[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/vst/ - Video Games/Strategy

[Advertise on 4chan]

Name
Spoiler?[]
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File[]
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 30 posters in this thread.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks. Make sure to check your spam box!

Self-serve ads are available again! Check out our new advertising page here.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: south-korea-flag.jpg (28 KB, 800x400)
28 KB
28 KB JPG
>destroys the entire genre of real time strategy
>>
would you be so kind to go back to your containment board
>>
>>571712
>talking about real time strategies and how they got ruined by gookclick shit
>fuck you go back
what did he mean by this
>>
>>571713
He's a bunkerfaggot terrified of his favorite boogeyman
>>
>>571702
don't worry anon, maybe you too will be good at the game someday :)
>>
>>571722
what is the fun of that shit?
>>
LoL is still alright, current creative bankruptcy aside.
>>
>>571702
tell me how they destroyed Age of Empires?

they can keep Starcraft, doesn't really matter to me
>>
>>571771
this. CoH and Age are the true faces of the genre.
>>
>>571702
Is that a play on playing it to death?
>>
>>571702
They didn't destroy it. Their tactical action "Strategy" games eventually got their own containment zone, known as MOBA. Now the RTS people can enjoy the real stuff like TW, Annihilation, AoE, C&C in peace.
>>
>>571702
AoE 2 will be chugging along long after SC is dead.
>>
>>571800
this but the opposite
>>
>>571819
no u
>>
>>571819
AoE 2 has more official support than Starcraft will ever have
>>
>>571798
But total war is literally tactical action, albeit slower pace.
>>
>>571713
fine
>an /int/ or /v/-level whiny overexaggerating shitpost without a clear description of a problem or any possible solutions for it
>>talking
so, how do you think one can "save" rts games? can you explain your ideas like a proper human being, without buzzwords, daft memes and vague/empty phrases?
>>
>>571843
Asymmetric non-competitive multiplayer
>>
>>571838
It has a complete strategy layer though, even if that part is usually turn-based. And the separate tactical layer encourages more methodical battles as you imply. In practice it feels like a way more extended RTS, the "turns" part is if you were fortunate enough to have a leisurely planning scenario in a fully real-time game and the battles feel more independent of whatever high APS production you did prior.
>>
>>571850
>starts compenting in your game
nothing personell kid
>>
>>571850
>Asymmetric non-competitive multiplayer
That doesn't sound like RTS at all. The real way to ensure RTS instead of MOBA is to have larger player counts and arenas so that some players can be dedicated to micro/tactics while others genuinely gain the time and leadership opportunities to make strategic decisions that direct outcomes in ways other than which side simply acted faster.
>>
>>571872
cope
>>
>>571883
I'm replying to someone who doesn't want competition or even real/direct multiplayer at all. What is the cope, brainlet?
>>
>>571890
>or even real/direct multiplayer at all
That's not what I said. Modern multiplayer games have such a need to be perfectly e-sports balanced that the theme of the game takes second place to ensuring two tanks from separate factions are 'balanced'
>>
>>571890
you've been seething about your MOBA boogeyman for several threads now, despite not understanding what makes a good RTS game
>>
>>571883
That's clearly what you need to do.
>>
>>571850
If you aren't being competitive why would you use any strategy at all instead of playing at random, seeing as how the objective of making a strategy is to achieve victory? And if there is no strategy why RTS?
>>
>>571940
You can still have objective based gameplay without it being competitive. And with that objective comes the strategy needed to take it from your opponent with what you have in hand.

This is different from the standard competitive RTS gameplay, where everything is designed to be as equal, balanced, 'fair' as possible.
>>
>>571895
Your "solution" has no direct relation to the problem you just stated. And if it somehow did, it would still be absurdly overkill. You've suggested changing the genre completely due to a laughably specific issue. They could just not balance those tanks, some devs don't care or update their games like that. You can use mods. Etc.

>>571940
It sounds like he wants something like a city-builder but with multiplayer collaboration.

