Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Tactical Strategy Games

durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
edited July 2007 in Games and Technology
I was looking through past threads for tactis games that were not Disgaea or Front Mission 4, and came up reasonably empty. Then I realized, there really haven't been many tactical strategy games period in recent memory beyond the Japanese SRPGs.

So I decided that instead of a request thread, I'd just make a general love thread.

I think my favorite experience so far, actually, has been Battletech, through both the boardgame version and MegaMek. There are a million mechs and loadouts, and each has a great deal going for it. A little while ago, I lost to a friend of mine, 4 well rounded medium mechs to 5 small ones, because the small buggers never left cover except to sprint behind me and release SRMs. The game manages to be diverse as hell, while still being fair enough that you know there is some way to beat that opposing force if only you can figure it out.

The other game I've played on and off since discovering it has been "The Legend of Wesnoth". It has gaping flaws in some areas, but the way that random attacks come together with simple, solid rules for movement and unit types, really makes the game a joy to play. It manages to avoid the bloat that usually comes with open source, have a few important statuses and unit abilities, and just lets you figure out the best way to use and abuse them. Plus, it tells you how likely you are to give and take damage each attack, and the transparency is nice, especially for a beginner.

And, though I said turn-based, I remember Myth being a wonderful game for people who like tactics more than unit-production. The online play was gold, just you, 20 points, and any units you felt like.

I decided to try Front Mission 4 and so far it seems really really fun. I like that it's much more of a "pick a good loadout and team" game than a lot of SRPGs. I know the one NIS game I tried (Phantom Brave) was pretty fun, but quickly became "beat the boss in ten seconds with any class, or level until you can".

So, what tactical strategy games do people really love? What makes a good tactical strategy game in general? What have I missed?

durandal4532 on
«1

Posts

  • cj iwakuracj iwakura The Rhythm Rogue Coral Springs, FLRegistered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Rebelstar Tactical Command for the GBA was very unique, but that's probably because of the ties to X-COM(which I've never played), but I know that gets lots of love around here.

    Squad-based combat that uses the environments for cover, and you can't see the enemies unless you're looking right at them(which means they can kill a party member very easily by coming up behind you).

    And I like the visual style/story of Stella Deus, but the gameplay can get annoying. It's more along the lines of FFT though, so that might not be what you have in mind.

    fiV9i14.jpg
    蒼く咲く華 日は灯り 天に流れる | Kill The Past
  • MalkorMalkor Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    The Close Combat series is awesome. It's deliberate, paced well, and unforgiving. Also the old school Medieval War and it's sequel.

    14271f3c-c765-4e74-92b1-49d7612675f2.jpg
  • RichardTauberRichardTauber King of the north Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    cj iwakura wrote: »
    Rebelstar Tactical Command for the GBA was very unique, but that's probably because of the ties to X-COM(which I've never played), but I know that gets lots of love around here.

    Aye. X-Com made portable is a fine bet for strategy.

    Intoxication emerges from an elementary desire to rise out of time
  • Wonder_HippieWonder_Hippie __BANNED USERS
    edited July 2007
    Front Mission is the sex. It's not a new thought around these parts, but it's an absolute blast. I'm playing through 4 again right now, and I had forgotten how good the graphics were. It's challenging without being impossible, the story's decently interesting, more so than most other mech games, and the strategy is heavy, deep, and balanced.

    It's really just everything I look for in a strategy game.

    Spoiler:
  • jclastjclast Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Band of Bugs for 360 was short, but I enjoyed every mission. And going back for gold medals in all of them was fun, too.

    steam_sig.png
  • BalefuegoBalefuego Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Myth II is probably my favorite game ever.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • LorkLork Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    X-Com started the genre as we know it today, and it's still the best by a very large margin.

    You can buy X-Com: Terror From the Deep on Steam for something like $2 right now. It's not as good as the original, but it should do.

    Steam Profile: Lork
    Gamertag: Clorfhanger
  • KungFuKungFu Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    box-l.jpg

    I loved this one. Made my roadtrip across the US fly by.

    Theft 4 Bread
  • MalkorMalkor Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    There's also Silent Storm.

    14271f3c-c765-4e74-92b1-49d7612675f2.jpg
  • DisruptorX2DisruptorX2 Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Malkor wrote: »
    There's also Silent Storm.

    Always.

    1208768734831.jpg
  • LitanyLitany Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    And Jagged Alliance.

