[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 56 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]


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: groundcontrol.jpg (530 KB, 1280x720)
530 KB
530 KB JPG
>Allegiance
>Anno 1800
>Battlezone
>Black & White
>Blitzkrieg
>Celtic Kings: Rage of War
>Company of Heroes
>Conquest: Frontier Wars
>Giants: Citizen Kabuto
>Ground Control
>Homeworld
>Hostile Waters: Antaeus Rising
>Imperium Galactica II
>Kohan: Immortal Sovereigns
>Kohan II: King's of War
>Lords of the Realm II
>Magic and Mayhem
>Myth II: Soulblighter
>Nexus: The Jupiter Incident
>Original War
>Perimeter
>Populous: The Beginning
>Praetorians
>Rome: Total War
>Sacrifice
>The Settlers II
>Spellforce: Platinum
>Spellforce III
>Star Wars: Empire at War
>Sudden Strike
>Total Annihilation
>Urban Assault
>Warhammer: Dark Omen
>Warrior Kings: Battles
>World in Conflict
>Z (original)

Any that should be added? Removed?
>>
>>840393
anno and the settlers are not an RTS but I agree with company of heroes
>>
>>840404
Of course they are
>>
>Majesty
>Wargame
Forgot these
>>
>>840393
Zero-K has some anti-micro features like auto-skirm (unit stays at its max range and shoots at its target) and some basic auto-dodging of slow projectiles on some units.
There's also a better auto-dodge that works with more units but it's not in the main game yet.
>>
Rise of Nations
>>
>>840393
A good chunk of these games are not RTS.
Also
>Ground Control
>Perimeter
>Sacrifice
>Spellforce
Have you even played these games? They are all prime gookclick in MP.
>>
>>840393
Well, Paradox games are technically real time even though they fall under the grand strategy umbrella.
>>
>>841741
Name one game that isn't an RTS and explain why
>>
>>841895
Not him But Myth is a tactical game.
>>
>>841895
>Anno 1800
City builder
>Black & White
Colony sim
>Blitzkrieg
RTT
>Ground Control
RTT
>Imperium Galactica II
4X
>Myth II: Soulblighter
RTT
>Nexus: The Jupiter Incident
RTT
>Praetorians
RTT
>Rome: Total War
RTT+TBS
>The Settlers II
Colony sim
>Sudden Strike
RTT
>Warhammer: Dark Omen
RTT
>World in Conflict
RTT
The term RTS denotes games that have both resource gathering and base building (compared to RTT where you either have a fixed army or purchase new units in exchange for abstract points) but still focus on combat (compared to city builders and colony sims where combat is mostly an afterthought).
>>
>>841895
'RTS' is a bit of a misnomer. Every RTS is real time but not all real time strategy games are RTSes.
>>
>>841993
Nonsense arbitrary definition. Strategy is defined as...
>a careful plan or method for achieving a particular goal usually over a long period of time
All of these games require strategy to win.

Also why is Anno 1800 a citybuilder and Age of Empires an RTS? Explain that one to me.
>>
>>842016
Because anno has upgrading housing and more complex resource management, and focuses on the transport of goods to locations, while AOE is an RTS because goods are teleported into a stockpile and where and how you place houses do not matter besides giving you housing points. In a city builder, the placement of buildings is important for efficiency reasons, while in an RTS buildings are placed for tactical reasons, ie using a line of houses as a wall.
>>
>>842042
So because Anno has more complexity, it's not an RTS? Gotcha
>>
>>842044
In terms of building a city, yes. However, an RTS is more complex in terms of your control of your fightan mans. Although I am not familiar with Anno, most city builders lack things like formations for your units, which AOE has. In those games, military action is typically a check for your cities efficiency and ability to produce goods. In AOE the fighting is the entire objective.
>>
>>842049
You keep stretching the definition further and further to fit your preconceived notions
>>
any game can become "gookclick" if the minmaxing mp autists get ahold of it, wtf is this retardation op? there's nothing special about the games in your list.