>>571898
This is the first thread where I've talked about MOBA, schizo. They must have raped your arguments hard for you to go around posting like this.
>>
>>571952
By the sound of it you just want the same old RTS multiplayer environment we've seen since the very first one
>>
>>571950
the most competitive RTS to ever exist, Brood War, has completely asymmetrical factions, batshit insane OP units and all the possible tools to make the game unfair for your opponent
>>
>>571954
So it's the same as every RTS with some actual faction variety.

Really shaking up the genre here
>>
>>571950
Cooperative multiplayer is still competitive, against the CPU. But again, you don't have to come up with these bizarre changes to the genre just to leave factions unbalanced with more flavor.
>>
>>571950
>You can still have objective based gameplay without it being competitive.
How? If you have a human opponent and you have to beat him, it's competitive.

>And with that objective comes the strategy needed to take it from your opponent with what you have in hand.
Sounds like you're competing with him using strategy, but you said you don't want that?
>>
>>571956
>still competitive, against the CPU
>>
>>571956
>>571957
I'm not talking about cooperative, nor am I talking about a match where you're fighting from equal footing to see who's best such as in chess.

I'm talking about more scenario/campaign driven multiplayer focus. Something not meant to be a dick measuring contest but a chance for two people to have.... fun
>>
>>571950
>You can still have objective based gameplay without it being competitive.
No you can't. If you're trying to win, you're trying to win. If you're not, you're not. Simple as. You're just bad at competing so you identify it as something else to excuse your lack of ability.
>>
>>571953
>By the sound of it you just want the same old RTS multiplayer environment we've seen since the very first one
Not at all. I just think changes should be about adding depth and fun. Not to be absurd, overkill "solutions" to problems which they have no relationship to.

>>571954
Good example.

>>571955
He refuted the reasoning behind your stupid RTS concept. So now you're switching to the strawman that everyone else hates change simply because their think your changes are dumb and more appropriate for a city-building/simulation kind of game instead.
>>
>>571962
>If you're trying to win, you're trying to win. If you're not, you're not
I'm talking about treating flag football not as the superbowl
>>
>>571964
That's fine if you have different ideas, I'm waiting to hear them. Actual different ideas and not just unit variety
>>
File: Spoiler Image (24 KB, 425x281)
24 KB
24 KB JPG
>>571960
bro, I found the perfect RTS for you
>>
File: 1618680221032.jpg (12 KB, 480x640)
12 KB
12 KB JPG
>>571968
>what do you mean there's no game we can actually win?
>why would anybody even play with these?
>>
>>571958
>>571960
Whether a game is PVP or coop, sandbox or campaign has no bearing on whether it is not fun or over-balanced.

>I'm talking about more scenario/campaign driven multiplayer focus. Something not meant to be a dick measuring contest but a chance for two people to have.... fun
How does Halo Wars, one of the most conservative and simple RTS to ever exist, not meet this criteria?

You are inventing problems where there is none. And then acting as if co-op campaigns? are the only solution or some kind of breakthrough idea...
>>
>>571966
No you aren't, you're whining that there's people better than you at something. People who play flag football are 100% competing.
>>
>>571975
>>571973
That's fine if I'm in the minority, I'll concede the argument and sit back while you two brainstorm how best to measure dicks
>>
>>571980
I'm not measuring anything. You're whining about competition in the same manner a 5 year old complains during a board game when his mom rolls a 12 and gets to move 12 spaces.

Any act of constructively achieving a goal in a game is competition. This has nothing to do with RTS in general, you have an awful attitude and you're trying to project it as legitimate when it isn't.
>>
>>571960
Even in a scenario/campaign driven setting, if there is a way of playing optimally, people will discover it and the game will revolve around it. It didn't happen back in the day because people would form small communities with their local friends to play against and everyone would play at similar levels, but things are global now so if someone in Korea or Norway discovers the best way of playing everyone in the world will have the means to copy it. Your complaing is similar to something I've seen in fighting games where a few people lament the fact that back in the day you had more "discovery" where the games seemed to be deeper and in a west coast vs east coast tournament for example the other guys would show up with a completely different playstyle you've never heard of which was fun. The thing is that nowadays people are modding the PC version of your fighting game to find out exactly how many frames each attack is and games get figured out quickly and then the discoveries spread globally. The internet changed competitive gaming and there is no going back to your childhood.
>>
>>571981
The original question was
>so, how do you think one can "save" rts games? can you explain your ideas like a proper human being, without buzzwords, daft memes and vague/empty phrases?
>>
>>571982
Which is why I think the change that needs to be made is to ignore those types when designing your multiplayer. Don't make it as a competitive chess match, make it fun because the people who are going to minmax will do it anyway.
But I admit I'm in the minority with the way I play games

