Your favorite strategy games.

[AdamReith]

Multiplayer mostly only works for chess or if you have a group of people also into these sorts of games.

Investment is just so huge to develop even basic competency in any half way complex strategy game.

My list:

AoW1
MoO2
Alpha Centaurai
Dungeon Keeper
Xcom Enemy Unknown
Heroes of might and magic 3
Rome: Total War
Combat mission: Fortress Italy
Graviteam: Mius Front
Armoured Brigade
Pike and Shot

I've spent a lot of time on others but these were the ones that felt like that they paid off in terms of interesting moments.

 

[Dodo1610]

Age of Mythology
Empire Earth 2
Stronghold + Crusader
Civ 3+4
Company of Heroes 2
C&C General
Medieval 2 + Empire Total War
Star Wars: Empire at War
Battle Realm
Spellforce 1+2+3

Massive RTS

Ground Control 1+2
World in Conflict + Soviet Assault

 

[std::namespace]

As to always playing players, this is not generally viable as it would be too time-consuming and they'll drop the game the moment they start losing.

right, true,
but what are we doing when we play single player "strategy" games?
what is the thought process that defines the "strategy" part and which is not trivial at the same time and can be, if recognized by the ai... lel, acted against?
i start homm3, look at known map, what is my strategy that goes beyond an extremely simple buildorder? (i never played homm3 mp competitively)

these games are barely games
they are "exploration" vehicles, for a very wide definition of exploration: from rules to content
you dont strategize approaches that can be countered
you are actually aiming to fuck the ai where its blind

 

[Ba'al]

Not a single mention of Cossacks? I thought this place was crawling with slavs?

I know about Cossacks but sadly never played it. I was always looking for a good sale, though. Also not a Slav.

It's one of my favourite games, but sadly I think you kind of need to grow up with it otherwise you end up comparing it to stuff like AoE II and end up disappointed. The first one has a massively underrepresented setting (when muskets were starting to get effective but not good enough to be without protection of pike blocks) and still looks great years later (Cossacks 3 being a strictly graphical remake of the first game for people that think more graphics = more better). Cossacks 2 is quite a bit different, being in the napoleonic era, having more tactical battles and a severely undercooked Total War style campaign mode, which is honestly the best way to play the game as the pacing of the new combat system doesn't work with base building. The games are also frequently on sale and dirt cheap on Steam.

 

[Galdred]

I think the 10 last year limit is a good one, because I don't feel like saying once more that X-COM, MOO1/2, MoM are great games et all.

So let's roll with it:

SP:
Shadow Empire(bad UI and mediocre AI, but there are not many 4X that even try to model encirclement being a bad thing).
FoG:Empire (I really liked the ability to play battles on FOG2, even though I used it 5% of the time)
Chaos Gate
nuXCOM2
King Arthur: Knight's Tale
Thea 1
Warlock 1/2: I really like the asymetry with the demon faction. It helps make you forget the AI cannot play
Invisible Inc
Stars in Shadow: Good attempt at MOO1 with the AI mod
Total War Warhammer something: Really frustrating, especially when it comes to sieges and auto battles, and it really feels like they didn't try that hard, but it is the first Total War I played for more than 100h since Medieval 1.

MP:

Space Empires 4X on Vassal and Board Game Arena. Granted, Vassal is not really a "video game", it feels more like playing the board game with some jankiness added. That said, it is also very customizable. BGA lacks the expansions. Anyway, SE4X is my preferred MP experience. It's a turn based 4X that feels a bit like a RTS, with a choice between teching, rushing or trying to out eco your opponent, and having to scout to know what he does. Imperfect informations makes the game much better than its competitors IMO.

Dominions 5 (haven't played 6): One of the best MP contented. I dislike the imbalance, because it makes 1 team vs 1 team unplayable (you need to count on other players to gang on the strongest nations). It could easily have been sorted out with a point handicap that could be set for each game (ie, strongest nation has less pretender points, decided by the host before picking).
It would also need some system to pick/ban nations.

Gladius: I found it to work much better than Civ for MP, with its focus on killing opponents instead of culturally enriching them.

Tabletop Simulator: This lets you try a ton of board games. The experience is quite good once you get past the clunky UI. Too bad you need to relearn it every time.

Blood Bowl 2: they don't deserve to be there after releasing the same game 3 times with some features getting worse between each, but I think that BB offers one of the best MP experiences when played in a league.

Special Mentions:
Void Destroyer 2 might not really be a strategy game, but I found it much more fun than X4 with its tight focus on fleet combat.