fucking heroes 3, a turnbased game, is basically "gookclick" as far as i'm concerned because people have figured out the exact build order you need to use, the exact amount of moves you can make, the spells you need to use, the amount of resources you need, the way you have to fight your battles, literally everything and if you don't play that way you'll lose
anno has optimal layouts, timings and build orders and similar autisms.
company of heroes is literally unironically "gookclick" in mp
your thread a shit
>>
>>842044
It has dozens of resource types to manage, arranged in production chains. In an RTS you shouldn't have more than 5-ish. Combat is the focus rather than economy.
>>
>>842016
>All of these games require strategy to win.
Almost every game requires strategy to win, moron. That's not how genres work.
>>
>>842049
> In those games, military action is typically a check for your cities efficiency and ability to produce goods.
This is just as true for "real RTS" like Age of Empires, Command and Conquer, and Starcraft, where battles are largely decided by who can make the biggest blob the fastest.
>>
Buttmad gookclickers doing mental gymnastics ITT
>>
OP is real autistic when it comes to nitpicking terms other people use but conspicuously avoids defining "gookclick", the premise for his own thread.
>>
>>842064
Turn based games can't have gookclicking, moron
>>
>>840393
You forgot supreme commander, the last good RTS with no gookclick
>>
A bread died for this, OP
Go suck a dick
>>
>>842093
Look up fast chess.
>>842095
Objectively wrong. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgdtF63mkvA
>>
>>842093
and what is gookclicking?
>>
>>842081
OP isn't the one trying to gatekeep. That's you.

>>842096
OP made an innocent recommendation thread full of obscure games and you gookclickers completely lose your shit.
>>
>>842111
>obscure games
These games are only obscure if you're 14.
>>
>>842111
You are OP. Why are you talking about yourself in the third person?
And you are most definitely, literally, by textbook definition, trying to gatekeep.
>>
>>842116
You don't know shit
>>
>>840404
>>840406
They lean more heavily into city builders, but I think they still qualify as RTS.
Now I'm tempted to draw a chart showing where various city builder/RTS hybrids lie.
>>
>>842128
Not very intelligent are you? Disappointing. This thread could have been more interesting if you were. Welp, I'm out. Enjoy your day.
>>
>>841895
CoD
Because it is an FPS
>>
It's difficult to determine the skill ceiling of a game if that game doesn't have an active competitive scene. It takes time and a dedicated community of people who are trying their hardest to win. No one knew about mutalisk micro in 1998.

I once saw someone post that "RTS games were so much fun until people figured out how to actually play them." At one point, even Starcraft and AoE2 had no "gookclick". People hadn't figured it out yet. But I don't understand the mindset of those who would reject a game because other players developed advanced tactics for it. If you gave Starcraft and AoE pros years to play any one of those games listed in OP, the playstyle they would develop would probably be unrecognizable to people who play it now. Would that make the game worse?
>>
>>842140
The mindset is actually easy to grasp:
>I'm shit at the game
=>
>Can't be my fault
=>
>It's the game's fault
or
>It's the other players' fault
The flood of whiney threads we've been experiencing lately reflects this mindset. "Gookclick" whiners attribute their own inability to get better to perceived characteristics of games. "Rusher" whiners attribute it to other players who dare to play these games to win instead of enjoying the aesthetics.
>>
>>842157
Yet I've never seen anyone complain about getting wrecked in Total War multiplayer, where the average APM of pro players is around 70.
>>
>>842099
>early game 1v1 on very small map
Lol
Your mom was objectively wrong when she brought you to life
>>
>>842197
woah wtf
that's a pretty harsh thing to say over a game. supcom shitters are something else
>>
>>842140
> But I don't understand the mindset of those who would reject a game because other players developed advanced tactics for it. If you gave Starcraft and AoE pros years to play any one of those games listed in OP, the playstyle they would develop would probably be unrecognizable to people who play it now.

I think the reasons are two fold.

One, they suck but they like the game and nobody on earth likes getting shit-stomped every single night when they want to play their newest game online. Nor do they really want to follow what they think are check-list build orders that you either execute 100% or gg. So they blame pros for ruining the game, because, let's be honest pros define the meta and everyone else follows. If you don't follow the meta, and you're not a good player, you get trashed so you blame "gookclickers" even more.

Two, they just hate the way the meta went.

I've personally had this happened to me with Chivalry. I loved the shit out of it, played 500 hours, and I didn't have a problem with most of the early techniques. Chivalry now is basically a ballerina dance where a pro's pov looks like someone spazzing out to make a webm for a /v/ thread. From a spectator prospective, it looks like two models bugging out while one eventually dies from the the start-up hurt box of a swing that hasn't even visually started.