>so, how do you think one can "save" rts games? can you explain your ideas like a proper human being, without buzzwords, daft memes and vague/empty phrases?
>>
>>571983
>"save" rts games
bruh, I've been playing RTSes the whole day, there is no need to save anything
>>
>>571983
This is a great example of your attitude, too.
>moooooom, he pointed out what's wrong with my line of thinking make him take it back!!!
>>
>>571967
We don't need ideas so urgently, because OP is wrong. RTS wasn't killed by "gookclick", it basically contained that trend by creating MOBA. With MOBA as its own thing, you can be confident the games now called RTS again involve more traditional strategy and tactical depth. I already gave examples of popular RTS series that are still going strong, still provide competitive, fun, aesthetic experiences that haven't devolved into e"sports".
>>
>>571966
>I'm talking about treating flag football not as the superbowl
If flag football had an online ranked competitive mode and enough people playing it, you would be here complaining about it. It's not the game you're complaining about, it's the attitude, which as I said:
>>571982
changed with the internet. Those competitive games are as fun as ever, what you want is your childhood back.
>>
>>571986
>>571987
Okay, so I answered the person's question and you responded to my response. You have no intention of answering the question yourself so I guess this is where our conversation ends.
>>
>>571991
>and you responded to my response
Yes, like we're supposed to, go ahead and hide, but make sure to stop replying in the meantime.
>>
>>571989
Good stuff m8
>>
On the contrary, there is in fact nothing wrong with Starcraft 2
>>
>>571988
>RTS wasn't killed by "gookclick", it basically contained that trend by creating MOBA
But MOBA has no gookclicking. You control 1 character save few exceptions. There is no constant looking all over the map with high APM to manage your economy at one side while a fight is going on in the other. And you have a team so you can't even properly dick measure.

>>571994
There is 1 thing: Blizzard.
>>
>>571960
Kind of agree, game is not all about winning. I enjoyed playing stronghold/aoe-likes like citybuilding/roleplaying rts a lot, for example. While i wouldn't mind to wage war with another player occasionally, I don't want players always to be forced into this "kill or be killed" and "total war" contest endorsed by rts game design. But most games are either go deep down total war rts or focus only on citybuilding aspect. Some kind of mix of crusaders kings with stronghold would be great as for me.
>>
>>571994
t. pr*toss player
>>
>>571982
>>571989
Your point about it being now global is misleading. That is simply a difference in scale. But where you talk about the internet use and meta-gaming, that is the real change. Looking up strategies online is cheating, you are meant to think of them yourself or observe them in your actual battles. Metagaming is already bad enough for action games but for strategy games it destroys them, the whole point is to think of the best possible move at that moment. Do you think chess players are allowed to have AIs decide their next move? That's what metagaming is.

>>571975
>>571981
I think he's conflating competitiveness in general, which is partly what makes these fun and actually games, with the e"sports" phenomenon. The e"sports" phenomenon isn't bad because it's competitive, it's bad because it's meta and diminishes the value of being purely immersed and competing in the game world itself.

