Some people will dismiss it without playing it and those people suck, if you’re going to bash a game, at least try it first. That being said, Halo Wars, believe it or not, is a good game. The missions are interesting, and even challenging, and everything just seems right. Let’s run through some of the strong points.

Strong Points:

• Great Controls/Easily Accessible: Now I want to get this out of the way because as I mentioned before, a RTS is all about the controls and the functions. Though Halo Wars lacks some extra features (hot keys, patrol, etc.), the game has essentially everything to make it accessible. This does involve a select all button which many hardcore RTS fan despise, but I highly doubt hardcore RTS fans are the target market for this game. That is to say that, yes, this game is somewhat easier than the conventional PC RTS, but it is in no means easy on higher difficulties.
• Everything just fits: This applies both to the graphics, music, levels. The units look amazing and very clear, and also match the Halo realm, which I find surprising, add to that visually stunning cutscenes and you’ve got some nice eye candy as battles go on. The music is the same type of orchestrated pieces that you would find in other Halo games, and to be honest it suits the game better than the Halo games. The orchestrated music brings a feeling of a grand scale, the feeling that you’re involved in something epic, and that is what Halo Wars is about.
• Varying Missions: Though there are the usual “go here, destroy base” missions, you’ll find there is often evac/escort missions, specialty type missions, and the occasional dodge the fucking scarab that kills you one hit mission, that thing is a beast to take down on legendary.
• Co-operative Campaign: This was the basis of my co-op article because the game is barrels of fun when you play with a friend. You would expect that things would get confusing and frustrating with two people sharing one base, and you’d be wrong. Yes you share resources, no you are not bound by what another person does (in most cases). What you build is yours to command, though you can also select to transfer units to the other player, and this comes in very, very handy in most cases.
• Unlockables: The skull system returns again in Halo Wars, along with optional objectives, if the skull system works like it did in Halos 1-3, then you could have one hell of a time using all of them on legendary.

Weak Points:

• Units don’t know when the fuck to stay still: This may be a pet peeve but it really annoys me to no end, if I command you to go somewhere, I don’t expect you to be moving in the opposite direction due to one group of grunts being there.
• Human Campaign: This was covered by Gamespot but the fact is you can’t play as the Covenant or the Flood in campaign, it’s a bummer I know, but there may be definitely will be DLC including their campaign. You can play as the Convenant in Skirmish mode though, so if you’re iching for some alien play, head on there.
• Where’s the story: Maybe I’m just slow, but it seems to me that there isn’t a huge story regarding Halo Wars, it seems to just jump into the Halo universe and follow the events of one John Forge, I was expecting a little more out of it in terms of story, that’s all.
• Progression: It seems the game never really confirms itself, even past half way through the game you’re still being introduced to new units that only have a one time use or one mission. I’d prefer the first maybe 5-6 missions was with introducing new units, and the rest was how you play it.

All in all, Halo Wars is an amazing game that has lived up to it’s hype in my eyes (probably because there wasn’t too much hype), and it’s worth a look over from any Xbox 360 owner. It has challenge to offer to the hardcore RTS group while remaining accessible to the newbie RTS folk. If you are planning to buy it, go for the mythic map pack bundle because even if you don’t use it yourself, you can sell it on ebay for about 40 dollars USD.

Most people remember the monstrosity of StarCraft 64, I remember renting it for my Nintendo 64, and I remember loving the game for being StarCraft but hating how it was done. If you have never paid StarCraft 64 let me tell you this: Don’t. The consoles are a huge deal in RTS games. StarCraft 64 takes good controls and decides add a nice layer of shit upon it. This isn’t about SC 64 though, so let’s get to Halo.

The first thing I noticed about the demo is that the graphics are very well done, and the cutscenes are amazing. This time around we have more story from the Halo world, and we get a better sense of what was going on in the war between the Covenant and the Humans. Story is a major part of an RTS, and from what I’ve taken so far from Halo Wars, it’s not going to be on the short side of the plot stick.

Who cares about graphics and plot though, it’s all about the controls. Here is where the Halo Wars does fairly well! I was expecting to be fumbling with my controller to get simple tasks complete and I was very surprised. Though playing with a mouse and keyboard is infinitely better then a 360 controller, the controls work for the game.

The game itself, well here is where we reach a bit of a bump in the road. See because Halo Wars was built from the ground up for the Xbox 360, you have a more dumbed down RTS experience. Building bases is limited to where it lets you, resources are automated and limited only by how my supply pads you have. The battles feel more battle then strategy, but all and all the demo is actually fun, and that my friends is what it boils down to (for myself anyways).

So final impressions? Halo Wars will be a positive step in console RTS games, I could go as far as to say even some “hardcore” RTS players will grow to like it. It’s only a shame that it may do worse than Halo 3 because the fanbase seems to not have the patience required for an RTS game, then again, that Mythic map pack comes a month early with it. You never know.

