Opinion of RoN

[cost]

"Is it anything like Cossacks"

Other than being an RTS, no.

Cossacks is a fast-paced no-holds-barred game. At least on 0 peace time (like I play). If you play with long peace times, it's closer to RON--long buildup then frantic action.

I put the new patch on and finally there's people on Gamespy. See you online.

[Rolfski]

GUI: 10
Finally a developer that understands how to incorporate the best features of other games, very intuitive.

Gameplay: 9
As said, some may find it a clickfest, others too slow. Still the gameplay is very solid and settings are highly adjustable to your personal style.

Graphics: 8
Some nice details but nothing too spectacular.

Sound: 8
Some nice sounds but also nothing spectacular.

AI: 10
Except for Galactic Civilizations RoN has the best AI on the strategy market today.

Longlivety: 5
The singleplayer Conquer the World mode is simplistic and gets booring soon. Also the game lacks a good story driven campaign.

Multiplayer is fun for a while untill you realize this game is overly balanced. Meaning that most battles end up in a big mess between mixed armies where the guy who has the biggest army up fastest usually wins.
Also the border/attrition system, although an innovative feature, seriously limits the strategic possibilities a player has. I came to realize that when I started playing Homeworld 2, which imo is more fun in mp and gives me more of that strategic chess feeling.



Overall:

If you like traditional RTS like AoE or Cossacks series buy RoN, it's better. If you like space setting I can also recommend Homeworld 2.

If you like fast paced micro clickfests buy WC3, Empires DotMW or Generals. These are all solid games with high mp value.

If you like casual turnbased empire building buy CIV 3: Conquest. The lastest CIV is polished and has some nice alternative campaigns. If you like space setting go for Galactic Civizations, it looks dated but the gameplay is good and the AI is incredible.

If you like deep (and I mean really deep) and highly realistic empire building buy Paradox games: EU 2 (1420-1820), HoI (1936-1947) or Victoria (1836-1920). As cost said complex but top notch. Their latest Victoria has an unsurpassed complexity and realism, still it is fairly easy and inituitive to play.

If you like it all buy Medieval: Total war. IMO the best overall strategy game that combines turnbased empire building with realtime 3D battles. The latest VI expansion is good and there is an incredible mod (MedMod) available that enhances overall gameplay.

[flash9286]

Multiplayer is fun for a while untill you realize this game is overly balanced. Meaning that most battles end up in a big mess between mixed armies where the guy who has the biggest army up fastest usually wins.
Also the border/attrition system, although an innovative feature, seriously limits the strategic possibilities a player has. I came to realize that when I started playing Homeworld 2, which imo is more fun in mp and gives me more of that strategic chess feeling.

Really how many mp games have u played, u have many option u can do an ancient rush, or the more conseravtive 150/150 rush or my personal favorite the raid/medival attack or the boom. These are the basics then u get into specfic civ straties. Take Japanese for example your got two choices the regular ancient rush, or what i like to do is the tweaked 150/150 jap rush go early classical build about 5-7 hi and some lc to take out archers and attack. The only balance problem in the game is the slightly overpowerd mayans

[Rolfski]

Originally posted by flash9286

Really how many mp games have u played, u have many option u can do an ancient rush, or the more conseravtive 150/150 rush or my personal favorite the raid/medival attack or the boom. These are the basics then u get into specfic civ straties. Take Japanese for example your got two choices the regular ancient rush, or what i like to do is the tweaked 150/150 jap rush go early classical build about 5-7 hi and some lc to take out archers and attack. The only balance problem in the game is the slightly overpowerd mayans

Exactly what I mean. I played most rushing, raiding and booming tactics but they all come down to being as fast as possible. Speed is overly decisive in this game.
However, deciding where to attack with what army is not that critical in RoN if compared to other games like HW2. Your options are relatively limited, at least untill modern ages. The border system and unit balance limits most midgame battles to frontline city clashes with mixed armies. Swarm strategies like in HW2 & AoE or surprise strategies like in C&C Generals & HW2 are relatively hard to pull of and play an insignificant role. So speed becomes more critical in this game which makes it kind of booring for me in the end.