>>571994
Another good point. SC2 isn't to blame for the pseudosports use of it. It is still a good RTS as a normal game.
>>
come on, somebody post something
>>
>>571998
I think Anno is a good example of the direction to go down
>>
>>571998
Sounds like you prefer simulation games like Anno, Crusader Kings, Rimworld, etc. Just because some RTS can be played like that doesn't mean it's the same genre.
>>
>>572008
>Just because some RTS can be played like that doesn't mean it's the same genre.
Are you saying Anno isn't an RTS? What defines the genre to you?
>>
>>572005
>value of being purely immersed and competing in the game world itself.
what? the knowledge of how to properly play does not diminish the value of competition. I would even argue the opposite, players randomly picking how they feel like playing make the game less engaging.
>>
>>572012
Not that guy, but RTS has always been defined as Dune 2 or any game made in its image. Dune 2 was the first RTS in same way DotA was the first MOBA.
>>
>>572016
Maybe that's the Achilles heel of the genre, if there was a widespread switch to more Anno-oriented gameplay I think there could be a re invigoration of the RTS genre. Imagine what new and unheard of multiplayer concepts could be born when the focus is no longer on chess-style competition.
>>
>>572016
>DotA was the first MOBA.
Aeon of Strife chads...
>>
Age of Empires is too slow of a game, it puts me to sleep. Idfk how anyone likes it. Less depth than a 4x less action than any other rts.
>>
>>572022
true
>>
>>572020
>ugh if only RTS was not RTS
bro just dont play it
>>
>>572027
>real-time
>strategy
woah
>>
>>572028
there are literally multiple other genres that cater to your prefered playstyle, sim games, city builders, DFclones etc. RTS games have nothing in common with whatever you're rambling about.
>>
>>572020
Well, not to be rude, but the answer is "nothing". That's not how the genre works.
>>
>>572030
>RTS
>real-time strategy
Anno is an RTS whether you like it or not
>>
>>572037
Name of genre is not a definition of the genre, and that's an actual whether you like it or not.
>>
File: prestyge.png (16 KB, 300x200)
16 KB
16 KB PNG
>>572021
Someone remembers. Good.
>>
>>572041
Your definition of the genre is not the definition of the genre, and that's just fact

Anno is an RTS and I wish more RTS developers leaned to Anno style gameplay. I think that would be a way to reinvigorate the RTS genre.
>>
>>572048
No.
>>
>>572052
What's your current go-to RTS
>>
>>572054
Irrelevant.

What's with the tourists who get mad when things get explained to them and they realize they can't just demand that some other group change?
>>
Another option would be making asymmetry not "different units/buildings roster, same goal" type but more "different rosters, different goals" Something like: some players play with city-building oriented roster that have access to city/income buildings and weak militia, while others can have more professional army but can't supply it on their own without coming to agreement with "mayor" player. Kind of reminds this type of coop playing when one player of a team goes into income and other one is going into early rush.

Also there were various custom w3 maps that explored rts possibilities, i remember some funky massive map with a lot of players where valid strategy was going into alliance with other players nearby and defending/building up together.
>>
>>572058
Opinion discarded
>>
File: Distant.webm (1.98 MB, 1280x720)
1.98 MB
1.98 MB WEBM
>>572061
> but more "different rosters, different goals"
Distant Worlds does this but it's not MP, small rat race that specializes in mining bases their victory on trade and production rather than conquering
>>
File: Hammer time.png (648 KB, 831x609)
648 KB
648 KB PNG
>>571702
The problem with RTS is that although it has a very high skill cap due to all the micromanagement you can do but the method of achieving that skill cap is soul-consuming
>spend most of your waking hours playing the same game over and over, barely any other game, only that game for most of the time
>read up every online guide there is to further optimize your groups of units and such
>pretty much dedicate your brain to playing this one single game
>competitive koreans get trained and pushed into being faster and faster at pushing buttons and micromanaging, 10 actions per second is around the standard in e-sports
One of the reasons why Starcraft 1 e-sports are still a thing is so that the competitive players playing it don't get left behind, can you imagine trying to play other games after literally over a decade of playing the same game over and over? It's not like MOBAs where the game itself is still pretty easy to a degree so you don't need to train much, or shooters where it's mostly your reaction time that is supposed to improve, so it doesn't take that much time to learn either.
>>
>>572079
>10 actions per second is around the standard in e-sports
Shitters actualy belive it? 600 apm is insane and no human can sustain it. Also you're wrong on it being one-game thing as most players have no issue switching the games, even on the highest of levels.
>>
>>572015
No one said anything about playing randomly. But looking up strategies instead of making them is like using an aimbot in a FPS. It's no longer you playing the game, you outsourced skill from outside of the game. Again, chess players can just alt-tab to read the best strategy for every situation if they don't feel like learning from actual play. Game destroyed. Thankfully vst games are too complex to be completely destroyed by metagaming, just partially.
>>
>>572096
>No one said anything about playing randomly. But looking up strategies instead of making them is like using an aimbot in a FPS
No, absolutely not.
>Again, chess players can just alt-tab to read the best strategy for every situation if they don't feel like learning from actual play.
Chess is a great example as to why you're wrong.
>Thankfully vst games are too complex
You're just bad at them so you don't know how to get your brain around them.
>>
>>572012
Anno isn't an RTS. It's a traditional simulation game like The Sims. Basically detailed sandboxes where your opposition is simply managing the complexity for better outcomes or imagination.