Games that had the greatest influence on me:
- Mega Lo Mania: That game got me hooked to the RTS genre (even though it didn't exist yet)
- Laser Squad & Space Crusade: Played it, loved it, could not find a copy of it, which made me obsessed over the game, to the point I made a prototype mixing both for my Atari.
- Civilization 1: The last high profile game I got on my Atari STe. I spent more time on the first than on all other civs combined
- Warcraft 2: I didn't play it much, but dreamt about replacing my Atari with a PC after playing it.
- Shogun 1: The game went out right between the time I was taking the written exams and the oral exams for the competitive entrance exams to top engineering schools. I ended up with a much lower score in the oral admission exams (that said, it probably has more to do with the fact that I perform very badly under stress).
- Master of Orion 2: first TBS game I got on PC, and it was a great one!
- X-COM: Apocalypse: due to my weird PC timeline, it was the first X-COM I played, so it holds a specialer place for me, compared to its predecessors.
- Hyperiums: Online browser game in which you can get attacked at any time. I ended up spending thousands of hours on it, making friends (and a girl friend), skipping classes a lot (because what is one hour of class skipped compared to the risk of losing everything you have built during your last months of free time?). I played the last year totally burnt out as I was looking for a replacement at the head of the alliance, but no one seemed interested in maintaining good relations with our neighbours. I almost failed to graduate because of the game... I don't regret anything, but I doubt I'll ever play something like that again.
- Dawn of War 1: The game I played competitively until I realized there was a hard cap on the execution level I could achieve, as I got trounced by the top Chaos player in the world. 3v3 with the same group of friends from Hyperiums still has been one of my favourite experience.
- Blood Bowl (any version, from Javabowl to Cyanide rerereleases): Just one of the best persistent competitive multiplayer experiences. Too bad Cyanide has been so incompetent with many key aspects. I had a great time playing on France Blood Bowl (Javabowl) and Orca Cola.

 

[Axioms]

Oh man I forgot Starsector. Amazing game by an indie dev and you can buy it not on Steam/GoG/Epic. Just totally fantastic. I really wish they allowed larger fleets in vanilla but still.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

retards are rare, most are mid

Whatever you say chan immigrant. Keep playing those mystical no retards online games.

multi is not about build orders

Of course not

and yet you fucking said so, build orders are something from rts shit, its not strategy if you are realtime-limited and have to get something up in seconds

here is an example of no-retards-allowed:
i recently played a ut2k4 match online, 16 people, 2 are shit, 1 cheats, rest is better than me, i used to be good
thats not a game for briansurgeons

another one:
i recently played my 11 year old nephew lol in 'napoleon at waterloo'
that pic below: goal is to get 7 units out north and/or kill 40 strength points of the enemy, overwhelming prussian reinforcements on turn 3
i played the french
THE CHILD instantly grasped that he has to block me on the exit - strategy of punching left over...
i pulled 3 or 4 units right after punching left to try and sneak by some of them, 1 got through

ABSOLUTELY NOT ONE SINGLEPLAYER AI RETARD vidyagaym is capable of reacting that way - NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONE
why play them? there is no sTrAtEgY in them

literally playing rock paper scissors blind and predicting the next step based on the previous sequence and current standing is MORE STRATEGIC than ANY game vidyagame made EVER!

1. Victoria 2

look at this shit, thats not even a game! LOL

looks likes a childs war game honestly.

I have been playing Hurtgen Hell's Forest solo against myself and winning (I think). You can play solo because the turns take so long you totally forget what you were doing w/ the other side's forces by the time you finish the turn you are playing. Its the perfect AI system.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

just going to post an old game I remember having lots of fun w/ that usually does not get mentioned instead of posting a lot of games people already posted. I honestly can't remember which one was better, or if they were both about the same, or if one was good and one was bad, and I might not enjoy them if I played them today since they are pretty old but:

Mission Force Cyberstorm 1+2

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Old Classics:

• Warlords II (1993)
• Master of Orion (1993)
• X-Com: UFO Defense (1994)
• Civilization II (1996; Civilization 1991 and Civilization IV 2005 are also great)
• Heroes of Might & Magic II (1996; HoMM, HoMM III, and HoMM IV are also great)
• Jagged Alliance 2 (1999)
• Alpha Centauri (1999)

Recent Gems:

• Troubleshooter: Abandoned Children (2020)
• The Dungeon of Naheulbeuk (2020)
• Urtuk (2021)
• King Arthur: Knight's Tale (2022)
• Jagged Alliance 3 (RPG Codex GotY 2023)

 

[Storyfag]

In no particular order:

UFO: Enemy Unknown
X-COM: Terror from the Deep
Master of Orion 2
Dungeon Keeper
SMAC
Civ 3
Heroes of Might and Magic 2
Heroes of Might and Magic 3
Heroes of Might and Magic 5
Command and Conquer: Tiberian Dawn
Command and Conquer 2: Tiberian Sun
Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars
Command and Conquer: Red Alert
Red Alert 2
Rome: Total War
Medievl 2: Total War
Starcraft: Brood War
Warcraft 3
Evil Genius

 

[PsihoKekec]

Strategy games

Civilization IV
M.A.X.
Kohan: Immortal Soverigns
Galactic Civilizations II
UFO: Enemy Unknown
Red Alert
Distant Worlds
Alpha Centauri
Medieval: Total War
Dungeon Keeper


Tactical/operational games

TOAW
Close Combat II
Steel Panthers
Syrian Warfare
Close Combat III
Panzer General
Close Combat IV
Graviteam Tactics: Operation Star
Close Combat V
Warfare

 

[flyingjohn]

Warfare

Best name for a strategy game ever.

 

[Silva]

A very good hidden gem is Armello, from the same devs doing the new Sodium Infernum.

 

[Saldrone]

Does anyone in this forum cares enough to explain me why Civilization 5 is trash? i liked it.

 

[flyingjohn]

Does anyone in this forum cares enough to explain me why Civilization 5 is trash? i liked it.

-Focus on small amount of cities.
-Global happiness
-1upt
-Stupid AI
-Bucket filling gameplay in the form of social policies
-No proper moddability until the end
-Simplified economy and specialist system
-Obnoxious city state system
-Range combat being fundamentally broken

The vp mod does fix a lot of the issues but it still feels like a dumbed down civ 4 with 1upt and hexes.

 

[VerSacrum]

Not a single mention of Cossacks? I thought this place was crawling with slavs?

Not a Slav but I played it and the spiritual successor American Conquest a lot back in the day, was even in a German online clan. You could get really gigantic battles going there, much larger than AoE, with proper formations and all. Good times.

 

[Humanophage]

Does anyone in this forum cares enough to explain me why Civilization 5 is trash? i liked it.

I like it. I still prefer Civ 4, but Civ 5 was surprisingly good. It was very important to reduce the amount of cities, as it made no sense not to found as many cities as possible in Civ4 (particularly with the corporations). There was insufficient penalty for excessive conquest in Civ 4, which is a general scourge of 4X games that make them feel more like "conquer the map" rather than world simulation. Civ 5 really tries to balance building tall. The neutral states are a fun addition, although the AI is not good enough at using them. Not having doomstacks and encouraging some degree of tactics on the main map is nice, although the AI isn't great at it, but then all the more reason not to exploit it and play more peacefully. The AI is weaker than in Civ 4 where it becomes challenging at Immortal, but it is still good enough on Deity.

In general, it is a valuable strategy because it has combat, but puts more emphasis on non-combat gameplay, which is rare.

 

[civac2]

Civ5 is the Civ game for people who don't want to build an empire. That's the deal with the 'tall' play talking point. Of course, you can build large and powerful cities in other Civ games. The actual meaning is 'I can't be arsed to manage more than 5 cities'. Which is fair enough. But there are two problems with how Civ5 tries to create 'tall' play. You remove the usual source of conflict between players, the struggle to control land and resources. Also, more is better is essentailly a law of the universe. Trying to circumvent it requires hamfisted, degenerate and infuriating game mechanics like the global happiness counter and even worse the increase of tech/SP costs per city.

Conquest in Civ4 vs a skilled player is quite difficult and costly, btw. Moreover, city maintenance is quadratic in the number of cities. Even a successful conqueror needs time to digest the new lands which are unproductive initially and recover from the strain of war. This gives other players the opportunity to follow suit. End game is about conflict between large empires and players who couldn't obtain more land get eliminated. This is the proper order of the universe.

 

[Lucumo]

Not a single mention of Cossacks? I thought this place was crawling with slavs?

Not a Slav but I played it and the spiritual successor American Conquest a lot back in the day, was even in a German online clan. You could get really gigantic battles going there, much larger than AoE, with proper formations and all. Good times.

And then some multi-barrelled cannons murder your nice formations D:

 

[Axioms]

Civ5 is the Civ game for people who don't want to build an empire. That's the deal with the 'tall' play talking point. Of course, you can build large and powerful cities in other Civ games. The actual meaning is 'I can't be arsed to manage more than 5 cities'. Which is fair enough. But there are two problems with how Civ5 tries to create 'tall' play. You remove the usual source of conflict between players, the struggle to control land and resources. Also, more is better is essentailly a law of the universe. Trying to circumvent it requires hamfisted, degenerate and infuriating game mechanics like the global happiness counter and even worse the increase of tech/SP costs per city.