    Steam: Litany || PSN: Litany- || Nintendo Network ID: Litany
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Silent Storm and X-Com are two I tried, and then put back down pretty quick. I'm going to go ahead and assume that I just gave them way too little time to grow on me. As much as I hate to admit to it, the graphics on X-Com make a bit of a difference to me. God, it's not just low-rez, it's almost impossible to distinguish objects. Are there any mods or what have you that might improve that end of it a bit? And Silent Storm seemed... I don't know what it was about them, but the view and movement really got to me. I should really give both of these a try again.

    I entirely forgot about Close Combat. I had a friend addicted to that when I was little. I should pick that up.

  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Front Mission is the sex. It's not a new thought around these parts, but it's an absolute blast. I'm playing through 4 again right now, and I had forgotten how good the graphics were. It's challenging without being impossible, the story's decently interesting, more so than most other mech games, and the strategy is heavy, deep, and balanced.

    It's really just everything I look for in a strategy game.

    I found myself really let down by Front Mission 4. It was just so easy because of the healing wanzers, and really short. I was considering picking it up after I rented it, but checking online revealed that I was on the last level already.

    Front Mission 3 was just a better game in every way (except graphics) and was longer too!

    afaossig.jpg~original
  • redfenixredfenix Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    So, is AW: DS in this category, or am I mistaken?

  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    Front Mission is the sex. It's not a new thought around these parts, but it's an absolute blast. I'm playing through 4 again right now, and I had forgotten how good the graphics were. It's challenging without being impossible, the story's decently interesting, more so than most other mech games, and the strategy is heavy, deep, and balanced.

    It's really just everything I look for in a strategy game.

    I found myself really let down by Front Mission 4. It was just so easy because of the healing wanzers, and really short. I was considering picking it up after I rented it, but checking online revealed that I was on the last level already.

    Front Mission 3 was just a better game in every way (except graphics) and was longer too!

    And the plot sucks, and everything progresses about half as fast as it should due to the split characters. All in all, FM4 kinda fucking sucked.

    I'm still mad we didn't get FM5, since by all accounts it was pretty good.

  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    AW: DS certainly fits into this category red.

    Advance Wars never set quite right with me because I hate building units mid-mission in anything.

    But, a lot of people really love AW.

    Anyone ever play Ring of Red? I was interested and then forgot about it, it's a really old PS2 game. Wonder if it's worth digging around for.

    afaossig.jpg~original
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    redfenix wrote: »
    So, is AW: DS in this category, or am I mistaken?
    Actually, yeah, I'd say it is. Wesnoth also has a system where you purchase units. I think the important aspect is a simple set of rules with complex consequences in terms of tactical thinking, really. AW was extremely fun, but I only played the GBA version, and eventually burned out on it, because it was all I played.

    edit: Actually, yes. I saw Ring of Red on the Giant Robots thread a while back, is it actually good or what? It sounded intriguing.

  • zhen_roguezhen_rogue Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    I've enjoyed:

    X-Com
    Jagged Alliance
    Silent Storm
    Disciples 2
    HoMM V

  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Etherlords 2 was also pretty cool, but is more like Magic the Gathering with some elements of Heroes of Might and Magic than a true turn-based strategy game.

  • LorkLork Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Silent Storm and X-Com are two I tried, and then put back down pretty quick. I'm going to go ahead and assume that I just gave them way too little time to grow on me. As much as I hate to admit to it, the graphics on X-Com make a bit of a difference to me. God, it's not just low-rez, it's almost impossible to distinguish objects. Are there any mods or what have you that might improve that end of it a bit? And Silent Storm seemed... I don't know what it was about them, but the view and movement really got to me. I should really give both of these a try again.

    I entirely forgot about Close Combat. I had a friend addicted to that when I was little. I should pick that up.
    Are you, perhaps, blind, and playing games with a Braille monitor? The graphics in X-Com aren't exactly pretty by today's standards, but they're very functional. The interface doesn't have tooltips, so it takes some getting used to, but you'd have a pretty hard time mistaking any object in the tactical view for anything but what it actually is.

    Steam Profile: Lork
    Gamertag: Clorfhanger
  • RedMageDarionRedMageDarion Registered User
    edited July 2007
    Ring of Red was a pretty solid enjoyable game.

    But it moved SLOW.

    You control every battle between 2 robots. So instead of just attacking each other, a la Front Mission, you have 60 seconds to launch cannon blasts, and use abilities like grenades and stuff.

