Why do nostalgia fags make a big deal out of base-building in RTS games?
No one wanted that shit. We all wanted to control huge armies and watch them fight but we were never allowed because if we weren't doing a ton of shit back in base while also achieving perfect micro we were losing.
Then a bunch of RTS games came out and figured out how to make good RTS games without base-building and everyone took to them but they're always hated here for some reason.
Do you REALLY want to play StarCraft where if you don't click a certain amount per second you lose?
>>334338135
Good area.
Another thing I don't get is this arbitrary definition of RTT And RTS. Like somehow practicing build orders to get as fast at them as you can somehow makes the game more strategic. None of you know what strategy actually is.
A strategy is "I'm going to make a lot of basic infantry and equip them all with Grenade Launchers."
In a traditional base-building RTS, you need to look up a build order for that to achieve the perfect ratio of resources (because they can't just make it simple and just stick with 1 or maybe 2 at most) then spend a lot of resources building buildings to then spend more resources on an upgrade for grenade launchers, all while making sure you spam out workers at a rate that you will be able to eventually spam both the soldiers and workers at the same time.
But in Dawn of War II, to do that, all you have to do is capture control points, and then make a lot of basic soldiers, and give them all the Grenade Launcher upgrade. Hell, there's even a strategy in which control points you want to go for.
I will never understand RTS fags that want base-building simply to increase the "mechanical skill" an RTS game has. Go play Starcraft II if you want to be forced to do a chore every once in a while to play a game.
>>334338962
Its probably because they dont like rts's were the matches are decided in the first 5 minutes :^)
>>334340395
I don't get how that disproves my point.
The grand majority of traditional RTS games are basically just over by the time someone misses a click.
>>334340476
>The grand majority of traditional RTS games are basically just over by the time someone misses a click.
You're not some super Korean pro, get over yourself
You seem to be under the impression that the base building is just an anchor and the entire game is all about ACTION
RTS games aren't about pure action, and base/resource management gives you more ways to win
Say my opponent in starcraft goes with a gas heavy build and has great micro in battles but is a chump who gets outmaneuvered in the greater battle. A simple, cost effective strategy could be to attack his vital resources. Even just large scale harrassment works if for nothing else but to distract the enemy player.
When you have nothing but army units against other army units the game is significantly simpler. Some people (like those who enjoy strategy games) believe it or not enjoy a level of complexity and openness in how they play.
>>334340476
By grand majority did you mean Starcraft and wc3?
>>334341013
Almost every major RTT has an element of attacking someone's resources. It's just that the resources are based on control points and such.
>>334341192
Playing cat and mouse on a control point is absolutely nothing like resource management with developed, built bases involved.
>>334341345
Yes, playing Cat & Mouse isn't anything like playing Chicken.
>>334341013
>RTS games aren't about pure action, and base/resource management gives you more ways to win
if i wanted to manage resources id go get an accounting job.
maybe they should make some sub genre for people like you who defend economy as part of a genre that is clearly marketed for its combat.
maybe something like Real Time economy or some shit like that.
>>334342530
They do, it's called a City-Builder.
>>334341021
Except that's only true in those games if you suck at video games. But who am I kidding this is /v/
>>334343034
>Mechanical skill is what RTS games should be all about
>>334343096
I don't think any games needs to be about anything but being about having any sort of skill isn't a bad thing, contrary to what you might have been told here.
>>334343214
There's a difference between strategic skill and mechanical skill.
Games like Starcraft and AoEII are games that focus more on mechanical skill than strategic skill.
>>334338135
Low level RTS is best level. I only play with another friend who also doesn't know what he's doing. It's the one genre that makes being shit more fun. Don't have to worry about optimal build order and can just place things when needed and pop out units.
>>334343339
And? What's your point why are you telling me this. Games like StarCraft and wc3 don't end when you fuck up once. That wasn't even true for 2.
>>334343453
Pretty accurate. The problem is you simply can't ever play other people online who are at that same nonexistant skill level.
>>334343581
Maybe you aren't aware of the fact that it's incredibly easy to climb ranks in SC by just practicing one shitty strategy over and over and doing it as fast as possible.
After all, RTS games with base-building are more about mechanics than strategy.
I don't mind base building. I don't mind purely strategic games. You're debating two totally different styles of RTS, they both have their place. L
>>334343760
Maybe you aren't very aware of how things work but being good at one thing is obviously going to trump anyone who is shit at everything. Once you actually get to players who know how to play the game being good at single strategy will get you nowhere. Clearly you have zero idea what you are talking about though, I can only imagine you got shit on by some God tier Korean and have hated the concept ever since, or even worse, you shit on it simply because you think it lends more credit to what you like that it's opposite might be bad.
>>334344079
And you wonder why base-building RTS are dead.
>>334344183
I don't actually wonder. You seem to be having a conversation with yourself. Enjoy.
>>334344714
Well, standard /v/ arguing. You sure won the argument.