Conquest in Civ4 vs a skilled player is quite difficult and costly, btw. Moreover, city maintenance is quadratic in the number of cities. Even a successful conqueror needs time to digest the new lands which are unproductive initially and recover from the strain of war. This gives other players the opportunity to follow suit. End game is about conflict between large empires and players who couldn't obtain more land get eliminated. This is the proper order of the universe.

Millennia actually had a good strategy here. The problem with Civ 5 is you cut down the city count without meaningfully changing the city gameplay. Millennia has a sort of Endless Legend esque "tall cities are actually tall" gameplay but I think it does it in a less bland way than Endless Legend or later the Civ 6 district system.

My primary issue with Millennia is I'd prefer if you could target your "Influence" to specific tiles. Not the single "next tile" thing Civ 6 does but like spreading out from a particular town instead of every single border tile as Millennia currently works.

Also Millennia's resource chain system allows you to have few cities while still fighting over good locations.

Too bad they added that heinous battle screen.

 

[revani]

The ones that made me spend stupid amounts of time playing them:

Alpha Centauri
Jagged Alliance 2
Red Alert 2
Company of Heroes 2
Europa Universalis 4 (the only one in the list that I wouldn't touch today)
Europa Barbarorum
Long War

 

[BlackAdderBG]

Way too much mainstream examples so far.
I guess based on most replies, these are some "hidden" gems in order of enjoyment for me:
Alea Jacta Est- Best AGEOD game by far and top 3 Roman themed game ever.
Disciples II- shocked not mentioned so far
Rise of Prussia- very fun small scale AGEOD game, best kind as all their games are a mess when they try to expand the scope too much (like Pride of Nations or Civil War 2)
King Arthur The Roleplaying Wargame- best total war clone with an interesting campaign map and character development, but atrocious battles, still more fun than the nuTotal wars and Shithammers
The Kings' Crusade- similar as above, but about the Third Crusade. Same battle engine, but interesting approach to setting up battle plans before the encounters.
Banner saga games- Surprisingly satisfying tactical layer even if I hate it when it released. Good implementation of difficulty as well
Egypt: Old Kingdom- very interesting game, where you start from small village in Egypt to making a kingdom in Civ style tiles development
Legends of Eisenwald- Disciples clone in fictional medieval Germany
Phantom Doctrine- nuXCOM clone with interesting Cold War spin, falls apart mid to late game unfortunately

 

[Ladonna]

Random order of a few that I haven't noticed yet;

Myth 1 and 2
EU2
Warlords 2 and 3
Warlords Battlecry
Civ 2
Colonisation
Silent Storm/Hammer and Sickle
Laser Squad
Lords of Chaos
War of the Lance
Conquest of Elysium (any, but 5 is the best so far)
Close Combat (2 onwards)
Combat Mission
Advanced Tactics

 

[mediocrepoet]

Not going to try and cite hidden gems because I don't know what you guys know about and don't, but here are some games I've enjoyed a lot over the years/recently.

More recent stuff:

• dotAGE
• Wartales
• King Arthur: Knight's Tale
• Spellforce: Conquest of Eo
• Old World
• Jagged Alliance 3
• Troubleshooter

Classics:

• X-Com TFTD
• Master of Orion I & II
• Master of Magic
• Civilization II
• Company of Heroes
• Dawn of War

Games sitting in my backlog that I think I'll probably like but don't know yet:

• Aliens: Dark Descent
• Terminator: Dark Fate: Defiance - basically Company of Heroes style RTS in the Terminator Future War scenario.

 

[Morpheus Kitami]

Classics:
Age of Empires II
Chris Sawyer's Locomotion
Civilization I
Civilization IV
Civilization IV: Colonization
Galactic Civilizations II
Heroes of Might and Magic III
Heroes of Might and Magic IV
Jagged Alliance: Deadly Games
Jagged Alliance 2
Master of Magic
Mount and Blade
Pharaoh
Rollercoaster Tycoon 1/2
SimTower

Does Pirates! count?

Hidden Gems:
Chaos Overlords
Crush Deluxe
Ironseed
Lego Rock Raiders
Lords of Magic
Metal Knights
Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds

Unfortunately, I don't get much chance to play strategy games these days. Too long and too demanding of my time. So most of these are from a time when I did have that time.