Prove me Wrong -- Protip, You Can't

RTS should focus on 15m games.

Base > Economy > Units/Defense

Other urls found in this thread:

steamcommunity.com/groups/AlbertoCaliphate
steamcommunity.com/app/6910#scrollTop=0
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

How does Sup Forums feel about tech upgrades?

RTS should focus on not fucking its own grandpa or catering to esports knuckledraggers. Various styles of play will evolve naturally once someone makes a single fucking RTS game that has more depth than a puddle and doesn't require spider reflexes to play.

This is why Generals is probably still the best 'all rounder' RTS.

Anyone could pick it up and cause mayhem but you had to at least be semi-strategic to win.

RTS is a broad genre. It's like saying every FPS match needs to end at 15 kills.

ergo: ur dum

I kinda like RTS's that take a bit longer as long as you have enough options to justify matches being that long

RTS needs to delegate menial tasks to the AI.
The ""strategist"" controlling each trooper individually is absurd and leads to the micromanaging gookclickfest that RTS became

RTS should focus on coop games, for which SC was actually popular in west

Paradox general is on different board, user

Let's count how long it takes for someone to bring up that other genre that we all know has become more popular over the years instead of focusing what could be done to make RTS feel fresh again

The point of the OP is that spending an hour to set up bases and get absolutely owned is awful.

MOBA!

I had more fun with RTS games when I was young and sucked balls at them. It was cool building your own base, now all I do is see them as gameplay elements I need to fart out as quick as possible.

Haven't really played one in a few years anyway I suppose.

If "FPS" are doing poorly because everything is 1000 ticket base construction fests, of course they should.

Id like a game where a base that takes an hour to build takes an hour to knock down.

However i dont see many people who would play a game that takes hours and hours to do 1 match even over multiple days.

Yeah you got that right, there are 4 times more people playing the co-op games in Starcraft 2 than people playing ranked games. At this point people don't want to learn things and find the genre too complicated, plus being solely responsible for winning or losing is too frustrating for them. Personally I like the co-op mode, it's fun since there's no pressure and it feels like the bridge between playing campaign but with someone helping you out.

Could MOBAs be matched in entertainment value by FPSRTS?

You're thinking of 4X/RTS like SOTSE

FPS RTS is an idea I love, I really wish games like Nuclear Dawn and Natural Selection 2 were more popular. Maybe if a big studio made a free to play one it would take off.

This. Recent releases are just shit uninspired ripoffs that offer less than what they are ripping off. Like Planetary annihilation, for example. If you are just straight copying a game at least have the decency to expand on it, not be shittier in every aspect.
Then there's Grey goo and Act of agression which I can only describe as souless. The thing is people who make RTSes nowadays think that because there's little games from the genre released, if they make one it will be great and successful outright. Except it doesn't work that way, lack of any other restaurants in a town doesn't make McDonalds great.

the only startegy you need is to play USa and spam rocket Humvies

>RTS needs to delegate menial tasks to the AI.
Only those who want to be grand scale.
Though, what would you delegate to the AI?

there is RTS mod for mount and blade. It's called Blood for Land. You should check it out.

I always thought Renegade was the ultimate in missed opportunity.

Goddamn that would have been great as an FPS/RTS Hybrid.

Honestly, ANY advancement to unit AI would be good at this point. Being able to tell units to perform moderately complex tasks like scouting an area, coordinating among themselves or doing hit and run attacks would do wonders for the genre even if you still had to take direct control for every important operation.

Ideally, you'd have an option of relegating certain aspects of play to AI commanders of different competence, so you can focus on econ and scouting while your AI is waging war, or do the opposite and ride to battle while your AI makes sandwiches in the kitchen. Or you can automate everything and intervene where necessary like some distant, low-ambition god. Aside from helping players who are slow, too deliberate or getting on in years, it would open up an entire new field of meta, where you try to trick your opponents about which parts of your war effort are run by an AI. Because AI is always going to be a potential weakness than a competent human player can exploit.

>RTS should focus on 15m games.
That's basically what the Command and Conquer series was and that's the highest selling RTS in history. You are not saying much.

Give us configurable unit AI. Why the fuck is a primitive "patrol" button an extent of this as of today? You should be able to at least give an automated "attack low health enemies first" command.

AI should handle all base building.

wasnt that because of the good single player?

AI should handle what you want it to handle, when you want it to handle it. It's not like AI is unable to screw up base layouts, fail to compensate for superweapons or put up stationary defenses where they're not doing anything.