>>334338135
But... Some people just want a real good game where you can actually win by perfecting your defenses instead of going full retard with massed armies clashing in the mid-field. Dunno how many are actually with me on that, but I really like my RTS to involve some amount of Tower defense. :/
I kinda' like the way Total War handles it.
It lets you pick your poison. If you're into the real-time battles, you can have the AI auto-manage all your cities and just move your army from fight to fight.
If you're into city-building, you can manually adjust the factors of each city and auto-resolve all the battles.
Or anything in between.
>>334345346
What RTS games even exist that give you defenses that are actually worth a damn?
>>334338135
>huge armies
>DoW 2
ahahahahahahahahahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHahahahahahaHAAAAAAHAHAHahahahaha
There's a LOT of issues with the RTS genre and community right now, but this entire argument and thread is borderline retarded.
>>334346005
Protip: Just because one specific game doesn't have huge armies doesn't invalidate my argument.
>>334346010
Like what issues?
>>334346079
>Protip: Just because one specific game doesn't have huge armies doesn't invalidate my argument.
Posting the wrongest example for your statement shows that you never even touched any strategy game or you just went fishing.
>>334345346
Defense is less strategic than offense in every RTS I've played. Offense requires scouting, then interpreting that information to know where to strike while you balance your economy and protect yourself from raids. In comparison, defense lends itself to ignoring the other player, not adapting. That's fair enough if you like it, but at a competitive level you want good ways to break turtling so you can force your opponent to either adapt or lose.
>>334344813
Not the dude you were talking to, but the irony here is simply incredible
>>334345480
That's a different beast entirely, as they mix the grand strategy and RTT genres. Fair enough if you like it, hell I really enjoyed rome. It's not relevant to RTS though.
I urge everyone to try supreme commander: forged alliance a go, and grab the unofficial patches on FAF if you can (hell, FAF works on pirated copies even).
That game gets the genre to a T. Every option has direct counterplay, so as long as you're scouting and adapting to what your opponent does you'll stay ahead. It also tries to eliminate micro as best it can; build templates, build queueing, unit queues you can loop and make as long as you want, the ability to make as many waypoints for as many actions as you'd like. The two resources are both automated and important. Strategic zoom also helps (why it isn't a staple of the genre by now is a complete mystery, we can only blame the success of a more stagnant RTS like starcraft I guess).
It's quite simply the most complete RTS to date, and it's a big shame that the rights to SupCom were given to square enix so we got the abomination that was supcom 2 instead of a real successor.
>>334346010
Really dickmunch, you can't think of anything? Well here's a whole fucking essay for you.
Only one game with a publicly visible competitive scene, which also happens to be a bland modern-day adaptation of dated RTS concepts and a Blizzard game to boot.
A community that is more interested in purchasing bare-bones HD Remasterings over supporting any new or innovative game. RTS Developers who are then torn between trying something new and interesting, or catering to existing/hardcore RTS players. If they create a game to appeal to RTS Nostalgia, the game will automatically be deemed not as good as the originals, who sit upon their high golden pillars built upon years of balance patches, expansions, and community and mod support. Anything novel is right out.
MOBAs (although this may actually be less of an issue in the coming years, as developers are finally realizing the potential of the basic game design, and that RTS controls are actually the worst implementation of the gameplay).
Even the few remaining strong non-standard RTS producing developers like Relic and CA are now bogged down by companies like Sega, producing few new games or games that are bogged down with crappy design and/or DLC.
The main points are the shitty nostalgia-obsessed community that creates threads like this, lack of visibility in the greater gaming marketplace, and perceived high barrier of entry, which all serve to hobble any growth of the playerbase and bring in new blood, which in turn just makes those same issues worse and in turn reduce the developer dollars that are going towards RTS. How it got to this point is a whole separate matter.
What are some good base building games?
I want a Base Building game where I can control where my front line is so I can tear it down and set it back up when I need to.
Posting some pics.
>>334346967
>percieved high-barrier of entry
>percieved
>No one wanted that shit.
I am so angry at that sentence that I'll eat the entire bait just to say go fuck yourself. Fuck you OP I am mad.
>>334347149
Is there a way to put my hands on RA2 without buying the whole collection on Origin? My discs are broken.
>>334346913
I just got sins of a solar empire is that any good?
>>334347238
The more fags I trigger, the better.
>>334338135
>No one wanted that shit
Efficient base building is part of strategy.
>>334347306
https://cncnet.org/red-alert-2
RA2 is free my friend,forever
>>334347172
>percieved
Really cocksleeve, all the fresh manure in this thread and you're going to call me out on some I before E goatshit? Or are you trying and failing to make some sort of poorly conceived point with all that hot greentexting?
>playing RTSs
I just like watching koreans play
you'd have to pay me a lot to learn all that shit
Base building is part of the fun in Age of Empires
>>334347309
It's very good and there's some great mods out for it, but don't expect anything competitive or as deep as a TB 4X. Absolutely great for dicking around or playing with bros if you have the time to play a whole game.