Sadly, that doesn’t mean I’m immediately good at the game. Very often I’ll know a whole lot about the competitive state, every detail, all possible moves, but I never get a lot of personal experience. I’m hesitant to play with others, simply because I’m scared that I’ll suck. Add to that the fact that I’m easily bored, and I end up knowing a lot of things about a lot of games, but still sucking at them.

One thing that competitive games always have trouble with is Game balance. I thought I’d write some blogs (or articles) on this for multiple reasons. First of all, it’s to help me put my thoughts on paper. I have a lot of opinions on the topic but I never write them down. Furthermore, it’s to help people get insight into the matter. Often people talk about game balancing while not knowing the fine details of it. And last of all, I hope that maybe some new developers (or people that mod existing games) read this, so that it can improve their games

I’ll mainly write about Real time strategy games, because it’s so easy to find examples, and because game balance is most important in them (though one could also argue that fighters profit more from a good game balance). However, most of the things I’ll write about apply to a wide variety of genres: Fighters, FPS, TBS, RPG, Puzzle games (think Tetris), racing, etc. I’ll assume that the reader knows the basics of the RTS genre, though I’ll explain some lingo.

Throughout these articles I’ll refer to a number of words, that not everybody knows. I’ll outline them here.

Metagame:

Metagame’s official definition is a bit different from the definition used in online games. When people talk about the metagame, it’s usually what people use. For example, a metagame could be melee-heavy, meaning that there are a lot of players that use melee units. Usually, the metagame changes constantly because people react to each other. If the metagame is melee-heavy, players will start using counters to melee units, and the metagame could shift to anti-melee instead. But with so much anti-melee, players will start using a lot of ranged units, and so the cycle goes on.

Macro:

Macro is usually referred to as a mixture of economy and territory control. It means the game on a large scale: For example, you might be losing small skirmishes, but you can still win in the macro game because you control much more territory than the opponent. Usually, if you are ahead in macro you will win the game because you have large advantages over the enemy: Better economy, better positions, more territory, etc. It is hard to find a corresponding definition in a genre like fighters, but positioning in those is still pretty important: If you’re in the corner, you’re bound to get hammered hard.

Micro:

Micro is literally ’small’. It’s the game on a small scale, with individual units. An example of micro is to not send your units into battle and let them fight, but to manually assign targets to all of your units. In FPS, you could call aiming a form of micro.

This is the end of the introduction, I hope people will look forward to the rest of the parts.

Tip 1: Keep your units alive

Running away would be a good idea

The most vital part of DoW2 is to keep your units alive. All squads are small and cost a lot, so you better make sure they’re worth it. If your squad even survives with only one member alive, it’s still cheaper to reinforce it back to full health than to buy a new one. Luckily, Dawn of War 2 has a way to keep your dying squads alive, and use it well! If you press the ‘Fall back’ command (default on X), your squad will automatically run back to base (or the nearest resupply point). While falling back, you cannot control your units but they take less damage, cannot be suppressed by enemy fire and run faster. Very useful!

Tip 2: Use cover

Another new addition to DoW2 is a cover system. Apparently it works much like in Company of Heroes, but I have never played CoH so I can’t comment on that. If you place your units near cover (plants, rocks or walls), they’ll automatically get behind them and take less damage. And a lot less damage. Basically, don’t even try to kill enemies that are behind cover. It’s best to just come from behind, where their cover is useless or attack with melee.

Tip 3: Teamwork is very important

In 3v3’s, teamwork is vital. There are just situations where you alone will not be able to overcome your enemy, but your teammates can help out. Some days ago I was playing with 2 friends, and the enemy had locked me up with Devestator Heavy bolter squads and a whopping 3 Tarantula turrets. It was near impossible for me to even come close because of the turrets, and if I got behind them with my jumping units they would be annihilated by the Heavy bolters. Then, my teammate came to the rescue, and because he came from the side the turrets couldn’t reach him. These are examples on how teammates can help each other.

Another vital way to help is to revive each other’s commander. If you didn’t know yet, if you move your own commander to an ally’s dead commander and right click on them, you can revive  them! While they will only be at around 1/3 health when they’re revived, they’re right on the battlefield (or at least not as far away), and your ally won’t have to pay the revival cost.

Support your vehicles

Tip 4: Vehicles are not one-man armies

In DoW2, vehicles are devastating. They can easily tear up most squads, and even some Anti-Vehicle squads have to be careful they aren’t rushed by vehicles. However, don’t think you can send them in by yourself. If there are multiple squads firing on your vehicles, especially if there’s some Anti-vehicle units mixed in, they will die in a matter of seconds. Therefore, always make sure you support your vehicles, or you will have simply wasted all that requisition and power.