When that became the norm in Chivalry, I quit it because it just wasn't interesting and looked nothing like chivalry i liked (ie, people spamming the war-cry button and mobbing each other).

Shit it happened with SC2 during HoS with pro matches going for two hours because of swarmhosts. People hated that and they stopped watching.

If anything, I think the people who shout 'git gud' are always the most ignorant about it. Git gud at a meta you don't like? I've never met a person who plays a game they hate so they can prove some fucking nerd wrong.

So that's how you get shit like OP where you're turning over stones for no meta.
>>
>>840393
Why do we call them gookclick and cheese tactic games?
>>
>Is that....an execution barrier?
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOO HELP ME ITS GOOKCLICK IM GOING INSANEEEEEE AIEEEEE
Jrpgs are the only video game genre with a widespread lack of execution barriers and its the single worst video game genre on average for that exact reason
>>
>>842366
This entire argument is invalidated by the fact that the AOE2 meta exists. Literally just go play AOE2 if you want players all along the skill curve and a healthy pro meta that doesnt completely detach itself from the """intended""" way to play
>>
>>842499
How is it invalidated? I know people who don't play AoE2 on ladder because they hate rushes and like playing autistic 3 hour long games with castles. I don't think that's AoE and last I checked, turtling for 40 minutes before you produce a unit isn't meta. You still have people whining about rushes too so these people fit in to cat 1 in my eyes and plenty that I say fit into cat 2.

They suck and blame the meta for it.
>>
Rushing doesnt ruin any rts for me except for stronghold. It's a castle building game, but only for me i suppose.
>>
>>842540
>What are closed maps
Based retard. You can absolutely have whatever game youd like to have within the framework of AOE2 without doing skmething like intentionally playing bad. Different game and map set ups make AOE2 play out very different even if all players still adhere to the online meta. A diplomacy map will cause players to reach the 3-4 hour mark even if they play thw gamebright because of how the competitive framework plays out in that set up

Aoe2 proves everyone complaining that metagaming ruins RTS are just bads hiding behind excuses. Game does EVERYTHING they ask for RTS to do. They still bitch and moan.
>>
>>842568
Yea, but you can do that with any game. I'm just saying why I think people bitch. Two factors.

Besides closed online is basically no online in my opinion.

>Aoe2 proves everyone complaining that metagaming ruins RTS are just bads hiding behind excuses.
Yea I pretty much agree. gookclick is just cope for most of it.
>>
This is (probably) a hot take but I'm bored and got nothing to do.

First up, lets call gookclicking what it actually is. Biocomputer play, you're literally imitating a computer. RTS meta at pro level ultimately boils down to on the base level
>Following a preset script
>Execute script with maximal speed possible
>Maintain omnipotent awareness via hotkey abuse with intervals under a second
>If full script executes successfully, continue
>If full script fails at any point, surrender and newgame
High level play extends that farther as it boils down to raw CPU/APM potential and multitasking ability. But at the end of the day you're copying an AI, just one not deliberately gimped so regular people can beat it. Hell the pros dope themselves up with energy drinks to squeeze out a few extra CPUs.

On one hand this is one hell of an achievement, on the other I find something funny about the fact RTS players love complaining about AI sucking yet in trying to get top level play/ranking become the AI they think they want. Just look at any RTSPro's raw game footage, you cannot tell me that stuff isn't trying your damnedest to be a bot without any of the deliberate gimping. Especially SC2 play.

This kinda leads into the second point, you got a hardcore, cut throat, hyper competitive to the point of most calling it insanity, PVP crowd that go at it hammer and tong for whatever reason. Autism, the only thing they can win at, closest thing to bloodsport they have, etc. They happily insult anyone else for not playing to win and spend hundreds or even thousands of hours getting into the meta.

Then you got people that aren't able/willing/insane enough to do that or god forbid, play for the sake of fun. They got ass raped by the meta, went to look up the meta, and actively get repulsed by it. Thus they don't bother doing 'git gud' or anything like that. They just move on with life.