>>334342530
>if i wanted to manage resources id go get an accounting job.
If I wanted to manage huge armies I'd sign up in a milliary academy, what's your point?
>>334338135
My first rts was Age of Empires, I liked the building up and the slower pace. If I wanted pure violence I'd open up the scenario editor and make fuckhuge armies murder each other.
>>334347450
It's not a percieved high-barrier to entry. It IS a high barrier to entry.
RTS games that aren't slow naturally already are hard as fuck for new players. Then maybe they wanna play AoEIIHD or some shit, and they wanna try playing against other people.
Well first, they need to learn a build order, and then practice that build order as fast as possible. Then they need to go online with a toxic and hostile community that gets mad at them for making tiny mistakes and has tons of smurfs at lower levels.
It's not percieved. It's very real. Unless you have friends that you can play with, you will not be enjoying your time learning that game.
Let's just ignore SC2 anyways, because it's a trash game and even though it's the only publicly visible RTS it's still almost fucking dead.
>>334347435
b-but
>EA Games have not released Red Alert 2 or Yuri's Revenge as Freeware.
desu my favorite rts all have some kind of base building, from age of mythology to rise of nation.Eck my favorite is still empire earth, a shame it aged so badly and two was a travesty
>>334347795
>EEII
>A travesty
>>334347309
I haven't played the game yet, though I do own it. I'm not a huge fan of 4X in general since I tend to favour faster paced games (relatively of course). It's shelved at the moment in favour of other things, but that's just me. You don't lose anything from simply trying to play the game, especially if you've already bought it.
>>334347889
Might have mistaken 2 and 3, it's been a while since I last played them.
>>334338135
I have over 1k hours in DoW2 and it would have definitely benefited from base building. The lack of it basically meant the game revolved around the first one or two engagements since losing the first battles pretty much fucked you the whole game. There was no punishment for spamming units instead of teching up. I was one of the top Ork players and it was so easy to win just by spamming Slugga Boyz.
>>334347715
Is the AoEIIHD community really toxic? That's really sad to hear, since from my experience RTS communities tend to be so niche that most people welcome new players and new competition. Heck, when I first started playing supcom I asked some players from the top 10 if I could play against them, and they were all willing to play games and point out my mistakes.
DoW2 was bad because the combat was boring. Its that simple.
Seeing a massive horde of orks get mowed down is fun. You cant do that in DoW2.
Thats it.
>>334348435
Personally I found DoW1 combat to be more lifeless than DoWII.
>>334348502
Why did you think that? Honestly curious
>>334338135
I like base building. The more the better.
>>334348548
I didn't like the way bullets hit enemies, and the melee felt less visceral.
It also has a lot to do with how early game nothing dies because everyone just kind of smashes reinforce and all your dudes are inaccurate as fuck.
In DoW2 I felt like bullets hit with more impact and melee abilities did more.
>>334348364
Yes, they were. Also SupCom is a game with significantly easier base-building imo.
>>334338135
base building adds a whole new layer of complexity onto the game. Pure micro would result in fast, boring matches
>>334338135
>No one wanted that shit. We all wanted
Well obviously someone wanted that shit, as there's a huge amount of people who want basebuilding. You're telling a group of people that nobody has their opinion, even though there is the group of fucking people you're talking about to begin with.
Are you retarded? Are you seriously pulling the austistic "If I don't like it, nobody else can possibly like it" card?
Great thread man
Also
>Dawn of War 2
>good
Basebuilding is way more fun than spamming tanks at your opponent, that's why. I always hated how some of the most interesting RTS games, like C&C, are less about making a good base and more about throwing as many units at the enemy as fast as possible. Fuck that shit. I'd rather fight AI that lets me take it at my own pace.
If that's what it means to be an RTS pleb, I sure as hell don't want to be "pro", because it's a faggot's playstyle.
>>334347792
Just pirated it you assface.
>>334349127
But that's wrong.
>>334348714
>I didn't like the way bullets hit enemies, and the melee felt less visceral.
>It also has a lot to do with how early game nothing dies because everyone just kind of smashes reinforce and all your dudes are inaccurate as fuck.
I feel like these are things DoW2 could have fixed, without removing the large scale warfare of DoW1 which is why I like DoW1 more.
>>334349424
DoW1 wasn't particularly large scale, though.
>>334349467
Maybe not SupCom large, but it was far larger than DoW2.
>>334349564
That's relative. The largest I think a match ever got was what, 100 units? More or less?
It still didn't feel like that much to me.
>>334348714
I guess it's because the game's newer? Perhaps that attitude developed with it's spike in popularity. Oh well, at least it's fun with friends I guess.
SupCom has a very unique style to base building. I definitely wouldn't call it easier though, just more adaptation based - the better your opponent is, the more difficult keeping a functioning base is.
>>334345812
Tiberian Sun, Nod defenses were damn good combined with the artillery. The expansion made the artillery less good though.
