Gamers: What do you think of this idea?

[Kyle]

This is for all you video gamers out there. For a long time I have been thinking about how awesome it would be to have a game like this:

A real time strategy game. However, rather than set in the Middle Ages (Age of Empires) or in the future (Command and Conquer), set it in the 16-1700's.

It would include infantry units like pikemen, riflemen (well, musketmen i suppose), etc.

It would include cavalry units, as well as artillery units.

You could upgrade your units. Heavy cavalry, light cavalry, dragoons. Your pikemen would start as farmers with pitchforks, upgrades would give them light armor and real pikes, etc. Your shooters would start as militiamen with poor discipline. A slow rate of fire, and they would break easily against a bayonet/cavalry charge. As you upgrade, they could start to reload faster and hold better discipline. You could hold formation with them and exchange fire, or do a bayonet charge.

You could include swordsmen with greatswords (it is my understanding that the Swiss and others used such infantry up through the 17th century) to break enemy pike formations and charge enemy musket formations.

Your dragoons would be mounted infantry who could travel quickly to get where you needed them to be, and dismount to fire. You could keep a group of pikemen behind your shooters waiting to defend them from cavalry charges. Your artillery would be slow moving and you had better keep it defended and not leave it vulnerable to a flanking attack by your enemy's like cavalry.

I think this sort of game would be more interesting than the Age of Empires type and the Command and Conquer type combined. What do you think? Why havent "they" made a game like this? Is there a game like this out there that I just dont know about?

[PTK]

Empire Earth, set it in that era. Ta-daaaa.

[Regolith]

Almost everything you wrote sounds exactly like Age of Empires III except for the availability of some of the more advanced, real-world tactics and combat.


Talk to the Ensemble guys.  Maybe they'll implement it in their next game.   

[41magsnub]

Almost everything you wrote sounds exactly like Age of Empires III except for the availability of some of the more advanced, real-world tactics and combat.


Talk to the Ensemble guys.  Maybe they'll implement it in their next game.   

You could say the same thing about civilization as well, at least for a portion of the game until upgrade past that level.

[jackdanson]

Total War?  That series is the closest to what you describe.  Empire, the new one, comes out tommorrow.. I'll be getting it fo sho.

IMHO that series is by far better than any other strategy game out there.. it's not really the same type of game though.

[HankB]

AoE  and AoE II were OK, didn't really get into AoE III at all.

IIRC, Empire Earth seemed to be based on the old "Rock-Paper-Scissors" game; Unit A is strong against Unit B, and Unit B is strong against Unit C, and Unit C is strong against Unit A. Didn't like it at all.

[grislyatoms]

Make it turn-based and I'm all for it. I like to plot and scheme a bit before making moves. 

Real-time games aggravate me, though I did enjoy the first few instances of Command and Conquer.

Going after the enemy ore harvesters to break their production was quite satisfying.

[jamz]

I enjoyed playing them until I realized that no matter what I did, I would always get my ass handed to me.  Now it's all about the FPS and zombies.

[Nightfall]

Talk to the Ensemble guys.  Maybe they'll implement it in their next game.   

They won't be making anymore games. Ensemble no longer exists.

[Kyle]

Wow, sounds like I've been sort of out of the loop. The last Age of Empires game I played/saw was II, and it was all Medieval.

[Marvin Dao]

Make it turn-based and I'm all for it. I like to plot and scheme a bit before making moves. 

Yep. Outside of a few games (Empire, CoH, Sins), all the units in RTS games move too danged fast. That tends to devolve the tactical bits into "who has the faster mousing hand" or, even worse, army composition.

[thebucket]

I enjoyed the setting of AoE 3 which is the Colonial Period in America, using a mass artillery battery to destroy charging cavalry is just FUN! Especially since I have a good sub and when the cannons go boom, they BOOM .  I was disappointed that AoE3 didn't have much for naval combat.  I'd like a game that has 18th century naval warfare; I've always like the warships of the age of sail.  Total War:Empire looks like it will feature a healthy amount of naval warfare so I may have to pick that game up.

[taurusowner]

I can't stand turn based games. I agree that sometimes RTS games can move quickly and haphazzardly.  I think that a way to solve that would be to allow formations and sectors of fire.  I play C&C Generals a lot, and the HMMWVs move a lot faster than other units and in a convoy line.  I would like to set formations where all units move at the same speed, and maintain the formation I set them in. 

[Matthew Carberry]

I have that complaint with Rome: Total War as well.

I'm probably doing something wrong but I can get my army arrayed and moving forward but once I start having the units target enemy formations, they break formation and it devolves into a melee.

It's a Roman army, one would think you could have the unit AI, I don't know, use actual Roman tactics and discipline?

[Regolith]

They won't be making anymore games. Ensemble no longer exists.

Yeah, I forgot about that.


Also, my avatar?  Militia card from AOEIII. :D    Some civilizations get to call in a militia, which lasts for a short period of time and doesn't do a heck of a lot of damage but works as a last ditch effort in defending your town center.

[Werewolf]

Europa Universalis II or III (Paradox) does exactly what you want. Exactly.