When comparing The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth II vs Zero-K, the Slant community recommends The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth II for most people. In the question“What are the best RTS games for PC?” The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth II is ranked 5th while Zero-K is ranked 15th. The most important reason people chose The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth II is:
Everything about the game has been improved over the original including the gameplay. With improved base building it now easier to keep the flow of the game going. There has also been 3 factions added to the game making for more choice for the player in how their game will play due to each having different skills and weaknesses.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Refined gameplay
Everything about the game has been improved over the original including the gameplay. With improved base building it now easier to keep the flow of the game going. There has also been 3 factions added to the game making for more choice for the player in how their game will play due to each having different skills and weaknesses.
Pro Six different factions to pick from
There are six different factions you can play as: Goblins, Dwarves, Elvis, Men of the West (Rohan and Gondor), Mordor, and Isengard. Each faction has their own unique units and specializations allowing for different play styles across each chosen race.
Pro Great soundtrack
With a great soundtrack as well as realistic battle sounds the game has a high polished sound that fits right in with the movies.
Pro Multiplayer online battles
You can create your own multiplayer battles, even password protected ones for playing with friends only.
Pro Expansive tech tree
Land, sea, and air. Choose your favorite play-style and use the appropriate tech tree. There are tanks, bots, walkers, planes, helicopters, boats, and submarines available to you.
Pro Flat tech tree
All units are available from the start of the game. There are no unit upgrades and you don't need to build certain buildings to reach the next level of unit.
Pro Awesome graphical effects
Despite it is an open source engine, the graphics are fantastic.
Pro Cross-platform game
There are versions for Linux and Windows. The easiest way to play in Linux is using Lutris platform.
Cons
Con Hub building lacks the logistics of other titles
Battle for Middle Earth II features a main construction building with different hubs branching outward from it. These hubs are the sole areas where you can add on to your base and, with a limited number on your first construction building, expanding to another base is essential if you want to build all of the units available to you and keep up your economy.
Con Actually a 4X game with a touch of RTS
This game is in the 4X genre and should not appear in the top RTS games list, it incorporates good parts from RTS like base building but is not an actual RTS.
Con Micromanagement a necessary skill for success
Like many other high-skill intensive Real-Time Strategy titles, this game is far from simple. Players will suffer a unit capacity limit, meaning you will have to do more with a few units rather than rely on a horde. Unfortunately, micromanagement is not for everyone, and some may see the skill requirement as an unfortunate addition to and otherwise great RTS game.
Con Bad visual design
Obviously this is an open soruce project so nobody expects AAA level gfx but this one looks exceptionaly bad. Some of the weapon effects are hideous to look at. Simple things like UI buttons and color scheme seem to be visually out of sync with the way unit models and the map terrrain look.
It seems like a mishmash of visual styles which is probably a result of many different contributors of varreying skill levels.
There definately are visually consistent and pelasant ot look at open source games so The visual design of the game needs to have some sort of strcut guidline or rely primarily on the taste of a single individual from the ZK team.
Con Flat balance
The economy is very close to a Total Annihilation economy (despite all the changes they introduced) but the unit balance resembles games with harder unit counters like Warcraft and Starcraft. In Blizard games, there are different ways to limit what unit type or kind you can build at any stage of the game, like tech structures which the opponnet can scout.
In Zero - K this is not the case since there are no tech buildigns focusing the player on a certain unit type which can be scouted. You can make all units at all times. The gameplay design feels amateur and not thought through From the broadest perspective. It also manages to miss the advantages of the Spring engine and mixes the need to micromanage units that counter each other with big Area of Effect Weapons.