>>334348052
II was the one with territories and did Rise of Nations but better.
III was the travesty.
>just about massive armys fighing
Is'nt that games like tom Clancys endwar and what not? Where the idea is to simply use the resources given to you as best as possible, without an income source for new stuff?
For rts's I always gravitate towards stuff like supcom.
>>334349619
>That's relative
No shit? DoW1 has larger battles than DoW2. Thats that.
>>334349267
I bet you bought Fallout 1&2 as well.
why did supcom 2 suck? what happened to planetary annihilation? why is forged alliance still the best RTS if you want partially automated macro scale battles and awesome base building? and why does it still lag at very high unit counts?
What are some good games the focus on base building over combat?
I loved 1602 AD but don't know any other games like that
>>334349853
It lags at high unit counts because you haven't applied the FAF patches which optimise the game. As for the rest of your questions, I can only cry.
>>334350005
Stronghold Crusaders 1
Dont bother with the second, removes many features from the first.
>>334349723
>The expansion made the artillery less good though.
The NOD artillery was OP as fuck in vanilla.
>that pinpoint accuracy against moving targets
That's why I play wargame and mowas2 desu, base bulding pls go and stay go
>>334350281
The only flaw with the artillery was how you'd end up with those giant as fuck craters in random places.
>>334350018
well shit, I should take a look at that then and try to rope my old rts buddies into a few games, it's been too long... at the scales we wanted, even with only 3 or 4 players, it became unplayable after a certain point
I just don't understand what exactly it is with PA, but I know there is something very wrong with it - it lacks that charm, that spark, in spite of being more or less a trimmed down supcom at a much larger effective scale and fucking orbital cannons and planet crashing and shit
RTS is a misnomer in the first place, a historical accident like "artificial intelligence". It doesn't do what it says on the tin.
>>334349741
>3 was beyond earth before beyond earth
I remember everything now, even why I purged those memories, just kill me already.
>No one wanted that shit.
Speak for yourself retard
>>334348112
Flash gitz were the superior unit to spam
>>334350417
You hit the nail on the head I think; they wanted to create an even more epic scale than supcom, but somewhere along the way they realised that it was impossible to keep the complexity of supcom and also expand the scale, So, they sacrificed complexity for scale sadly. Could they have done better? Maybe. Probably. Personally though, I think it was doomed as soon as they started marketing it as having planet spanning maps.
It doesn't help that the units look like toys, I have no idea what's up with that. Also I hear the devs are colossal jews and cared more about the money than their love for the genre, though I have no idea how true that is.
>>334338135
>no one wanted it
Fuck off kid
>>334350925
As a kid I mostly played emperor, how was it seen by the dune community anyways?
RTS games should all be like Total war shogun 2.
>>334351638
>RTS games should all be like Total war shogun 2.
So AI does nothing but take high ground on the defensive while getting freespawn through the ass?
>>334343760
>you can beat bad players easily
wow what a fucking revelation.
bomp
>>334351835
But thats what you do.
Its strategic rigjt to take highground.
Why you complain?
AI to smart for you?
>hurrr durr I don't understand how people like X and not Y
>>334338135
honestly my favorite part of RTS games is base building
>>334338135
Pro-ism and E-sports are part of the cancer that killed all the comfyness RTS had back then
today if you dont play rts like those korean SC players you look like a retard that should not play rts
i always loved to play more slowly, placing the buildings in a specific way only to look good on the city, building good defenses to make the game longer instead of rushing the attacks to finish fast, almost like "role-playing" sometimes but not that much
>>334350925
I'm downloading this, wanna play?
>>334354845
>>334350925
>>334354849
I got RA1 too if youre down lol
>>334354845
can you play age of empires online anymore?
>>334354971
no idea, its been years since last time i touched AOE1
>>334355312
I got red alert 1 and dune off cncnet.org if youre interested
>>334338135
>o one wanted that shit. We all wanted to control huge armies and watch them fight but we were never allowed because if
Thats why there are so many RTT threads
oh wait
>Then a bunch of RTS games came out and figured out how to make good RTS games without base-building and everyone took to them but they're always hated here for some reason.
No base building is RTT not RTS and DoW 2 was hated to death by removing the base building stuff from dow, 1 but games are shit tho
>Do you REALLY want to play StarCraft where if you don't click a certain amount per second you lose?
1 if the game is decided by it is shit and 2 the one who does the action faster will always have an advantage no matter the game
>>334338962
>In a traditional base-building RTS, you need to look up a build order for that to achieve the perfect ratio of resources (because they can't just make it simple and just stick with 1 or maybe 2 at most) then spend a lot of resources building buildings to then
Build orders encompass a minimun series of actions the player has to take, its not just building, but gaining map control, monopolizing certain resource, harrasing the opponent at certain time ,etc ,etc its in the player to adapt it and swap builds orders on the fly, to outsmart the opponent , thats the point of the genre and what makes it fun, having to use your brain
The difference would be like arena shooters to cod deathmatch
With RTTs the players have far less freedom since the developer has to force objectives somewhere to create artificial (not made by the players) gameplay otherwise the game would devolve into attacking your opponent with a click, W3 would be the pinnacle of what an strategeish RTT could ever hope to be. the extreme of it would be Dota and its clones
You cannot make a compelling multiplayer RTT game
>>334355792
Holy shit do people actually believe this?