RTS are Dune2-likes, which are real-time tactics combined with strategy. Anno isn't real-time tactics, combat is not the primary focus at all.
>>
>>572096
You can pretend to be muh 1000 IQ strategy player but there is a difference betwen playing off-meta and not knowing what meta is. The first is based on informed decision-making and the second is just throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks.
>>
>>572079
These are the retards who think that you can only have fun in a competitive game if you're part of the top 0.001% of skill. His brain is also very actively ignoring the fact that those top players lose games, too, in his head you have to win every time like it's a single player game.
>>
>>572096

> image the day book learning or netdecking broke a game
I can't for the life of me... in fact, this shit makes trolling players that much easier (players anti-meta trol)
>>
>>572109
>Chess is a great example as to why you're wrong.
It's the purest example of why googling strategies is cheating and defeats the fun of discovering strategies yourself. If your memory is good enough or you alt-tab, you are unbeatable, humans can't beat the best AI at chess.

When both players have equally googled all the best strats, the only arena left is action or memory, who can do it fast or remember enough of the solutions. You've taken creativity out of it.
>>
>>571843
make them better
>>
>>572124
> runs mmobots
> OMG MMOS ARE JUST GLORIFIED IDLE GAEMZ !!!11!!1!!
>>
>>572110
>Anno isn't an RTS. It's a traditional simulation game like The Sims
Wrong, but we'll agree to disagree
>>
>>572094
Fuck if I know, what's the average apm?
>>
>>572124
>the only arena left is action or memory
That's all chess is in the first place, retard. Everyone has at one point lost on the third turn to a goofy opening and they never fell for it ever again. It's just called learning. And no, it doesn't trivialize the game or demean it at all.

Computers can be made to beat humans at any game, btw, not an argument.
>>
>>572130
Nope, you're just wrong. Dune 2 is RTS, what you think it is isn't, and that's final.
>>
>>572139
I agree with you that Dune 2 is RTS. Anno is also RTS. Glad we got that resolved
>>
What kind of twat thinks Anno isn't an RTS??? (the same kind that argue XCOM are RPGs)
>>
>>572141
Your contrarianism isn't cute and you aren't convincing anybody.
>>
>>572120
The only thing I agree with in his rant (mind you, I skimmed the thread) is that playing online is unfun if the game is somewhat old. A lot of online games tend to suffer when newbies are repeatedly curbstomped by the very experienced players and they stop playing, especially the ones with higher skill caps
>>
>>572145
I don't care about convincing you, I'm only stating facts
>>
>>572112
Put it simple: a human enjoys discovering the game for themselves instead of spoiling it in advance. They enjoy using their own creativity and observation skills instead of gleaning everything from boring wiki/forum pages. They know games are games, not sports/studies - they know that playing achieves nothing worthwhile outside of the game besides having fun.