    I really enjoyed it though. Something about WWII style giant robots was completely awesome.

    Pokemon White - 3954.6369.6328
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Lork wrote: »
    Silent Storm and X-Com are two I tried, and then put back down pretty quick. I'm going to go ahead and assume that I just gave them way too little time to grow on me. As much as I hate to admit to it, the graphics on X-Com make a bit of a difference to me. God, it's not just low-rez, it's almost impossible to distinguish objects. Are there any mods or what have you that might improve that end of it a bit? And Silent Storm seemed... I don't know what it was about them, but the view and movement really got to me. I should really give both of these a try again.

    I entirely forgot about Close Combat. I had a friend addicted to that when I was little. I should pick that up.
    Are you, perhaps, blind, and playing games with a Braille monitor? The graphics in X-Com aren't exactly pretty by today's standards, but they're very functional. The interface doesn't have tooltips, so it takes some getting used to, but you'd have a pretty hard time mistaking any object in the tactical view for anything but what it actually is.

    Well, I may be misremembering... although, I do think the one copy I tried to use kept glitching out on me, which probably affected things. I usually have no problem with games from when I was a kid, so I am a bit ashamed.

    Also. Front Mission 5? Did we not get it because it's an import, or because the studio went under, or what?

  • RiemannLivesRiemannLives Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Lork wrote: »
    X-Com started the genre as we know it today, and it's still the best by a very large margin.

    You can buy X-Com: Terror From the Deep on Steam for something like $2 right now. It's not as good as the original, but it should do.

    And the original is on Gametap.

    What you think "makes sense" has nothing to do with reality. It just has to do with your life experience. And your life experience may only be a small smidgen of reality. Possibly even a distorted account of reality at that. So what this means is that, beginning in the 20th century as our means of decoding nature became more and more powerful, we started realizing our common sense is no longer a tool to pass judgment on whether or not a scientific theory is correct. - Neil Degrasse Tyson
  • Burning OrganBurning Organ Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    http://www.free-games-net.com/games/paybackt2.shtml
    Very very easily modifyable and it has RPG elements :D
    I remember playing this in a home made mode called terminator... Basically we'd give one guy very good armor and weapons (So he was nearly invincible) and then we had him outnumbered and tried to kill him.
    It's very awesome, very free and very much worth a try if you got a friend to play with or time to waste :D

  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Urgel wrote: »
    http://www.free-games-net.com/games/paybackt2.shtml
    Very very easily modifyable and it has RPG elements :D
    I remember playing this in a home made mode called terminator... Basically we'd give one guy very good armor and weapons (So he was nearly invincible) and then we had him outnumbered and tried to kill him.
    It's very awesome, very free and very much worth a try if you got a friend to play with or time to waste :D
    That sounds excellent.

    Actually, it also reminds me of Laser Squad Nemisis. That was one that seemed like it was a pretty solidly put together game, the demo just didn't convince me it was worth subscribing. It had areas that were too big, sparse, and reasonably difficult to move around in, and pretty standard combat. I'm sure it improves greatly with human players, but they don't let you test that.

  • HydroSqueegeeHydroSqueegee ULTRACAT!!!™®© Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    if you like battletech, check out megamek.net

    choose which house to fight for and start conquering planets against other players. Its a good time.

    zW0NKxe.png
  • KVWKVW Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Whats the difference between a Tactical Strategy game and a Japanese SRPG? Does it have to be US made to be a Tactical game? Is Rainbow Six tactical strategy? Heroes of Might and Magic V? Can someone distinguish what were supposed to be talking about? One person mentioned Tactics Ogre, but aside from the Tactics in the title, its a Japanese SRPG.

    I love the Ogre Battle series (not the Tactics Ogre versions) as it requires a great deal of strategy with how you set up groups for travel speed on different terrains (flyers or snow or trees or so on versus the mixed groups only good on roads / plains) and the alignments of units when capturing towns. I think the lack of direct control over battles makes for great strategy as you must choose when to fight with certain units and when to retreat if you feel you cant handle it with that group composition (you can pick attack strongest, most hp, least hp, etc, but they can only attack people in range, so if weakest is back row, you cant reach him with a melee character, etc and they attack next weakest). Add in multiple hero characters, lots of job classes and multiple endings and its the making of a great replayable strategy game (now I dont know if its tactical or not by the OPs definition as it come sfrom Japan). I still feel March of the Black Queen is the pinnacle of the series while Person of Lordly Calibur was still excellent in its own right.

