Staredit Network

Who enjoys strategy UMSs with tactics? Examples might include Diplomacy/Scenario Games, Phantom Games, BattleCraft, (Not Melee, it's not a UMS), Strategic Warfare, Team Micro Arena, Uberena, Nexus Destroyers, Snowball Wars, Bunker Wars, Tug-o-War, and Snipers... and if you must... UMS Melee. Add a map you enjoy that you feel is important to this list. If you are so inclined.

Which tactical game do you play often/enjoy and why? What makes your game own others and why should it be rated better than another?

Other
It is good.

Civil Wars, Diplomacys mainly. I don't think a bunch of those qualify as tactical warfare =\

Whilst making the list I didn't want people to all put other, hence, I decided to put down many things that were popular and could be considered tactical by their patriots. BattleCrafr for instance requires you to look at enemy units and then make a tactical counter. Bunker Wars requires you to make tactical strikes on enemies with your special powers. But yeah... For me it would have to be Diplomacy or Snowball Wars.

Nexus D, Battlecraft, or Tug-o-War. But then the thing is so much people edit the map and make it all weird. And Diplomancy sometimes doesnt seem very fair. There always is some country that is better than others, and if your unlucky and the good countries are picked your out of luck.

And Uberena doesnt seem that well known, iv seen it a few times but its definatly not as well known as some maps like Battlecraft, and Nexus D. Snipers seems like just sniping, and it does take skills but i dont like it... Snowball Wars, there always thoes odd heros... So pretty much the first one to get it wins I mean yea you need good tatics, but like in your map Veta, there are thoes little animal things i forget what there called. Once you get one of thoes your hero counter starts rolling in and you won...

Bunker wars is just getting upgrades and massing the weakest unit... or massing the strongest, most rigged unit =\

Well.. most of the bunker wars games are outdated, but I guess a more balanced, newer version would qualify as a tactical warfare map.

Some of those count as tactical warfare, SNIPERS IS DEFINATEY ARENA/CLICK

Diplomacy 7.7 = King

Diplomacy Blood and Iron = Cheap Ripoff, Burn it.

Cry Blood and Iron supporters.

Gold and Blood\Iron are for entirely different diplo players but bother are equally good.
Gold is a lot quicker and is unbalanced(Czech vs Syrian Infantry, Regular Ghosts vs Austria Ghosts, etc...). Although very very fun.

Blood\Iron makes you think before sending infantry at a tank. A tank can blow them to pieces. It requires less drop expanding and is more having a good combination and good tactics.

Diplomacy and Civilization Emerald FTW!!!!!

I prefer 7.7, however, I think 7.7 sucks and is unbalanced. Players are too far away and there are too many countries. Players end up massing the best possible infantry because of the distance factor. I played a decent Diplo recently, it was great... just needed balance unit wise. Diplo 2112 I think.

7.7 isnt very balanced... thoes zealot what are they thoes lancers owns... and I agree with what Min said. Also Blood And Iron is more nicely made, but it doesnt seem like a diplo game it seems more like thoes WWII or WWI type of games, becuase it is...

I'm pretty sure it takes place in year 1812 or so.

It's more of a war game... it takes tactics, diplomacy and micro, where 7.7 is just massing..=\

nexus d is so much fun. Most people think its a stupid overwhored team micro map but there are so many strategies to that game and it goes more in depth than most people realize.

Uberena , defences and Impossible Scenarios. Only things I play these days.

I don't see why Uberena is so popular. It's made by Moose, that's the only reason I can see that might make it played often by SEN people. It's a good game, just overrated.