Despite the stiff competition offered by Westwood's Command & Conquer series and Blizzard's Warcraft line, Lords of the Realm II eclipses both and easily gets my nomination for strategy game of the year. The full version of this game is nothing short of awesome. Virtually everything is improved this time around: gameplay, graphics, siege and battle engines, audio and, well, everything. That's not the case in Sierra's sharp update to 1994's medieval strategy award-winner Lords of the Realm.
Now Im obviously 24 and i have played (and still been playing) other, newer, and probably better games, but this one has stuck in my mind.Strategy games tend to focus on either micromanagement or massive battles, and no matter which one the game tends to focus on, the other almost always suffers. įinally, i remember the units were not humans.So, not historical/earth game? I also might remember a clock in the top of the building that was counting down the process of the training.im not sure about this one.
if you wanted a warrior, you send a villager in and he came out later as warrior)
The map is spherical, and if you go out on the one side you appear on the other.Ī little hint that i have is that there were some training buildings, and in order to train a unit you had to send another one in (so e.g. In my memories it is green-oriented, and there are ofcourse houses and some units. Back in 2000+ i think, (i was, like, 10-11 at the time) there was a RTS-civilization game on my computer probably installed by my gamer uncle
0 kommentar(er)