Make the games a 3v3 endevour, with each player controlling a different aspect of one side.

>Mayor
Builds cities, optimizes paths, guides production.
>Commander
Leads the troops, controls the units, chooses the combat strategy.
>Agent
Scouts, harasses, uses special units.

Same amount of difficulty, three times the depth.

It's more about ensuring players have the optimum economy.

Time to steal another idea

supreme commander 2 was a an huge letdown with all those useless units and unbalanced mechanics.

Personally, i think big scale rts should take a note of assfaggot games, and make basic NPC units autospawn and patrol to the enemy base
Other stuff that will be nice is
>Build repair pad/hospital
>Can select at what HP units will auto retreat for repairs/healing

>Select interceptors
>Link them to radar
>They will automatically take off and intercept any enemy plane the radar detects

How about this.

Each player has a starting pool of construction points and selects what buildings he's going to have in the base. Then you get a 1 minute setup phase to leisurely place them around. And that's all the buildings you'll ever going to get, rest of the game is unit production and map control. Maybe at most some crude outposts.

You're encouraging early game building sniping.

Base could be tough for weaker units. Look at Supcom, a single starting turret can shred a squad of T1s like they're nothing.

You can use a transport to drop the t1 units way benind the pds and start wrecking shit by using the holes in surveilance.
Unless you make mandatory defence implacements integrated into the buildings, divided by importance, like HQs having better firepower on them then the other structures.

Base defenses in SupCom are super-worthless.

Now I'm reminded of a game with turrets directly integrated into most basic buildings, but can't exactly remamber which one it was. Maybe Earth 2160.

Wargame is quite different from the rest

Yeah, the russians had turrets that moved around their buildings on rails.

Tell it to that stratbomber swarm incoming to wreck your commander because you didn't bother with AA protection.
Unless you make enough interceptors, obviously.

I think it was 2150 actually.
2160 had defenses on buildings for the LC and ED but you had to build them.

Dawn of War ork buildings also had guns

RTS should focus on strategy over mechanical skill and games should be over an hour long at least

Real time tactics games are more similar to strategy games like chess since you focus on what you do with your units, how and when to engage, etc

>any RTS
>good single player
ha ha
C&C was the biggest selling RTS in history probably cause it was the first, unless you wanted fantasy in which case you could play Warcraft but a military theme is going to be more popular obviously

so you are saying that, on average people cared about and enjoyed multiplayer more than singleplayer in C&C?

No, I'm just saying RTS games are shit single player, but it's not like it mattered, it was the 90s and there were no other games like it, just like there were alot of shit NES games that people still played anyway

If anything removing base-building from an RTS game makes it less strategic, not more

ok so the game wasnt good yet people bought it, that is your claim?
wouldnt it be fair to say it was good for its time?
like how the first computers were shitty compared to what we have today, but they still served their purpose

Too bad being more strategic means more complexity which translates into no one playing the damn game in comparison to mobas

Someone who actually knows their stuff, please tell my why Starcraft 2 supposedly sucks. I unironically think it's the best RTS game around with probably the healthiest player base, but I see it getting bashed everywhere and all the time.

esports is shit

RTS games became less complex as less people started playing them. All the esports shitters wanted 11 units per side with a focus on micromanagement. Ironically a game like Dota2 is far more strategically complex than RTSs ended up being with hundreds of heroes and items. If someone reinvented RTS into something that had more strategy involved it would probably do quite well

Spawn Larva

since this is the closest to an rts general how alive is voobly for aoe2
hd looks like ass even if you ignore all the KANGZ shit so i'm not interested in it and i feel like playing aoe2 against humans

APM>>>>actual tactics
That's not a strategy but a glorified clicker game.

sc1/esports shitters hate it because it isn't brood war
the rest of the world hates it because it tries too hard to be esports

>games should be shorter
>game lengthening features > game shortening features
???

Well argued my friends.

To be fair, most RTS games aren't really about strategy.

RTS games will never regain their former popularity. People are just too casual. Just look at how people are STILL playing skyrim.

RTSes suffer from trying to copy WC3/SC2 because those were the last really successful ones.

Players also can't shift the blame on anyone, you can't easily integrate hats into the game(faggots love to dress up shit) and everyone thies to make it an esport and ultimately that does more harm than good.

>because it tries too hard to be esports
What exactly is wrong with that? Doesn't it just mean it will be properly balanced?