The subhuman is the opposite, they don't mind spoiling ideas they could have thought of themselves, they think games are electronic sports (even though they don't refine the body) and their in-game results are important to their lives, hence they will use time outside of the game to get better at it, googling, practice sessions, better hardware, reducing the aesthetics/graphics options to gain an advantage.
>>
>>572147
Your contrarianism isn't cute and you aren't convincing anybody.
>>
File: 1548344525624.webm (1.24 MB, 854x480)
1.24 MB
1.24 MB WEBM
>>572150
>Anno 1800 is a city-building real-time strategy video game, developed by Blue Byte and published by Ubisoft, and launched on April 16, 2019 in North America.
>>Your contrarianism isn't cute and you aren't convincing anybody.
>>
>>572122
>book learning
>videogames
Videogames are not intellectual. If you want an intellectual challenge start a PhD. Read >>572149
>>
>>572146
How is that an argument, though? Seriously. You don't have to play with someone who has been playing the game for 20 years. That's not a knock on the game itself or its playerbase, it's just you. Go ask a friend if he wants to play.

If you can't find anyone you want to play the game with, you probably weren't interested in the game in the first place.
>>
>>572146
Holy fucking shit why are retards spouting this all the time. No matter how old or small the game is, vast majority of the playerbase is dogshit. Potential newcomer will always be able to play with people at his level.

>>572149
you've clearly never played any game at any competitive level
>>
>>572153
> mfw some of us leave our houses to play competitive games with ppl from time to time.
> mfw not all games are fucking videogames
> mfw doing this for epeen instead of prizes & friends
>>
>>572149
>Put it simple: a human enjoys discovering the game for themselves instead of spoiling it in advance.
Then reality sets in and it turns out the people that bother to teach and learn from each other discover things faster and it's actually more fun to appreciate the game as it exists instead of trying to pretend you'll ever be the best at it solely by yourself with no outside influence.

Gotta wonder about your ego.
>>
>>572152
Your contrarianism isn't cute and you aren't convincing anybody.
>>
File: 1580996547259.gif (3.28 MB, 635x640)
3.28 MB
3.28 MB GIF
>>572165
I can see I've successfully beaten you down. Imagine that, the concepts of
>real time
and
>strategy
aren't restricted until the end of time to being like a game made the 1990's
>>
>>572136
You think action or memorisation are as important to strategy as creativity/abstraction?