Tip 5: Crazy tactics can work

There are very little games where crazy tactics and strategies can work. Try to think outside the box. You will be able to surprise your enemy with things he did not expect, and if you do not expect something in DoW2 you’re in a lot of trouble. For example, do you think you can win the upcoming battle? Send some of your infiltrated scouts with shotguns behind the enemy lines, and they can pick off foes that try to run back to their base. Afraid your enemy will use a lot of Plasma cannons and Heavy bolters soon? Destroy all of his cover by jumping on them with your Assault Space Marines or by smashing through them with your vehicles. There are so many crazy strategies  that can be used, and everybody has only scratched the surface of what’s possible. Try to be innovative, and you can gain a huge advantage over the enemy.

I hope these tips can help people to improve their game, so they can enjoy it as much as I do. Good luck!

The original StarCraft was released 10 years ago, and its expansion, Brood War, soon followed. Compared to a game like Age of Empires II, which was released a year later, StarCraft was quite basic. While Age of Empires II used 4 different kinds of resources, StarCraft only used 2: Minerals and Vespene gas. And while Age of Empires II had over 10, players could only choose one of three races or factions in StarCraft.

One of the biggest difference between StarCraft and other Real Time Strategy games, is that the game engine hardly helps the player: There is very limited automatic resource gathering, the path finding is simply atrocious, there is no way to automatically form formations, it’s impossible to queue the building of structures for Terrans, and that is only the tip of the iceberg.

But StarCraft was blessed with one thing: Almost complete control over your units. While in other games the AI might work against you while you’re manually handling your units, StarCraft just lets you do as you please. So while there is no way to automatically form formations, you can do it manually. While the AI is terrible at targeting, you can do it manually. While the AI is terrible at path finding, you can do it manually.

And this also had big influences on the skill gap between new and skill players. While the new player has his hands full with ordering his army around, the skilled player will micro his units to perfect his control over his army. This way, unless the new player gains a huge advantage by controlling the game with his economy (or rushes the skilled player), the skilled player will always win. The bareness of the game is one of its defining factors.

But of course, no developer likes to have a game with terrible path finding or AI. So naturally, Blizzard has fixed this in StarCraft 2. However, this means adjustments have to be made. For example, workers gather minerals so fast with the increased path finding, Blizzard was forced to adjust their mineral capacity from 8 to 5. But the big question is: Will these improvements actually improve the game or not?

Of course, at this point, we can do nothing but speculate. And of course, we can expect changes in the game play (otherwise it couldn’t be called a new game). My guess is that it will have a negative effect on the game.

We can draw parallels with other games. For example, let us take the Super smash bros. games. Super Smash bros Melee (SSBM) was a popular game for tournament players. It was heavily based on so-called ‘advanced techniques’, that abused bugs in the game engine to give the user an edge. Then came Super smash bros Brawl (SSBB), its sequel on Nintendo Wii. While SSBB was certainly an improvement over SSBM, with a big roster upgrade and an improved game engine, there was something lacking. The depth these ‘advanced techniques’ created, lacked in SSBB. Therefore the game felt shallow.

The situation StarCraft is in is very similar. The importance of micro defines parts of the game, just like in SSBM. StarCraft is also played a lot in tournaments. And StarCraft 2 is, just like SSBB, very pretty compared to its predecessor. Can we accurately predict the future? No, we can’t. But we can hope for Blizzard to make sure the game does not lose its depth.

Supreme Commander is the balls to the wall spiritual sequel to Total Annihilation. Hundreds of units on screen combined with simplistically clever gameplay has deviated the least from the genre, while still managing to bring even the best of gaming PCs to their knees when the massive battles heat up. SupCom has brought the classic RTS formula into the future and with a sequel on the horizon, the future looks bright for the massive-scale RTS.

Company of Heroes is the sign of the times; Emergent tactical gameplay allows for slower, more skill based gameplay. Micromanagement is less of a chore and is a lot more rewarding when it works in your favour. Squads will seek cover, and tanks will often reverse rather than turn all the way around and expose their weak easily-penetrated rear armour. Small but clever additions like these are what truly makes Company of Heroes such an enthralling and replayable experience. Graphically, the individual attention to detail is immediately obvious. Lowering the camera to the ground allows you to truly see the effort that has been put into realizing the characters.  Online multiplayer is essentially flawless with games beginning in minutes, and the clever automatch system imported from the Dawn of War series, Company of Heroes has crafted a nice niche in the genre which will last until the sequel is released.

World in Conflict is is an action game trapped in the body of an RTS, creating consistent warfare and allowing tactics to be key in securing a victory. As a result, the story mode feels a lot more like story. Key characters are developed, and during loading the situation is well narrated by Alec Baldwin in a concise manner, preventing boredom but setting the scene. The multiplayer is a very different animal indeed from your typical RTS fare, mainly being that it’s server based, and players can drop in and out at any time. Each player has a role to play with a choice of Armour, Air, Infantry and Support. Co-operation is essential to victory and winning itself is extremely satisfying when pulled off well. Well, that and there’s nukes.