'casuals ruin everything' is a meme. Hardcore games are more popular than ever. Autistic shit like dwarf fortress or grand strategy games have an audience now when they never would have had one 20 years ago. There's an audience for nearly any sort of hardcore game imaginable. Just because there's alot of casual video game players now it doesn't mean hardcore ones went away.

>What exactly is wrong with that?
Focus on micromanagement over strategy. It really is that simple. SC2 makes you click for the sake of clicking, it has mechanics with no depth like inject larvae just to make you click another thing every few seconds

Very little tries to imitate blizzard RTS.
These days it's attempted C&C clones, attempted TA clones or attempted CoH clones.

Why play them then?
RTS without strategy is pointless.

objectively wrong

> Hardcore games
like what?

Yeah, but most devs aren't happy with niche audiences. They want to to sell a fuck ton of games so every dev can get a mansion made out of solid gold and cocaine.

Sure there are indie devs but you can count the amount of indie devs that don't do pixel shit on one hand.

yeah unfortunately RTS games are a bit too complex for most indie devs so there hasn't been an indie RTS revival yet

>futuristic RTS
>everything has pointless glowing bits

>futuristic RTS
>every glowing bit isn't useless

>futuristic RTS
>everything is useless without glowing bits

...

>Play SupCom
>Enjoy it
>The lack of any decent audio kills it for me
>No memorable music, generic effect sounds and worst of all: Units don't fucking say anything.

>Play Rise of Nations
>Good music, poor sound effects regarding weaponry and movement
>Units don't say anything

This should be criminal in RTS games. I love hearing units talk, I.E Company of Heroes, Warcraft, Starcraft, World in Conflict and so on.

>hire voice actor
>"ok, I'll need 10% royalties"

Play something with me lads.

AoE2HD if you can tolerate awful netcoding plus australian ping.

And where ping doesn't matter, Rise of Nations Extended, FAF, Total War Warhammer

This hasn't happened ever. VA's get paid a specific amount for their job. Now with the strike that might change but back when these games were made, they were paid once and that was it. And a VA for an RTS game sure as fuck does not get paid much.

>PCHEW PCHEW PCHEW
>pchew pchew pchew
>faster pchews
Yeah, sound design wasn't great.
The only memorable sounds are microwaverapebeam, yhwassa's phase bomb, and
>STRATEGIC LAUNCH DETECTED
>mfw

I don't know how it went, but the image and the text are in reference to recentish VA strikes pushing for royalties. Jensen's VA was one. And I could see it having some success there because Eidos is pretty stuck with having to use specifically him.
I think the awful VA that did female shepard's voice amongst other things was the other higher profile VA bitching.

FAF and AOE2, here.

Everytime we have these threads we're all reminded that Sup Forums consists of kids and casual shitters.

aight, if you want to play get in uh...
here. Here's a random meme group with an empty chatroom I belong to for some reason.

steamcommunity.com/groups/AlbertoCaliphate

Happy to play whatever, with however many people. I'm fairly average at all the games though.

>Dumb every game down to basic overpowering with attack units and battle "strategy"
Yeah let's appeal only to horribly underaged, attention spanless rejects.

10% is too much for a VA. I'd agree to 7% at most. That is, a starting fee of however much is the standard, plus 7% royalties. Square Enix can afford it and they know it.

>Check it out
>WE WUZ memes
>Sup Forums shit all over the place

Just kill yourself you McFuckup.

How is the strike doing?

>17 year old from Sweden is a moderator
>They all have meme avatars

jesus fucking christ

I'm not really into quick RTS matches or multiplayer in general, but just watching bases grow gets boring. What are some city builders with actual threats?

Anno series

Yeah yeah, I know. As I said, meme group I'm in for some reason.

Get in the Deus Ex group chat then if it upsets you that much. I'm not sure why it should if you can stomach being on Sup Forums in general past all the memespouting. steamcommunity.com/app/6910#scrollTop=0

>Those few wonderful week during lotv beta when spawn larvae was changed to autocast.
>It gets changed back because idiots think there is too little to do even though getting a robust creep spread and microing multiple armies takes infinite apm.
I'm still mad.

>strategist
You are describing a tactician not a strategist

pharaoh or caesar 3

I never played a RTS but SOASE interested me because I love spaceship battles.
How dead is the online?

If I visit Sup Forums, or Sup Forums in general then I accept the memes and find them befitting.

A group like that is just made for underage shitters like you.

Probably pretty damn dead. Sins is so fucking slow with nothing to do with all the downtime.

You should endeavor to be more tolerant, my good friend.

and that is objectively wrong

Sins takes up to 6 hours per match, so, you know, pretty dead.