[flash9286]

Exactly what I mean. I played most rushing, raiding and booming tactics but they all come down to being as fast as possible. Speed is overly decisive in this game.
However, deciding where to attack with what army is not that critical in RoN if compared to other games like HW2. Your options are relatively limited, at least untill modern ages. The border system and unit balance limits most midgame battles to frontline city clashes with mixed armies. Swarm strategies like in HW2 & AoE or surprise strategies like in C&C Generals & HW2 are relatively hard to pull of and play an insignificant role. So speed becomes more critical in this game which makes it kind of booring for me in the end.

In which game is speed not a factor of wining? I will even agree that during the early statges of ron most battles were front line battles. But know they are not common. Why would u attack a front line city just use general ambush ability and attack that crucial 2 econmic city. Or even better do the enlightment capital rush, maybe u should play game with me. One other thing about speed most people tech up to fast leaving a attack point where the rescoures are depeleted. Overall this game has many stratgies and they are all not front line gunpowder battles.

[Rolfski]

Try out C&C Generals or HW2 (demo if u want) and you will understand what I mean.

[flash9286]

i have played c&c, never played HW2. The only game that comes close to the stratgic depth of RON is Aoc(IMO).

[Alex]

I'm a TBS player, and RoN was the only RTS game that I could play and find it enjoyable.

But it is a RTS game, so you won't find there the deliberate pace of a TBS. Sure, there is the pause button, which makes things more bearable to me.

It is certainly one of the more polished RTSs in the market now.

[Capt Dizle]

I consider BR to be head and shoulders above other designers. SMAC was simply amazing. Still, I didn't buy RON because it was RTS. In fact after the Civ3 debacle I quit buying computer games period.

If BR regains his senses and builds another TBS game I'll buy it. Maybe he will look at games like Shogun and do something that combines turn based empire building and real time combat. I would like that.

[Sarxis]

Oh man! That would be a dream come true! Brian making TBS games again? ::sigh::

His name on a TBS game would mean insta-purchase for me.

[Skanky Burns]

Pause and setting the game to run on slow speed makes quick mouse-using not necessary in single-player mode. Still, it isn't TBS.

[ACEofHeart]

Its a real time game that is made exeptional well..Some nice touches like city building with borders...
Now with that said,, I still see no "real" strategy involved".. I think its only in comparasion to other RTS that you might say there is ..
You still collect resourses as fast as you can, then you zoom thru most ages without ever really experiencing the units, benefits and buildings of that age.. And you still have very little control over most ending larger battles, can you say click,, click, click,,.. you can only make sure your units are upgraded and in starting postion..
The announced Expansion will have Goverment chioces which might add to the "strategy" side..
This is not a "Real Time" version of Civilization. If you accept it for what it is,, you'll have fun..

[flash9286]

there is alot of strategy invlolved ace, there are many generic stratiges like the rush, the 150, the boom, the kamaize, etc... After this u have specific civ strats like egygpitan one city raiding, french and turk classical attack and many mores. Play mp and u will see if u zoom though the ages that you want last long. As for the battles yes there is micro in them but there is still strategy like the type of units you use and general/spies/scouts abilities, there also bonous for where u fight liek on rocks/river.

[ACEofHeart]

I guess I don't consider Game Setup options the same thing as Strategy applied during the game. Regardless
of what Setup options you choose, the game still plays out the same way. Collect those resourses,build those same buildings and upgrade ,,upgrade asap...
I see no real strategy decisions that take your civilization into its own distinct different ,, as I stated earlier, maybe Goverment choices and a True Scientic victory or Economic Victory ( not just setting a number of your choosing in Game Setup options) would add to strategic gameplay..
Hey,,I still like the game... , I think its misleading tho to consider the gameplay with other turn based world builders... some Reviewers have done this.
Anyway... Happy New Year !!!

[Sarxis]

They are adding Government choices to the Xpack. And you can do economic victory in some form IIRC (forgot if its wonder victory). I do know you can do research race too.