Theater Of War series

[Saryk]

I bought the Theater of War series off of Steam. I am thinking about buying my son a copy. However I don't know if I will buy a copy for my two nephews. So what i want to know, how many players can play a multiplayer match in ToW games?

Thanks!

[Vinnart]

I believe it is up to 4 vs. 4. Multiplayer is where games like this shine, and live on. I do not have the PC juice I feel to Multiplay. The only thing MP I checked out a bit at this point is you can play MP vs the computer, and with AI controlled allies. If you only have 3 players it looks as if you can have the PC play to fill in. GREAT FEATURE! The only main feature I could not find is a way to adjust the the game speed. You must play normal speed. Offering a slower pace would be good for many reasons.

I know from my RTS days with a clan playing a certain stepping stone to TOW called Sudden Strike that MP play is where you really test your meddle. Different than a game like CM, which is always 1v1. TOW offers teamwork that makes RTS something that createse camaraderie. It is the most fun if you and, your teammates are on voice chat while you play. Like in real warfare the better the communication between units, the better your chances of winning, don’t have to type, and improves the fun. Great game! Great series! MEGA potential! I would say get it for all! What is great about this game is I am not finding it the clickfest like many other RTS. Don’t get me wrong though quick thinking, and quick reaction are there as in real life.

[Saryk]

Thanks Vinnart for the reply. I went ahead and bought it for my son and we played a multiplayer match against the cpu. I didn’t like the Domination or the king of the hill, but we did enjoy the Attack-Defend (Africa). Wish there were more maps; I might have to make some or find some to download.

Thanks again.

[Vinnart]

Glad you got the game Saryk. The more you explore it, the more you see its depth of play, and massive potential. The similarities are there to Combat Mission, but still unique on its own. You said that you did not like the Domination or, King of the hill. May I ask why? What turned you off? Are you new to RTS in general? The reason I ask is meeting engagements, which is basically when flags are more in the center is probably what is more popular In MP community. The reason why is because they are the most balanced. I know I prefer meeting engagements when I play MP Combat Mission games. Those types of battles do require the most speed in the initial deployment, but after that the pace changes with peaks , and lows, just as real combat from my understanding. I kind of think of it more like a chess game that has a mixture of speed chess, and no time limit chess. Your initial deployment is like your opening moves in a chess match. Also, recon is important of the map before you play serious. Having a plan before hand for your deployment objectives is important. All this, along with good COMMAND and CONTROL, make much less of an effort that goes much more smoothly. I cannot stress smooth command and control enough for RTS, and basically any PC game. In this aspect the waypoint functions are where TOW’s could use its most priority improvements. RTS does NOT have to be frustrating, and I think TOW is taking some of that stigma out from these types of games. I do wish though that there were an option to set game speed by host to ½ speed. The Combat Mission crowd would like this pace more, and those with the slower PC’s like myself would like this.

[Saryk]

Glad you got the game Saryk. The more you explore it, the more you see its depth of play, and massive potential. The similarities are there to Combat Mission, but still unique on its own. You said that you did not like the Domination or, King of the hill. May I ask why? What turned you off? Are you new to RTS in general? The reason I ask is meeting engagements, which is basically when flags are more in the center is probably what is more popular In MP community. The reason why is because they are the most balanced. I know I prefer meeting engagements when I play MP Combat Mission games. Those types of battles do require the most speed in the initial deployment, but after that the pace changes with peaks , and lows, just as real combat from my understanding. I kind of think of it more like a chess game that has a mixture of speed chess, and no time limit chess. Your initial deployment is like your opening moves in a chess match. Also, recon is important of the map before you play serious. Having a plan before hand for your deployment objectives is important. All this, along with good COMMAND and CONTROL, make much less of an effort that goes much more smoothly. I cannot stress smooth command and control enough for RTS, and basically any PC game. In this aspect the waypoint functions are where TOW’s could use its most priority improvements. RTS does NOT have to be frustrating, and I think TOW is taking some of that stigma out from these types of games. I do wish though that there were an option to set game speed by host to ½ speed. The Combat Mission crowd would like this pace more, and those with the slower PC’s like myself would like this.

The reason I do not like Domination is the finite amount of units that are deployed and there are no reinforcements. If holding an area gave some kind of points to spend on additional units, I’d like that a ton more. Of course I am new to the ToW series (but I have played the MoW series) and I am only playing Africa maps now. And don’t know the full capabilities of mods and extra maps, plus I was playing versus the AI.

My experience , I have been playing strategy games since the 80’s, Modem Wars, Dune, Steel Panthers (I still have them in the closet), etc. There are three genres that I prefer Strategy, RPG/MMO and FPS.

[Vinnart]

I am new to it too, but have been exploring it much. Domination sounds more like a Combat Mission type play. In CM, from my knowledge there are no reinforcements in MP RTS. That sounds like it would be more popular with very experienced players that want it as the ultimate challenge of having to rely on your limited resources to win. I think king of the hill might be more popular where you get points to get reinforcements for flag capture. That is how Sudden Strike had it. I believe Sudden Strike 2 had the best concept of flags. Flags were in groups or pairs by color. For pairs you have to capture both, and hold for certain amount of time to capture. When capture you got reinforcements. The pairs made it more team orientated.

It sounds like you have the experience to know there is a learning, and patience curve for any new game to understand it, and enjoy it more. Especially games like TOW where there is much depth to learn about. This game has a good future. Too bad I would lag to death to even try it MP beyond playing the AI on my PC, or I would try to get a game with you to check it out. I would probably not play as well as I hope first time out MP, but it’s all in fun.

My experience, I am new to TOW2, and usually try the demo for any game like it. I am a very picky gamer. I loved strategy games as a kid in 70’s and 80’s. I got my first PC 10 yrs ago, and found a game called Sudden Strike shortly there after. I would check other games out, but stuck mainly to SS because I got involved in competitive team multiplayer in a clan. I stuck to that for a few years until the team broke up. An old army buddy kept trying to get me into CMx1 for the longest, but I had a closed mind. Finally I did try, and grew to LOVE the CM series. I didn’t get into it until CMAK. I have been playing pretty much CMAK, then CMSF for the past several years until finding this game. TOW1 just didn’t grab me for several reasons. TOW2, and now Kursk are so much more polished. Now with the new strategic level it will have even more layered depth. Both CMx2 and TOW2,3 are great games, but only TOW can give the player the experience, and involvement from the private to the Division level. You can care about the soldiers, or not. Its up to you how deep you want to get involved with the individual soldiers/characters, and still have fun. They need to make it easier to change the soldiers names. This gets a person more interested by being able to personalize it, and makes it easier to identify individuals. I will remember a guy I named Clint Eastwood much more than a guy named Hoo Flung Poo (no offence to my Asian brothers). It is good there is a default name for each soldier, but I can’t pronounce many of the foreign names, let alone easily identify them.