Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

PC game suggestion

Jackofalltrades

By Jackofalltrades,
in Huddle Lounge

Recommended Posts

Eazy-E Mentor

Eazy-E

Posted
Posted

League of Legends. Its free to play and similar to RTS style of play. If you have ever played the WCIII mod DOTA, it is very similar to that. (Makers of LoL made DOTA)

It is classified as a massie online battle arena (MOBA)

I have been hooked for a while now. If you want to give it a try let me know. I can send you a referral.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted

RTS = Real time strategy, basically command and conquer, age of empires, and uh, some others I don't know anymore.

I noticed Steam had a sale on the "Cossacks & American Conquest" games, which are real time strategy games that offer historical campaigns and stuff in early american and european history, but I haven't tried them. They came out in the early-mid 2000s... if you look at http://store.steampowered.com/app/115210/?snr=1_6_4__421, you can find the "metacritic" review of the game and check out some of the reviews of it.

here's the link to the package: http://store.steampowered.com/sub/11264/

sometimes I buy from Steam, othertimes I use it to find games. Steam is kinda a pain, but whatever.

pretty sure they are single player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Razzy Newbie

Razzy

Posted
Posted

Go get an old copy of BF2, which I'm sure your computer can run, and download project reality. Then meet me on the Tactical Gamer server. Not only will it take you a good 10-20 hours to get the hang of every role, but it's a great time waster. I don't play it too much anymore as I'm usually too busy, but I've logged a ridiculous amount of time playing it since I first downloaded it (version .51, the game usually has 1-2 big updates per year and they're currently they're on version .97) a few years ago. Very addicting once you get the hang of it. Currently there are two game modes: AAS, which is between two conventional forces, and insurgency, which is asymmetrical. Current factions include U.S., British, PLA, Russia, Canada, MEC, Germans, Chechens, Taliban, and Iraqi insurgents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted

SCII's campaign was fun but short... Highly suggest you pick it up if you liked C&C/AoE type games, as it's also an RTS game but with nice graphics and a good story.

for that matter, if you never played the first strarcraft games, you might want to pick them up too

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HearMeRoar Newbie

HearMeRoar

Posted
Posted

I recently picked up StarCraft II. I was a huge fan of StarCraft, but had been busy with nursing school when SC II came out. StarCraft II has a great single player campaign and of course Battle.net multiplayer is always good. I'm really enjoying it so far and recommend it. Especially if your a RTS fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • MHS831
      Panthers Top 30 Visits and Draft Tracker

      By MHS831 · Posted

      I appreciate the honesty in your posts--I am not sure Canales is rusing(?) because I don't think we are good enough yet to draft players for depth on day 1.  I do think we are in limbo, fwiw.  At 19, I think you are drafting second rounders in the first.
    • strato
      It is time to Consider the Likelihood of WR at #19

      By strato · Posted

      We are in a unique situation here. Just my opinion. Three things: Moton’s playing health has been gradually declining as he is aging, while his contract is a drag on the payroll.  Something will give with him sooner than later but I think 2026 could be it.  So.. need a right tackle by 2027. At the latest.    Icky’s individual situation is unique as well. They would have had an extension done by now if not for the injury. We only have him for this year. With no assurance he will ever be the same player.  It would be reckless just to assume. Now we have Walker for one year. And that is a major relief. Maybe he is the answer, but the team that knows him best let him go and it was cheap for us to sign him. So how much did they value him?    We look to be needing two tackles by 2027.  And have poo for depth this year as well. So anyway we could draft a guy for 2027 RT and groom him this year, and see how Icky does, and act as needed in 2027. Spread out filling the two holes over 2 years.    Then I remember, hey if Bryce doesn’t get a Lot more consistent do they extend him? Hoping not, if he isn’t really good.    So then we are looking at the 2027 draft which people say is gonna be loaded with QBs. If we need a LT and a QB what is the pick gonna get spent on?   Taking into account the recovery success rates cited here on the Icky surgery, you might want to plan for him to not be the same player. rather than assume he will be and get caught with your pants down.  It is a tough situation.    And factor in that it is critically important to protect this QB, always, but especially this year where it is said to be make or break. And how you might feel about that.    All of it points to a real possibility that these things converge in the negative, like Bruce sucks and Icky is not the same. In that case if you want to be assured of getting LT secured, the only place you can do that through the draft could be very well be 2026 1st round.     For me, I would like to err on the side of caution.  Cover for these outcomes. It wouldn’t be fun. Added benefit is if we do have a tackle go down this year we will have a guy there. Because I don’t know what we have now.  
    • flagfootballcoach28
      Mike Kaye: “I would keep a pretty close eye on {KC Concepcion}.”

      By flagfootballcoach28 · Posted

      I agree. In a perfect world I wouldn’t want to draft another WR, but in this draft it’s fine based on the value of who will be there at #19.  All of the top tier guys worth pick #19 at other positions of need will be long gone. Only exception is Dillon Thieneman, but he’s almost a shoe in for the Vikings as the Harrison Smith replacement. Some posters on here want to draft an OT just to check a box without realizing the concerns and risk that comes along with said player. Sounds like XL to me… desperately drafting need… KC is a pretty safe player.  Produced all 3 years in college and last year in the SEC vs a lot of top corners in this years draft. He single handily dropped the South Carolina CB Brandon Cisse’s draft stock with how bad he abused him.   Sometimes it’s best to try and hit a double instead of going for the home run. This draft screams “go for the double”. Esp in the first. 
×
×
  • Create New...