    For recent stuff, Fire Emblem has started making its way over to the US with Game Boy versions and a GC one (I think a Wii one is on the way as well). Again, I dont know if they are what they OP was looking for or not though.

  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Lork wrote: »
    Silent Storm and X-Com are two I tried, and then put back down pretty quick. I'm going to go ahead and assume that I just gave them way too little time to grow on me. As much as I hate to admit to it, the graphics on X-Com make a bit of a difference to me. God, it's not just low-rez, it's almost impossible to distinguish objects. Are there any mods or what have you that might improve that end of it a bit? And Silent Storm seemed... I don't know what it was about them, but the view and movement really got to me. I should really give both of these a try again.

    I entirely forgot about Close Combat. I had a friend addicted to that when I was little. I should pick that up.
    Are you, perhaps, blind, and playing games with a Braille monitor? The graphics in X-Com aren't exactly pretty by today's standards, but they're very functional. The interface doesn't have tooltips, so it takes some getting used to, but you'd have a pretty hard time mistaking any object in the tactical view for anything but what it actually is.

    Well, I may be misremembering... although, I do think the one copy I tried to use kept glitching out on me, which probably affected things. I usually have no problem with games from when I was a kid, so I am a bit ashamed.

    Also. Front Mission 5? Did we not get it because it's an import, or because the studio went under, or what?

    Nah, Front Mission is developed in-house by Square Enix (at least, I'm fairly sure it's in-house)...either way, I think that perhaps FM3/4 didn't sell well, so they didn't bother localizing it, which really sucks.

    They are bringing FM1 DS out over here though, so maybe if sales are good we'll still see FM5 one of these days.

  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    KVW wrote: »
    Whats the difference between a Tactical Strategy game and a Japanese SRPG? Does it have to be US made to be a Tactical game? Is Rainbow Six tactical strategy? Heroes of Might and Magic V? Can someone distinguish what were supposed to be talking about? One person mentioned Tactics Ogre, but aside from the Tactics in the title, its a Japanese SRPG.

    I love the Ogre Battle series (not the Tactics Ogre versions) as it requires a great deal of strategy with how you set up groups for travel speed on different terrains (flyers or snow or trees or so on versus the mixed groups only good on roads / plains) and the alignments of units when capturing towns. I think the lack of direct control over battles makes for great strategy as you must choose when to fight with certain units and when to retreat if you feel you cant handle it with that group composition (you can pick attack strongest, most hp, least hp, etc, but they can only attack people in range, so if weakest is back row, you cant reach him with a melee character, etc and they attack next weakest). Add in multiple hero characters, lots of job classes and multiple endings and its the making of a great replayable strategy game (now I dont know if its tactical or not by the OPs definition as it come sfrom Japan). I still feel March of the Black Queen is the pinnacle of the series while Person of Lordly Calibur was still excellent in its own right.

    For recent stuff, Fire Emblem has started making its way over to the US with Game Boy versions and a GC one (I think a Wii one is on the way as well). Again, I dont know if they are what they OP was looking for or not though.
    The difference between the traditionally Japanese SRPG genre and a tactical strategy game, the one that seems most important to me, is that in an SRPG the highest level (usually) wins. Bigger numbers in the level colum mean faster wins, even if you can fight higher-level enemies. At least in my experience, it was suicide going up against a single higher-level enemy in Phantom Brave. They emphasize the RPG portion. What I usually think of as tactical strategy is basically wargaming, but on a smaller scale.

    You focus on postioning and specific unit abilities to win encounters that are usually (if against a human) equal from the get go or (if against a computer) hard but able to be tackled using skillful manuevering, not by leveling your characters until they rock awesome.

  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited July 2007
    KVW wrote: »
    Whats the difference between a Tactical Strategy game and a Japanese SRPG? Does it have to be US made to be a Tactical game? Is Rainbow Six tactical strategy? Heroes of Might and Magic V? Can someone distinguish what were supposed to be talking about? One person mentioned Tactics Ogre, but aside from the Tactics in the title, its a Japanese SRPG.