>>334355916
Nice post
We all got a really elaborate look on why you think Anons post was ludicrous
Good thing we had this discussion
I feel mentally enriched
Thank you anon
>>334356125
If you actually took him seriously after "Artificial Gameplay" then the only person I feel sorry for is you.
>>334356186
>Developer puts some flags /capture points
>If one player takes the flags he wins the game despite not winning the fight
>Without the falgs players can just stall in an advantageous position forever or run around endlessly without a penalty
>The flags give nothing but not losing
>So both players are forced to play around it because the developers forces them to
>>334356363
No, I'm not going to engage with you about how "Artificial Gameplay" is the stupidest thing ever.
Might as well shit on AoEII's King of the Hill mode if you're that fucking retarded.
>>334356453
Why do you even post if all you do is call others retarded while bringing absolutely nothing to the discussion
You're wasting precious bandwidth that could be spent on Pepe
>>334356453
You meant that side mode that no one played and wasn't in the main mode of any RTS?
>No, I'm not going to engage with you about how "Artificial Gameplay" is the stupidest thing ever.
They would be arbitrary rules that go against or have a different nature from all the rest of the stuff in the game , the phrase seems to get the message across well
>>334356694
The objective of the game is the objective of the game is the objective of the game The objective of the game is the objective of the game is the objective of the game The objective of the game is the objective of the game is the objective of the game.
If you don't like that objective, go play something else.
For me personally DoW1 had the perfect mix. There was a good base amount of base building so you could choose which units to go for, which upgrades to priorotize and how heavy you should go on the defense while still keeping the focus on micro and the actual fights.
DoW2 seems stupid to me. If I just wanted to br handed a bunch of units with no base progredssion or resource management Id just play a moba or a fighting game or something.
>>334356798
>game built around 2 armies fighting
>Instead of letting the players figure out how to best use the tool they are given
>Devs add arbitrary shit to force the players do what they want for no other gain whatsoever
If anything just make massive maps so you cant get rushed that quick. I understand the whole the faster you click you win thing, that's why I'm not a big fan. but just recently I was playing red alert against some Korean fags and I instantly rushed to build air units, which he saw, so he want anti air, then I switched immediately to mammoth tanks from a second base he hadn't found and shit on him. so there are ways.
>>334345812
SupComFA / FAF ?
>>334356956
Yeah, putting resources in the middle of the map for armies to fight over is artificial gameplay. Just like their fun, it's artificial fun, not real fun.
>>334355792
>RTT is this thing because I said it was.
>Defending clickfests build orders
>Things switching pre-fabbed meta build orders is what encompasses strategy
>You cannot make a compelling multiplayer RTT game
>Despite the fact that Wargame and others have been doing very well and new attempts like Act of Aggression and Grey Goo do terribly
>>334346913
SupComFA / FAF
>>334357185
>>RTT is this thing because I said it was.
Define RTT
>Defending clickfests build orders
With hardcore RTT You would also get clickfests and RTS players do what RTT players would do PLUs they would manage their base and expansions
>Despite the fact that Wargame and others have been doing very well and new attempts like Act of Aggression and Grey Goo do terribly
Well how? no one ever talks about it and its essentially CoH but you get to do specific actions
Hidden and dangerous/commandos was better at the gimmick they have because they were centered around it
>Yeah, putting resources in the middle of the map for armies to fight over is artificial gameplay.
Both players spawn and do whatever they want as opposed to be forced to go protect some shit the dev wants for no gain
>Just like their fun, it's artificial fun, not real fun.
of course some people like eating shit but hey each to their own ecks deee
>>334357541
There is no RTT, just RTS. Either that, or all RTS games are actually RTTs.
And yes, you did have to keep going back and checking on your base because it was the chore that you had to do to keep playing the game.
Honestly I don't know why I'm arguing with someone who uses terms like artificial gameplay and artificial fun unironically when those terms even fell out of ironic use in 2011.
>>334358242
>RTT has no no base building therefore has to ahve elements that make up for it
>RTS have base building
>Theres no RTT
Of course you are scared of wordsp eople can repeat
can you explain to me what do you win by using shill-jitsu in this thread?
Like what are you after
>>334358476
Your definition of RTS having base-building and RTT not having base-building is completely arbritrary, but I just don't care anymore because this is /v/ where everything is a hivemind and not liking things that are older just because they are older is wrong.
