can't a movie be sci fi even if the main plot is more about religious/spiritual questions than traditional sci fi themes? Sci fi means science fiction, and 2001 had lots of both.

I never really thought of 2001 as fantasy or horror, fantasy is IMO a totally different thing and horror... Well, I don't really get how you could consider 2001 a horror movie, sure it has some scenes that might resemble something from a horror movie but most movies have those.

[QUOTE="basersx"][QUOTE="inoperativeRS"][QUOTE="basersx"]

Sci-fi is different than fantasy. And yes 2001 is my least favorite Kubrick film. And I have both CoH and DoW, they are the very same game, except CoH is a lot better.

inoperativeRS

2001 is IMO still unprecedented as the best sci fi movie ever made. And CoH and DoW play totally different, but whatever. It's hard to argue when we both have such strong opinions.

2001 wasn't even really a sci-fi movie. The monkeys were not futuristic at all; they were just regular monkeys that encountered the monotih. Same with the space parts. They were just people is a some what realistic possibility in futuristic space that also encounter the monolith. There was nothing sci-fiction about the monolith, they did not represent advanced technology they were a symbol of the religious/spiritual unknown.

The movie was fantasy/horror at its core which is probably why you like it. 2001 is much more of a fantasy movie than it is a sci-fi.

Of course it has some fantastic sci-fi elements like all the ship and station scenes because everything Kubrick does is perfect but the Clark story was much more of a fantasy story at its core than a real Sci-Fi.

Why can't a movie be sci fi even if the main plot is more about religious/spiritual questions than traditional sci fi themes? Sci fi means science fiction, and 2001 had lots of both.

I never really thought of 2001 as fantasy or horror, fantasy is IMO a totally different thing and horror... Well, I don't really get how you could consider 2001 a horror movie, sure it has some scenes that might resemble something from a horror movie but most movies have those.

When the main plot and message of a movie is not science at all then it's hard to call it a sci-fi.  It will always be categorized that way but everyone knows at its core 2001 is about religion.  An example of a true sci-fi would be Blade Runner.

I'm glad you like 2001 so much, I am a HARDCORE Kubrick fan, I have seen every movie he ever made multiple times and own them all on DVD.  But I have always said 2001 was my least favorite of his movies.  Long before you and I ever had this conversation.

Oh, I'm a Kubrick fan as well. Although I haven't seen all his movies I love the ones I have seen.

I just don't see how there's any connection between the underlying themes and the genre of a movie.

(No particular order)

Of ALL time??

• Starcraft + Brood War
• Total Annihilation
• Red Alert 2
• Company of Heroes

1. Warhammer 40k: Dawn of War: Dark Crusade

2. Starcraft

3. Warcraft

My RTS.

1. Total Annihilation- All of it. (but the add-ons hate XP)

2. Conquest: Frontier Wars- Best 2D-3D in space. Eats Star Trek: Armada 1&2 & Star Wars: Empire at War alive, in game play & maps.

3. Command and Conquer- All but Generals it retards the sea craft & missions the change too much in battle. (Rocket Bikes forever!!)

4. Company of Heroes- i kill you i take your stuff.

5. Earth 2160- free for all on building & make your own craft (good graphics)

6. Star Wars: Empire at War- the space battles. (Forces of Corruption & the land battles suck)

7. Dungeon Keeper 2- Time to be bad.

8. Stronghold 1&2 Crusader- Time to get medieval on your but.

9. (oops not real time) Final Liberation: Warhammer Epic 40,000- jest fun!

9. Warhammer 40k dawn of war- should be more like the table top or have less building resections.

10. MechCommander Gold & 2- i kill you i might get your stuff next mission.

11. Warcraft II & III- cute, pretty, colorful, magical.

12. Heritage of Kings: The Settlers (more of a sim) (needs walls)

13. Majesty: The Fantasy Kingdom- it good too be King

14. Battle Realms- needs to be bigger faster.

15. Star Trek: Armada 1&2- (bad graphics & maps)

Earth 2140, 2150- got last week.

Supreme Commander- Don't have yet.

Conquest 2: The Curium Uprising- My Most Wanted!!!!

Starcraft- Played it found it a bit silly, too surrealistic in graphics & play.

Same with me and Age of Empires 2: The Conquerors. The amount of micromanagement in both economy, buildings, and military was awesome. You needed to control everything yourself to win the game, while from what I hear in other RTS's battles are more automated and whoever has stronger and more units wins. Definitely not the case in AOC.twomey7

 This post = win 

i'd say dawn of war for a few reasons:

• expansions included, there are seven unique and (pretty much) well balanced armies, lots of diversity in terms of playstyle and personality
• simply the best resource model i have ever experienced in a rts, encouraging aggressive play early on
• a game focused on massed infantry battles with an awesome blend of ranged and melee combat, all of which is perfectly brutal
• an excellent squad mechanic that both allows for easy unit control on a large scale and streamlines the logistics of moving units into battle thanks to the squad reinforce feature - keeping the player focused on the battle
  
