rise of nations

[tribble]

I recently got rise of nations, and WOW. I was shocked. the visuals are amazing, the gameplay is great, the nations are actually diverse! I was so suprised at how good this game is after my rather poor experience with the Age Of Empires series. the british? love 'em. the bantu? they're great! the egyptians? awesome! honestly, the only nation I didn't love was the french. admittedly I haven't played with everyone yet, but just...wow.

[SurlySeraph]

I liked Rise of Nations, though I didn't really like how the rock-paper-scissors unit relations play out in the more recent ages. I mean, MACHINE GUNS beat tanks?! WHY?
Quality game, though. I especially love the Cold War campaign - I replayed it from both sides until I got every possible ending, and it was absolutely worth it. I never really played online, though.

[tribble]

I liked Rise of Nations, though I didn't really like how the rock-paper-scissors unit relations play out in the more recent ages. I mean, MACHINE GUNS beat tanks?! WHY?
Quality game, though. I especially love the Cold War campaign - I replayed it from both sides until I got every possible ending, and it was absolutely worth it. I never really played online, though.

but...machine guns dont beat tanks... bazookas do...
and what campaign? i never saw a campaign. do i have to complete all the learn to play missions for the campaign?

[Dublock]

no its the conquer the world campaign. Theres different one for it. I think the Cold War is from the expansion pack..(I have both). It is a good quality game. The units rock paper scissor thing is annoying however.

[Cybren]

The French are extremely effective during and up to the enlightenment age due to their wood collecting bonuses, and their healing supply wagons are always a boon.

[SurlySeraph]

but...machine guns dont beat tanks... bazookas do...
and what campaign? i never saw a campaign. do i have to complete all the learn to play missions for the campaign?

My memory's off, then. I know there was SOMETHING illogical about how some infantry unit interacted with tanks. Maybe mortars were light infantry, and therefore weak against tanks? I'm not sure.

And yeah, I think the Cold War campaign is from the expansion. Which would be worth buying for that campaign alone.

[konfeta]

Amazing game, recently got back into it. Make sure you get Thrones and Patriots x-pack, gives a bunch of campaigns, improves conquer the world, adds new cards and nations, and adds a government system.

Currently doing a run with the Egyptians and thanks to a lucky random Resource/Card distribution along with some shrewd diplomacy, I got the entire African continent filled with Wonders by Gunpowder Age, and still have 4 Wonder Cards to boot.

*P.S. I still can't get over some of the nation powers. "Power of Migration" and "Power of Motherland" never fail to crack me up. Having "The Comrade" lead U.S. Marines is also comedy gold.

[Om]

I liked Rise of Nations, though I didn't really like how the rock-paper-scissors unit relations play out in the more recent agesThat annoyed me about all the ages. Each unit type is only really effective against its designated opponent and completely useless against everything else - light infantry v heavy infantry, heavy infantry v cavalry, cavalry v light infantry. Other RTS games do this as well but not to the same infuriating degree

Other than that though, it was an entertaining game and very enjoyable

[Maxymiuk]

This paper-rock-scissors relation taught me a lot about diversifying though. My main army was usually composed from 10 light infantry, 10 heavy infantry, 10 archers, 10 light cavalry, 10 heavy cavalry, and 10 horse archers. Plus two supply wagons, two scouts, and a general/patriot. It steamrolled pretty much anything. And the 6-10 artillery units I had tagging along as a separate army took care of any cities/defensive positions.

[Athaniar]

I recently got rise of nations, and WOW. I was shocked. the visuals are amazing, the gameplay is great, the nations are actually diverse! I was so suprised at how good this game is after my rather poor experience with the Age Of Empires series. the british? love 'em. the bantu? they're great! the egyptians? awesome! honestly, the only nation I didn't love was the french. admittedly I haven't played with everyone yet, but just...wow.

The game is alright, but it can be quite historically incorrect sometimes.

[warty goblin]

That annoyed me about all the ages. Each unit type is only really effective against its designated opponent and completely useless against everything else - light infantry v heavy infantry, heavy infantry v cavalry, cavalry v light infantry. Other RTS games do this as well but not to the same infuriating degree

Other than that though, it was an entertaining game and very enjoyable

Funny, I've always liked reasonably hard RPS style balancing in games. It forces combined arms and careful attack prioritizations if the counter system is well integrated with unit ranges and speeds.

[Om]

Funny, I've always liked reasonably hard RPS style balancing in games. It forces combined arms and careful attack prioritizations if the counter system is well integrated with unit ranges and speeds.Each to their own. To my mind it just feels ridiculously forced and artificial. Nothing shatters immersion like having your big Landsknecht unable to so much as scratch an unprotected archer

[warty goblin]

Each to their own. To my mind it just feels ridiculously forced and artificial. Nothing shatters immersion like having your big Landsknecht unable to so much as scratch an unprotected archer

It can be badly done yes, and that is a good example of it. I'm not universally endorsing each and every instance of RPS style balancing, I just find that without it you get something as hard on immersion as, say, Starcraft.