    I love the Ogre Battle series (not the Tactics Ogre versions) as it requires a great deal of strategy with how you set up groups for travel speed on different terrains (flyers or snow or trees or so on versus the mixed groups only good on roads / plains) and the alignments of units when capturing towns. I think the lack of direct control over battles makes for great strategy as you must choose when to fight with certain units and when to retreat if you feel you cant handle it with that group composition (you can pick attack strongest, most hp, least hp, etc, but they can only attack people in range, so if weakest is back row, you cant reach him with a melee character, etc and they attack next weakest). Add in multiple hero characters, lots of job classes and multiple endings and its the making of a great replayable strategy game (now I dont know if its tactical or not by the OPs definition as it come sfrom Japan). I still feel March of the Black Queen is the pinnacle of the series while Person of Lordly Calibur was still excellent in its own right.

    For recent stuff, Fire Emblem has started making its way over to the US with Game Boy versions and a GC one (I think a Wii one is on the way as well). Again, I dont know if they are what they OP was looking for or not though.
    The difference between the traditionally Japanese SRPG genre and a tactical strategy game, the one that seems most important to me, is that in an SRPG the highest level (usually) wins. Bigger numbers in the level colum mean faster wins, even if you can fight higher-level enemies. At least in my experience, it was suicide going up against a single higher-level enemy in Phantom Brave. They emphasize the RPG portion. What I usually think of as tactical strategy is basically wargaming, but on a smaller scale.

    You focus on postioning and specific unit abilities to win encounters that are usually (if against a human) equal from the get go or (if against a computer) hard but able to be tackled using skillful manuevering, not by leveling your characters until they rock awesome.

    Agreed. As much as I love Japanese SRPGs, I would love to see more strategy and less highest level wins gameplay. But then, this is true of every kind of RPG. We need less "spend time making numbers bigger" and more real strategy. Less filler and more unique and kickass fights.

  • jclastjclast Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    KVW wrote: »
    Whats the difference between a Tactical Strategy game and a Japanese SRPG? Does it have to be US made to be a Tactical game? Is Rainbow Six tactical strategy? Heroes of Might and Magic V? Can someone distinguish what were supposed to be talking about? One person mentioned Tactics Ogre, but aside from the Tactics in the title, its a Japanese SRPG.

    I love the Ogre Battle series (not the Tactics Ogre versions) as it requires a great deal of strategy with how you set up groups for travel speed on different terrains (flyers or snow or trees or so on versus the mixed groups only good on roads / plains) and the alignments of units when capturing towns. I think the lack of direct control over battles makes for great strategy as you must choose when to fight with certain units and when to retreat if you feel you cant handle it with that group composition (you can pick attack strongest, most hp, least hp, etc, but they can only attack people in range, so if weakest is back row, you cant reach him with a melee character, etc and they attack next weakest). Add in multiple hero characters, lots of job classes and multiple endings and its the making of a great replayable strategy game (now I dont know if its tactical or not by the OPs definition as it come sfrom Japan). I still feel March of the Black Queen is the pinnacle of the series while Person of Lordly Calibur was still excellent in its own right.

    For recent stuff, Fire Emblem has started making its way over to the US with Game Boy versions and a GC one (I think a Wii one is on the way as well). Again, I dont know if they are what they OP was looking for or not though.
    The difference between the traditionally Japanese SRPG genre and a tactical strategy game, the one that seems most important to me, is that in an SRPG the highest level (usually) wins. Bigger numbers in the level colum mean faster wins, even if you can fight higher-level enemies. At least in my experience, it was suicide going up against a single higher-level enemy in Phantom Brave. They emphasize the RPG portion. What I usually think of as tactical strategy is basically wargaming, but on a smaller scale.

    You focus on postioning and specific unit abilities to win encounters that are usually (if against a human) equal from the get go or (if against a computer) hard but able to be tackled using skillful manuevering, not by leveling your characters until they rock awesome.

    Agreed. As much as I love Japanese SRPGs, I would love to see more strategy and less highest level wins gameplay. But then, this is true of every kind of RPG. We need less "spend time making numbers bigger" and more real strategy. Less filler and more unique and kickass fights.

    Sounds like turn-based strategy as opposed to strategy RPG would be right up your alley. X-COM, Band of Bugs, stuff like that. Your squad is predefined; you just have to figure out how to win. None of that "go level for a while and learn some new skills" mentality from FFT and Disgaea.

    steam_sig.png
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    jclast wrote: »
    Sounds like turn-based strategy as opposed to strategy RPG would be right up your alley. X-COM, Band of Bugs, stuff like that. Your squad is predefined; you just have to figure out how to win. None of that "go level for a while and learn some new skills" mentality from FFT and Disgaea.
    Well, pretty much yes. That's part of why Myth 1 and 2 have such a place in my heart, they give you the units you need, figure out how to use them.