>>334358621
>Your definition of RTS having base-building and RTT not having base-building is completely arbritrary,
Just like every genre name ever
As long as people know what kind of genres are represented by the acronyms it's completely irrelevant what they're made of
When you say that the Total War games are a mix of Grand Strategy and RTT you know that it has an overworld map where you try to paint everything your colour and a battlemode where you move units around without erecting buildings
>>334338135
But I enjoy the base building in an rts more than microing units.
>>334357541
>>334358242
RTS<->RTT is a spectrum
CoH is more RTT than Starcraft but more of a RTS than DoW2.
DoW2 is more of a RTS than World in Conflict.
RTT adjusting characteristics
>no or very little basebuilding
>resources limited to one that replenishes overtime (faster if units are lost)
>pre-combat deployment
>lack of resource chains
Its just people that did not play hard RTT games like Blitzkrieg or Men of War, stick it like a derogatory term on things they don't like, thus arguments like those in this thread.
>>334358838
No
If it has base building its a fucking RTS
if it doesn its RTT
thats the difference
>If it has a penis it can be a woman too
>>334338135
If it doesn't have base building it's not an RTS.
I enjoy Men of War 1/2 alot because each game is different.
In games like Starcraft you always get the same shit:
>Build up or Rush
>Counters for everything
>If you fuck up in the building asembly you've basically lost
Not having base building in Men of War allows it to be alot more variated, not to mention the big amount of troops you can pick.
And obviously when a german player spits out a Tiger early, ANY other faction is gona shit their pants, but it can also easily be disabled if he lets infantry get close to it with AT or RPGs.
So what i'm saying is that in MoW, any unit can do wonders, if micro'd properly., while in other RTS it's usually just blob and click on shit.
>>334348112
I have over 1k hours in dow2 and you're talking out of your ass.
>Slugga spam
Yeah that was a super op uncounterable tactic if you were SM pre the TIOW patch, every other faction can skull fuck t1 sluggas without even blinking.
>The lack of it basically meant the game revolved around the first one or two engagements since losing the first battles pretty much fucked you the whole game.
The point of the retreat system and the vp system was the opposite of that, it made it hard to inflict meaningful losses on your opponent early game unless they fucked up massively. Since you clearly only played for like 2 patches when slugga spam with the only ork tactic I could see how you would think that because sluggas could fuck up gens but only a retard would 3 gen into triple slugga.
>There was no punishment for spamming units instead of teching up.
Shit man having 60% of your unit cap taken up by sluggas is going to save you from 2 guardian, shuri plat into fast 2 and falcon isn't it fucko enjoy being penned in your your base at 12 minutes.
>I was one of the top Ork players and it was so easy to win just by spamming Slugga Boyz
Why go in the internet and tell lies? Even at its most obnoxious slugga spam was never the worst of the ork bulshit.
What about flash gitz spam, triple bigga shoota rush, stick bomma spam, double trukk, Love da dakka stunlock bullshit, Unkillable Knobz patch, ass knife, double kan?
>>334358942
Found the divisive faggot with no taste.
There is no point in discussing concepts with totalists.
>>334359097
>expecting the idiots to know anything about DoW2
It's literally one of the most boogeyman games on /v/, of course they're going to shit on something they don't understand.
>>334347612
Hey I did that but they won't let me be general :(.
Who /Elite Mod/ here?
>>334338135
I like to see my increasingly big army emerge from an increasingly large and complex base
>>334359150
Found the tumblrwhale feminist
There is no point in discussing concepts with shills
what are you shilling I wonder
>>334360040
I identify myself as a strategic bomber
Check your land walking privledge
Not me
I always wanted to build an impenetrable fortress that could survive waves of enemies
>>334338135
>Do you REALLY want to play StarCraft where if you don't click a certain amount per second you lose?
I hate "players", thinking like they know everything about gaming and the root of the term "REAL TIME STRATEGY".
>>334354845
This. The true spirit of RTS is base building.
God I'm glad the Korean gaming scene died thanks to their president.
Fuck you OP
>>334338135
>No one wanted that shit
yeah, that's why ALL the rts games that are considered good, as well as ALL the rts games that ever sold well, had base building. because nobody wanted it. sure.
>>334338135
>Then a bunch of RTS games came out and figured out how to make good RTS games without base-building and everyone took to them
are you high? nearly nobody liked them. that's why the genre fucking died. devs made shit nobody wanted. supreme commander was the last good rts.
face it - whining about base building in rts is the same retarded autism as whining about tank/heal/dps roles in MMORPGs. only absolute morons who dont understand the genre do it, and games who actually do away with it end up absolute garbage.
>>334338962
>None of you know what strategy actually is.
>A strategy is "I'm going to make a lot of basic infantry and equip them all with Grenade Launchers."
Okay this may constitute a strategy but it's a pretty simple and short sighted one. A better strategy example given would be "my enemy start position is close, I will attempt to make strong early game units to try and contain him and control this area of the map." Or "my enemy start position is now further in this game, I will attempt to play defensively and tech towards a middle or end game position where I can strike out with bigger units." This is also a strategy.
