A buddy of mine just passed on to me a copy of Sudden Strike II.
He said he had also briefly played it, and knew it belonged on my computer.
So I decided what the heck he was going to leave it here whether I liked it or not at any rate.
I must say I played one quick test of it, and was impressed it wasn't another chase em with the mouse constantly to have anything get done sort of RTS game.
I would have to say my biggest over all liked aspect was the lack of the "build stuff" portion of the game. I don't like that about RTS games (one of the biggest reasons why I won't play them).
The game sets you a mission, and assigns forces. Not unlike a Steel Panthers scenario. The game's visual scale is appealing (I don't like the scale used in Combat Mission, who cares if I can see if the guy shaved). The graphic icons are a bit smaller than those for Steel Panthers, but they are well drawn and the terrain is very nice looking.
The action differs from Steel Panthers, mainly in you that can't just sit there and take all day deciding.
That aspect of Steel Panthers routinely appeals to me more I suppose, but then I just don't have the desire to rush myself.
All in all, and after only briefly looking at admittedly just 15 minutes of one game (I picked germans vs a modest Russian front mission), I must say it is nice looking.
I am though, going to have to now re categorise RTS into RTS kiddie game, and RTS real time scenario:) .
Is there a distinction, well yes to me there is I suppose. Warcraft Starcraft, or whatever you want to call em, they are all just toys not depicting anything historical.
Sure there might be some pre game strategy, but during game its not strategy any more than running a factory at the managerial level is.
Sudden Strike II though is like comparing an Oral Test with a Written Test. Same questions, same answers needed. But you can't sit there muling the question over is all.
I think I will call it a recommended game:) .
I suppose this means I will have to look into checking out a few more games heheh.