    However, I do think there's more than room to make the two genres merge a bit. Something in the vein of a Battletech game where you "level up" in terms of how much Clanner tech you have access to from your captured foes, or whether Command thinks you're worth committing an Atlas to. You could make something based around the point-buy system that meant you could try to go for the fewest resources wasted in the pursuit of the enemy, so while there was a "standard loadout", doing it with fewer mechs or less expensive hardware would be rewarded, and doing it with more would be an option for people who wanted to steamroll.

    I think I may have just described X-Com. I really need to pick that up from Steam.

    Alternately, the SRPGs would be more intriguing to me if leveling was handled more as a way to differentiate characters, not leapfrog foes.

  • solsovlysolsovly Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Agreed on the differences between Western Tactics games and Japanese SRPGS. I love Disgaea, tactics and all of them. But I never have to actually think or plan or properly position to win in any of those games. The exception being the item world in Disgaea and chaining... but even then its not very "tactical". I'd rather have chess with stats than more RPGS on grids. Just an FYI, steam has a sale on disciples II + jagged alliance 2 for like 8 dollars. Pretty decent steal.

    XBOX Live Tag: Solsovly
  • JihadJesusJihadJesus Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    .
    They are bringing FM1 DS out over here though, so maybe if sales are good we'll still see FM5 one of these days.
    FM1 hasn't been released stateside before, has it? That game is the reason I bought my DS. Well, that and the fact that there are tons of other games for it to tide me over until I get me som Front Mission.

    Tired of getting reamed by Gamestop? Sign up for Goozex!
  • Vincent GraysonVincent Grayson Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
    edited July 2007
    JihadJesus wrote: »
    .
    They are bringing FM1 DS out over here though, so maybe if sales are good we'll still see FM5 one of these days.
    FM1 hasn't been released stateside before, has it? That game is the reason I bought my DS. Well, that and the fact that there are tons of other games for it to tide me over until I get me som Front Mission.

    Nope, although the whole game aside from story was in English on the original cart (at least, IIRC), so it was pretty import friendly. I'm looking forward to playing through it again.

  • DanHibikiDanHibiki Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    I also loved Ogre Battle, there was just something about the leveling up and the fights that got you hooked on the game. You also had to plan ahead a lot. If you spent too much time leveling up you'd run out of funds and loose.

    sig_zpsf0994cbd.jpg
  • TeriferinTeriferin Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    solsovly wrote: »
    Agreed on the differences between Western Tactics games and Japanese SRPGS. I love Disgaea, tactics and all of them. But I never have to actually think or plan or properly position to win in any of those games. The exception being the item world in Disgaea and chaining... but even then its not very "tactical". I'd rather have chess with stats than more RPGS on grids. Just an FYI, steam has a sale on disciples II + jagged alliance 2 for like 8 dollars. Pretty decent steal.

    Last weekend Steam had a sweet sale where they were selling Disciples II with all of its expansions for $5. That was the easiest game purchase I've ever made. I'm not sure if I'm entirely comfortable calling it a "tactical strategy" game, though...

    steam_sig.png
  • Judge-ZJudge-Z Teacher, for Great Justice Upstate NYRegistered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Ring of Red was a pretty solid enjoyable game.

    But it moved SLOW.

    You control every battle between 2 robots. So instead of just attacking each other, a la Front Mission, you have 60 seconds to launch cannon blasts, and use abilities like grenades and stuff.

    I really enjoyed it though. Something about WWII style giant robots was completely awesome.

    I also enjoyed it. Setting up the battles required a decent amount of strategificating. The pace didn't bother me at all. I'm thinking this can be found cheap, to boot.

    JudgeZed.png
  • Terror&HubrisTerror&Hubris Registered User
    edited July 2007
    Jagged Alliance 2 is free on Gametap and is deep (and hard) as hell. I got totally addicted last week, definitely worth a gander.

    This game can't make my TV bigger?
    Sadly, no... But here's a list of what you will get out of Rock Band:

    [too much to fit in a sig, thats what]
  • BigPointyTeethBigPointyTeeth run away! run away! Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    I've always loved the Combat Mission games, and the next one, Shock Force, will no doubt continue that.

    nomnomh.jpg
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.