>But in Dawn of War II, to do that, all you have to do is capture control points, and then make a lot of basic soldiers, and give them all the Grenade Launcher upgrade. Hell, there's even a strategy in which control points you want to go for.
Here's the problem with Dawn of War II. The base building aspect could have entirely been removed and the game would have worked, it was for the most part relatively unimportant. Now I know why they de-emphasized base building aspects in DoW II is because by doing so it feels a little bit more closer to playing a real time version of the tabletop game.
>>334361228
I was simply naming "a" strategy.
>>334342530
>if i wanted to manage resources id go get an accounting job.
Don't worry you never will because you clearly can't manage any resources at all.
>>334361307
Okay fair enough then.
>>334361086
Aren't you the exact kind of retard that >>334346967
talks about?
>>334338962
>>334338135
I always.
ALWAYS play RTS games against an AI, rather easy one because I love building up my base and then proceeding to crush the enemy.
If I play against another player they just steamroll me because I have to be quick, I want to endure, build up my base and survive a few big attacks from the enemy before slaughtering them
>>334361428
nigga what?
>OP claims "nobody likes X in RTS"
>i show that every RTS without X has failed miserably
evidently, people DO like X in RTS.
case closed.
I have not played Company of Heroes 2 but I wish more RTS games would take many aspects of Company of Heroes 1.
Strategic control of certain areas of the map is vital, you still have allocation for base building, terrain of the map changes depending on damage and objects built around it thereby increasing or decreasing importance of certain routes or areas of the map, suppression against swarm strategies or "human wave" and last but not least importance of flanking and attacking direction(e.g striking tanks in the rear or side with anti-tank weapons.)
Like another example that is old and simple but was very nice was in Starcraft 1 where certain maps would only let small units through certain areas but larger units could not move through or certain areas into a base was blocked by neutral buildings that could be destroyed thereby opening up a new strategic possibility.
>>334361228
shame all the DoW games are shallow spess maroon circlejerks
>>334361618
>every RTS without X has failed miserably
Fucking what?
DoWII, Wargame, Men of War, and CoH 2 all still have active playerbases.
The only games that have failed miserably are the ones that have attempted to "bring back the base-building! The resurgence of RTS!" And wow, they all failed miserably because no one plays anything except shallow HD remakes and StarCraft II.
>>334338135
>No one wanted that shit
then go play wargame.
oh right, you can't, because if you're a shitter who can't even handle trivial base management then you sure as fuck cant handle the massive multitasking that wargame requires.
fuck off casual, this genre doesn't need trash like you
>>334361698
It is but I still enjoyed the games for what they were. Could be worse though, the space marines could have all been Ultramarines.
>>334361698
Warhammer fantasy died for the spess maroon circlejerks audience.
>>334338962
>A strategy is "I'm going to make a lot of basic infantry and equip them all with Grenade Launchers."
Rock paper scissors confirmed to be the ultimate strategy game
I like both games.
Generals Zero Hour with mods is amazing. And i LOVE Supreme Commander.
That being said, i ALSO love games like Men of War or Wargame. But they are different.
>>334361743
>DoWII
massive step down and not even remotely as popular as its predecessor
>Wargame
>Men of War
>CoH 2
niche titles at best
none of these even come close to the widespread acclaim and commercial success of classics like supreme commander or the blizzard RTS games.
>>334361812
>You are now aware there are worldwide competitions for Rock-Paper-Scissors.
>>334361853
As expected of the highest level strategy game
![RiverOfGold-4[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/qUMHesC.jpg "RiverOfGold-4[1].jpg")
>>334338135
>Not wanting to build comfy or grant towns.
Oh fuck off, that's mostly the reason I play RTS. Fighting is secondary.
Ignoring how shit OP, DoW2, and probably the rest of the thread I didn't read...
I like turn-based RTS, where you build your bases on a global map then zoom in to fight battles with troops you accumulated, it Total War and Empire at War.
Maybe Battlefleet Gothic Armada point-style multiplayer, any other games that do it that style?
>>334361851
Supcom 2 was shit, and CoH is not a niche game. The other two are though.
>>334338135
>No one
>We all
someone needs a red pill on life there.
>>334361851
Are you honestly going to try and compare RTS games during the prime of RTS games to games that came out recently?
Because two can play that game. SC2 is fucking dead. And yes, they are niche titles, but so is the whole fucking genre. At beast you have AoEIIHD achieving about the same numbers as CoH2 in terms of recent playerbase. Probably about a thousand players more because there's always the nostalgic compstomp crowd.
>>334361851
>massive step down
Holy opinions Batman
Someone who likes basebuilding and can't leave his comfort zone did not like it?
Its like people don't make games with you in mind.
>Nostalgia fags
I want kids to stay with their consoles and other crap.
OP = a fag
>>334361851
Relic got fucked hard by THQ from the start to the end which really hurt DoW2 more then a lack of base building.