Retards can memorise when to use strategies they don't even undertand. Action is an even lower bar. The essence of strategy is being able to produce those things yourself because of your inventiveness and capacity for abstracting specific situations to general ones.
>>
>>572129
MMOs aren't even strategy games.
>>
>>572168
Your contrarianism isn't cute and you aren't convincing anybody.
>>
File: wew.png (7 KB, 809x482)
7 KB
7 KB PNG
I see you are a bit confused so here's a handy infographic
>>
>>572144
XCOM is more of a strategy game than Anno, it's combat focused. It's just turn and tactics based mostly.
>>
>>572173
> scrub detected
>>
File: 1617786166768.gif (775 KB, 220x220)
775 KB
775 KB GIF
>>572177
>strategy isn't strategy if it's not focused on shooty pew pew
>>
File: mIxbP8s.gif (1.96 MB, 349x348)
1.96 MB
1.96 MB GIF
>>572177
> tfw eurogames aren't strategy games
>>
>>572170
>Retards can memorise when to use strategies they don't even undertand
No they can't.
>The essence of strategy is being able to produce those things yourself
No it's not. You've never had an original thought that someone else didn't come up with, deal with it.
>>
>>572177
Have you ever played Anno with ai harder than easy or in multiplayer? Do you think Stronghold series aren't RTS either? People also play AoE2 as city builder so I guess AoE2 isn't RTS as well.
>>
>>572155
>You don't have to play with someone who has been playing the game for 20 years. That's not a knock on the game itself or its playerbase, it's just you. Go ask a friend if he wants to play.
I agree, that's one of the few ways one can enjoy the multiplayer of older games, it's a blast too
>If you can't find anyone you want to play the game with, you probably weren't interested in the game in the first place.
Anon this is /vst/, an off-shoot board of /v/, most people barely have friends let alone ones interested in the kind of games they play, the "deepest" game one of my few real life friends plays is Stardew Valley
>>
> chess
people should switch to chess960 or other variant of random chess that makes impossible to remember all openings, who think otherwise is wrong
>>
>>572189
enter AoE2 or BW and hit automatch. Evewn if you've never played it before, chances are you will play against someone much worse than you.
>>
>>572195
I really should buy the new AoE2 but I've been waiting for a sale due to chronic poorfaggotry
>>
>>572200
If you really can't afford it then you have bigger issues than viability of competitive strategy games
>>
>>572201
sometimes ppl need to chill man... don't do this...
>>
>>572201
I've pirated a lot of strategy games and was content with the singleplayer until the last few years, besides there's worthwhile discussions to be had, it's not like /v/ where almost everything is shitposting and the cool threads die with barely any replies, and I doubt Stellaris and Endless Space 2 can be considered competitive.
>>
>>571715
>bunkerfaggot
I like this
>>
>>572208
>there's worthwhile discussions to be had
Yes, in not!general threads for the respective games. I even regularly bump gookclick hate and other bait threads to keep autists from infesting the other, actually good, part of the board.
>>
File: BW.jpg (758 KB, 2464x1386)
758 KB
758 KB JPG
>>572135
Roughly 300 in BW. I've seen people hit 400s a few times.
Note: the APM shown in the top right does change rapidly, it's not an average over the course of the entire game.
>>
>>572223
that's in pro games, your average ladder trash wont have it over 200
>>
>>571702
>a fucking pepsi logo
>>
>>572005
>Do you think chess players are allowed to have AIs decide their next move? That's what metagaming is.
What the hell dude, no. Chess is full of metagaming in the exact way you seem to hate. There is little difference between memorizing AoE2 build orders and chess openings. In fact, I'd say chess has been doing this whole "no fun allowed, memorize this bunch of books written about chess and be hyper competitive" thing way before RTSs were a thing. Hell, it's where Elo rankings come from. So when you say looking up strategies online is cheating, what do you think about chess books?
>>
>>571960
AI Wars?
>>
>>572061
I can see 2 problems with a game like that:
1 - It's already hard enough to design a game centered around combat, also hard enough to design a game centered around city building. The game you suggest is actually a bunch of different games interacting, and it's already hard enough to find a dev team good enough to design one of those. Chances are that half of the game would suck.
2 - Attracting players. Such a game would be a hard sell to people who like current rts style games so it would have to attract the people who like city building, and a game like this need to be popular enough for you to find matches with people playing the different aspects.
>>
>>572313
https://www.goldennumber.net/wp-content/uploads/pepsi-arnell-021109.pdf
>>
>>572149
>Put it simple: a human enjoys discovering the game for themselves instead of spoiling it in advance.
I agree but this is gone in the era of the internet. A game comes out and in a month people will have a bunch of strategies figured out, the mechanics will be dissected to autistic levels, and you will be stomped by the top level players. I also miss discovering hidden stuff like cheats, unlockables and easter eggs in games, but there is no point anymore because everything will be all over the internet on the first week of the game being out. Information spreads too fast, globally, and there is no putting this back on the pandora's box. Playing single player games without a guide is what I do for this feeling, but you just have to accept multiplayer gaming is changed forever.
>>
>>572357

e-sport compfaggotry was spawned from that very idea.

FPS was the only exception.
>>
>>572440
why the hell wouldn't you want to go online to learn "the right way to play" quickly if you're seriously concerned about getting involved in pro-play.

It's thinking THATS ALL THERE IS TO IT, is exactly why pro-play is only top 2% in most games...
>>
>>572475
mad cos bad
>>
>>571702
You are overdramatizing it
>>
>>572479
>20:43:31
>>572480
>20:43:30
MOOOOOT
>>
>>572416
>they charged Pepsi $1 million and gave them a shitpost in return
>>
>>571771
>>571800
chinks love aoe. They'll destroy soon enough
>>
577401
>game's been out for 24 years
>They'll destroy soon
You're weak.
>>
>>571702
>waaah i'm bad at games and everyone should be as bad as me waaaaaah!





Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.