Let me say it this way: Expectations. To give you an example, whenever certain people hear the dreaded words Indie Puzzle-Platformer, they start running away with horror. When I hear TBS, Heroes of Might and Magic 3 is the first game that comes to my mind. It's not a genre that interests me, so I won't be seeking every individual TBS game with the hope that I might like it.

And you're right. The last base-building RTS I liked is Tiberium Wars, which is 6 years old. And I haven't played anything serious since then. But I still play those old RTS games with a passion. And as I said above, I'm well aware that there can be some slow ass RTS games. Total Annihilation and Supreme Commander come to mind.

Generally I prefer RTS games because they seem to flow better, and are less about micromanagement (albeit there's sometimes that too).

I think I was forever scarred by the UFO: Enemy Unknown turn-based ground combat where I had to individually micromanage each of my soldiers one by one, and they seemed to be unable to do any positive things by themselves, but they did stupid things like getting scared, wetting their pants, dropping all their weapons and running away. And then I had to hold their hands and lead them back to their dropped weapons, pick the weapons up for them, change their diapers, blow their nose etc.

I like to be able to control my units directly _if needed_, but sometimes too much is too much.

But then, ever since Warcraft 3 introduced faster gamespeed as a gameplay element (ie. you couldn't freely slow it down if things started getting too hectic), I've started thinking that maybe turn-based strategy games are more suitable for me after all. I don't like to be rushed.

At least Gorky 17 was pretty ok, I didn't mind the micromanagement in it.

It might be worth branching out a little, and try at least one game from each major category of TBS though. The difference between Jagged Alliance 2 & Civilization in terms of gameplay is greater than the difference between Battle Isle & Red Alert, yet JA2 & Civ are both TBSs, while Battle Isle is a TBS & RA is an RTS.


That's why I did not like the first X-com either. The micro-management was just too much for me. Had the squads been smaller, I would not have found it to be an issue (I love Jagged Alliance 2, and in this game you micro each individual soldier even further, but as you don't have nearly as many of them, the game flows better, at least in my opinion).

Like many here I enjoy both of them...really depends on the game, and if it was well made. Of recent examples I've played, are the Dawn of War 2 games for RTS, and presently, I am really enjoying Eador MotBW for a nice, but engaging TBS. That's why I often make good use of the "pause" button when playing them...lowers my anxiety level tremendously, lol :D

Completely different genres of games. One is all about plotting and long term planning; the other more dependent on twitch gameplay, memorization of build orders, and repetition of specific commands. There are also quite a few rts that have ditched base building available. I find these games incredible boring as there doesn't seem to be enough to do for a real time experience. Overall I prefer turn based games personally.

Oh yes, I'm definitely certain that it's good to branch out. Once upon a time, I used to hate FPS games with a passion. Now? For the last few months, I've been playing FPS games with a newfound fervour. I'm not even playing RPGs, which I liked a lot. Yes, I'm not above dipping my hand in uncomfortable genres. It's just that they are very low on my priority list.

I'm a strategist. TBS is to RTS what chess is to Rock'em Sock'em Robots.

I have to plug two games here - for anyone who says that RTS is about building the biggest army, and the game devolves into a giant, strategy-less, all-out win or lose rush.
Sid Meier's Gettysburg!
Sid Meier's Antietam!
I actually think they are a decent trade-off between the genres. There is nothing turn-based about them, but they also lack what you see in most RTS games. There is no building. You can pause to plan your troop movements. You can try an all-out rush, but you will lose (see Pickett's Charge.)
To win, you have to position your troops as best you can, taking advantage of terrain, keeping some units in reserve, using artillery to suppress the enemy, and flanking at the right moment. You must pay attention to unit position and morale. A single veteran regiment, entrenched on high ground, whose commander is unwounded, and it's flanks are covered, can hold its position against five times its own strength.
These might be the most tactical RTS games I have ever played. Rock'em Sock'em Robots they definitely are not.

Unfortunately, they are not sold digitally, and buying a physical copy can get a bit expensive. We need [url=http://www.gog.com/wishlist/games/sid_meiers_antietam]games on GOG!

Depends entirely on the game, I like Warcraft 2 and Starcraft but I also like the turnbased warfare in the Civilization games even with their stacks of doom.
I kind of like Panzer General except their use of terrible disadvantageous dicerolling, which is a major pain in a lot of RPG games as well.

I used to like TBS much more than RTS but have slowly gone over to slow RTS games for three reasons.

1:Slow RTS games are more fun in coop against the computer. If you know the game you can even get drunk with your friends while playing them. Gets really fun when you're drunk and start making stupid mistakes that all can laugh at. :)

2: I'm usually tired after work and don't want to have to think too much. A quick skirmish map usually against the AI gives me my strategy games fix.

3: This is a somewhat odd reason. I love watching my little soldiers, ships, robots whatever getting around shooting,smashing,bombing and generally creating mayhem all over the place. KABOOM when something blows up in all its glory makes me giggle like a little girl. :)

I still enjoy TBS a lot but nowadays I play them for the most part during weekends or when I'm free for some other reason. They take a lot of free time which I don't have a lot of anymore.

I like them both, but my heart lies with RTS. I got on to strategy games through Total Annihilation and AoE2 and have only recently got into Grand Strategy (Total War) and TBS (Civ V).

I think RTS are less daunting. If you make mistakes, you can roll with it, but with TBS it's a bigger deal.

I agree. But OTOH, I rarely have time to play TBS games as the ones I'm usually playing just take so much time per turn and so many turns to complete a game.

Total Annihilation/Supreme Commander vs Go-boardgame.

I love them both equally!

I love the adrenaline of RTS of making decisions quickly and racing to make that army or research a brutal technology. Also this one is great for multiplayer and LAN with friends. My favorites are StarCraft and Age Of Empires 2.

On the other hand, the complexity offered by most TBS is great. That makes for a completely different experience where you have to analyze your every move very carefully, you don't have the "but the time was running! I had to do something" excuse for a bad decision. Fire Emblem and Civilization are my favorites. I should also try Disgaea.

Am not a fan of strategy games but do like a good rpg. RT RPGs such as NWN2 (without pausing every few seconds) frustrate me as the party NPC's don't do what I want them to do.

Balduers Gates approach with the in depth auto-pause menu was spot on for me. I approached combat in full TB mode but the flexibility allowed both ends of the spectrum and everything in between.