• a well implemented rock/paper/scissors damage system that ties well into technology progression and unit types
• little/no unit redundancy as higher technology levels are unlocked
• set in awesome warhammer 40k universe, and making excellent use of the license

there are many other reasons i love dow, but these are the biggies - starcraft definitely deserves a mention, it was ahead of its time when it was released, but i think dawn of war is a more than worthy replacement
A-S_FM

I agree, but i think Supreme Commander will replace them ALL ;)

i'd say dawn of war for a few reasons:

• expansions included, there are seven unique and (pretty much) well balanced armies, lots of diversity in terms of playstyle and personality
• simply the best resource model i have ever experienced in a rts, encouraging aggressive play early on
• a game focused on massed infantry battles with an awesome blend of ranged and melee combat, all of which is perfectly brutal
• an excellent squad mechanic that both allows for easy unit control on a large scale and streamlines the logistics of moving units into battle thanks to the squad reinforce feature - keeping the player focused on the battle
  
• a well implemented rock/paper/scissors damage system that ties well into technology progression and unit types
• little/no unit redundancy as higher technology levels are unlocked
• set in awesome warhammer 40k universe, and making excellent use of the license

there are many other reasons i love dow, but these are the biggies - starcraft definitely deserves a mention, it was ahead of its time when it was released, but i think dawn of war is a more than worthy replacement
A-S_FM

Agreed, although I like a lot of other RTS 

My favorites are:

1.)Age of Empires 2 Conquerors

2.)Total Annihilation

3.)Medieval Total War series (If it counts)

4.)Starcraft

5.)Warcraft 3

6.)Supreme Commander (Would be higher but my comp can barely handle it)

Age of Empire 2 with the expansion. Gavin2232

I concur. 

Nice choices all around. I still never understood Rise of Nations. Great building, horrible combat. Still I am going to add one I haven't seen on this board.

Blitzkrieg (with expansions)

Good old slow-going tactical RTS game

I dunno in my opinion Starcraft was without a doubt the best game of all time for its time. I'm just saying that cause it's what I believe, and I don't play Starcraft that much (It gets frustrating without Strat Zoom, and a few other things, which I will not metion at the moment). But if thats what we're talking about here than sure Starcraft is the best RTS of all time. For me it's gotta be Supreme Commander. Of course there will be other games to take its place in my mind, but currently Supcom is the best.

Warcraft 3: Reign of Chaos & Frozen Throne

Starcraft is a great game, no doubt, but Age of Empires II + Conquerors made the biggest lasting impact on me. I made memories with that game. I loved the campaign, and I could play skirmish from sunrise to sunset.stoutlad

1. Rise of Nations + Thrones and Patriots Expansion (This does not get enough praise, probably because this game actually makes you think...)

2. Age of Empires II + Conquerors Expansion

3. Warcraft 3 + Frozen Throne Expansion

4. TIE: Company of Heroes + Opposing Fronts Expansion / Dawn of War + Expansions

5. Starcraft

1. Rise of Nations + Thrones and Patriots Expansion (This does not get enough praise, probably because this game actually makes you think...)

2. Age of Empires II + Conquerors Expansion

3. Warcraft 3 + Frozen Throne Expansion

4. TIE: Company of Heroes + Opposing Fronts Expansion / Dawn of War + Expansions

5. Starcraft

Stevensonbak

2 years and a half old thread.

DON'T BUMP.

And by the way StarCraft: Brood War is the only right answer.

Homeworld.

[QUOTE="inoperativeRS"][QUOTE="basersx"]

2001 wasn't even really a sci-fi movie. The monkeys were not futuristic at all; they were just regular monkeys that encountered the monotih. Same with the space parts. They were just people is a some what realistic possibility in futuristic space that also encounter the monolith. There was nothing sci-fiction about the monolith, they did not represent advanced technology they were a symbol of the religious/spiritual unknown.

The movie was fantasy/horror at its core which is probably why you like it. 2001 is much more of a fantasy movie than it is a sci-fi.

Of course it has some fantastic sci-fi elements like all the ship and station scenes because everything Kubrick does is perfect but the Clark story was much more of a fantasy story at its core than a real Sci-Fi.

basersx

Why can't a movie be sci fi even if the main plot is more about religious/spiritual questions than traditional sci fi themes? Sci fi means science fiction, and 2001 had lots of both.

I never really thought of 2001 as fantasy or horror, fantasy is IMO a totally different thing and horror... Well, I don't really get how you could consider 2001 a horror movie, sure it has some scenes that might resemble something from a horror movie but most movies have those.

When the main plot and message of a movie is not science at all then it's hard to call it a sci-fi. It will always be categorized that way but everyone knows at its core 2001 is about religion. An example of a true sci-fi would be Blade Runner.

I'm glad you like 2001 so much, I am a HARDCORE Kubrick fan, I have seen every movie he ever made multiple times and own them all on DVD. But I have always said 2001 was my least favorite of his movies. Long before you and I ever had this conversation.

The Shining was easily one of his worst, mainly because he wasn't the right director for it, not a good fit.

That movie was just an excuse for Jack Nicholson to ham it up and intimidate timid Shelley Duvall

I liked A Clockwork Orange, now thats a great one!

STARCRAFT.