They forced relic to ship early (which is why eldar have 3 platform units) because they were losing money hand over fist and relic was their most profitable studio.
They forced GFWL onto relic because M$ paid THQ to shill it (the massive connectivity issues pretty much solo killed multiplayer scene eventually).
Because THQ was going down quicker then the hindenberg over the dev cycle of the base game and the expansions there were multiple waves of layoffs untill by the time Ret shipped they had one guy at relic working on balance.
I'm quite confident that under sega relic could make DoW3 into a damn good game, a game with 15 faction DLCs but a good game none the less.
I like base building. I wouldn't personally buy another RTS that doesn't have it.
>>334338962
>arbitrary definition of RTT And RTS.
But that literally is the difference between 'tactics' and a 'strategy'. This isn't something marketing latched on to, it's like saying there is no difference between a strategic and tactical nuke.
>>334342907
cossacks 1 and american conquest
cossacks 2 is shit
>>334351389
>3D RTSWell, that and the rushed nature of the game.
Really, really bad balance, for instance.
>>334366375
Cossacks 2 is better than American Conquest.
Dear God fuck those garrisons. And you can only have 5 cannons despite rapid-fire garrison muskets scare away 1000s of men approaching all at once.
I really liked that Battlefield thing they did though, with the pre-set-up battles.
>>334359097
>What about flash gitz spam, triple bigga shoota rush, stick bomma spam, double trukk, Love da dakka stunlock bullshit, Unkillable Knobz patch, ass knife, double kan?
You don't see that shit spammed in pro 1v1 matches. 2v2, sure, 3v3 kek
New Wargame when?
Fuck you Eugen.
0ad is slowly turning out pretty sweet. It's still far from completion, but it's pretty fun to try out the different civilisations. They even have some flavor texts to put the civ traits in a historical context.
also it's free as in freedom
>>334368574
Not really. I appreciate the effort, but not even the pony mod can get me to play that game.
They've done great work on numerous assets but everything else is lackluster.
The pathfinding, the stability, the gameplay itself,...
>C&C 3 Tiberium Wars on 360
>Nod keeps hitting your refinery with a catalyst missile
I would tell NOD to fuck off, but they're the best.
> Tfw you search for Kane's Wrath torrents and you literally can't find any that still have seeds.
Fuuuuuuuuuck.
>>334370402
>tfw you search for torrents of any RTS and none have seeds
>except for a few russian ones
>>334338962
Take SupCom as a counterexample. There is no such thing as a SupCom build order past the 4-5 minute mark, tops, and the longer you use a static build order, the less flexible you are.
>>334370474
Use GoG torrents, anon.
Albeit at that point, you might as well buy them.
>>334367425
I'm not talking about now 3 years later after 700 elite mod community patches I was talking at the time on the patches they problems on, the crux of my point being slugga spam was 100% a pre TioW issue which made his claims less credible.
Also I know at least some of those strats were mostly 1v1 focused when they were op (double kan, fast trukk).
Just as an aside I always did and still do believe in the pre-EliteMod day relic never balanced the game around 1v1 which is why the majority of 1v1s were backcapping bitch fests.
>>334370712
>I always did and still do believe in the pre-EliteMod day relic never balanced the game around 1v1 which is why the majority of 1v1s were backcapping bitch fests.
Why the fuck would they balance for 1v1 in a game that is clearly designed for multiple players per side?
>>334371145
Exactly, i still think 2v2 was the best. Synergy between races and units was awesome.
>>334362289
Amen brother
>>334338135
underage
Since it is related to the thread theme:
What is your favorite RTS? Please also post your age.
C&C and Dune
Age 32
>>334373169
EE and RoL I'm 25
>>334359097
Why would I care enough about a game that's nearly 10 year old to lie about it you colossal autist? Tier 1 spam dominated 1v1 unless your opponent was a retard.
>>334338135
>Stop liking that I don't like.
>>334373169
Original War, 19.
>>334361524
Honestly, this nig
I usually don't like EASY easy, but building a big base then crushing a challenging enemy is fun. I hate the esports bullshit, but the thrill of commanding an army upon an AI is loads of fun.
>>334373775
I don't know you tell me? Want to tell me why you insist on being so wrong in the process.
Tier one blobbing strats were only ever dominant when something was stupidly broken (mek boy triple bigga shooters into eldar).
The most consistent 1v1 strat over the course of the game's life cycle was req only t1 into fast t2 into transport before your opponent could get AV weapons.
>>334338135
>we were never allowed because if we weren't doing a ton of shit back in base while also achieving perfect micro we were losing
No, you weren't allowed because you were shit at video games. People who were good at video games were allowed to have both a large army and a base.
Removing base building (and resource management in some cases) is nothing but the genre being dumbed down because of shitters who can't handle it.
I hope you never tried to play Battlezone, because you have to handle your base, keep your harvesters safe, order your army around and kill shit yourself all at the same time.