This is why nobody buys RTS anymore. PVP autism drives them off and the PVPers like it that way.
>>
>>842642
>If full script executes successfully, continue
>If full script fails at any point, surrender and newgame
why do shitters expose themeselves so easly? just make much more ambiguous statements next time and somebody even believe you
>>
>>842662
I'm not seeing a counterpoint
>>
>>840393
fun fact: most rts aren't gookclick, you just like to whine because the most popular ones are
>>
>>842642
>This is why nobody buys RTS anymore. PVP autism drives them off and the PVPers like it that way.
This. This is the real reason RTS are fucking dead.
Look at aoe4
>made exclusively to cater to the pvp crowd
>complete disaster and already dead 2 weeks in
Like every other RTS that was made for esports faggotry
>>
>>842720
They designed AoE4 to appeal to casual tourists. Competitive players still prefer AoE2.
>>
>>842134
>You must be 18+ to visit this site
>>
>>840393
Forgot Brutal Legend
>>
>>842704
>fun fact: most rts aren't gookclick, you just like to whine because the most popular ones are
Even weirder is that Starcraft, has countless custom and casual game modes and 95% of players don't need to play fast unless they're laddering and wanting to improve. i.e. not being casual
>>
>>840393
just don't play online. any competitive game will become an unpleasant arms-race for bragging rights which ultimately comes down to 'who is willing to spend more time on the computer doing something that isn't fun?'

>>842486
you don't hear many jrpg fans admitting that they have an outright addiction to something they hate and can't stop playing because it was designed by psychologists to extract time and money from them indefinitely. jrpgs are pretty tedious on the whole but the more clever ones are a lot more fun to engage with than any competitive game.
>>
The real reason less people play RTS MP today and other MP games have become very popular is simple;
People’s egos are more fragile today than they were 20-15 years ago. For the generation that grew up playing the classic RTS games many haven’t lived up to their life expectations and they can’t handle losses without feeling shit about themselves. For the new generation, they’ve been taught that even for just participating in something you should get some gratification, so they only really love team games like CoD, overwatch, LoL etc where they can always blame bad allies for a loss but still feel good if they win. Where RTS games are a lot more focused on 1v1 play where when you lose it means you simply got outplayed by another individual so they take the loss worse.
TLDR; people like OP (sad cunts) can’t play an RTS game just for fun anymore. They feel too shit about themselves losing half the time, when losing roughly half the time is how just RTS is.
>>
File: el munstruo gamer.png (756 KB, 540x720)
756 KB
756 KB PNG
>>843443
explain why you don't exercise this extraordinary overman drive of yours by going outside and playing sports without coping, seething, or malding.
>>
File: 56c52b417d.jpg (67 KB, 500x594)
67 KB
67 KB JPG
>>843443
Or maybe normal human being just want to play whatever's popular right now. You autists need to understand that nobody cares about how "skilled" your e-athlete larps if it wasn't for the money and overpriced "gamer" brands
>>
>>843510
lol project harder. I played plenty of team sports growing up and learned that you have to be able to lose sometimes if you want to play the game. This true for everything in life like getting a job or dating. If you cant understand this then I already know you are a neet.
>>843548
>normal human being just want to play whatever's popular right now.
That’s basically what I said, moron. I just elaborated with a reason as to why what is popular right now. I never said anything about esport pros or whatever you fucking sperg.
>>
>>843548
Amazing reading comprehension, anon.
>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_wH7Lx-HDQ
anyone who uses the word "gookclick" is actually retarded. you can get clear up to A rank in brood war literally playing one handed. you can do it with s t a t e g y. if you don't want to do that go play customs or find other friends who don't understand playing to win. it's not fucking rocket science.
>inb4 a bunch of nonsensical arguments about why deciding a course of action outside an individual round ie a build and a gameplan is not actually really strategy like muh TBS or muh "not gookclick" RTS that just frees up more APM to spend juking units anyways
>>
>>843658
>>843658
i detect a hint of coping here, perhaps even malding. But let's pursue the line of thought further.

Why do you not play sports anymore? Why do you continue to play video games?
>>
>>843220
>custom and casual game modes
That nobody plays.
>>
File: Untitled.png (1.42 MB, 1920x1080)
1.42 MB
1.42 MB PNG
>>843692
Way to out yourself as someone who has never played RTS games, my guy. Pic related is EU server right now, and it's far from EU prime time. Coop is vastly more popular than custom games.
>>
>>843676
>zero argument
>just deflects and wants to move away from the original discussion
I accept your concession, virgin
>>
>>843795
what do you mean zero argument? There's no substance in your post to respond to. I'm the one pulling us back on track. I could ask more questions surrounding the original theme of the discussion and you'd probably just make another post to the effect of "i'm so cool i play sports and have sex, that's my answer", or something else that sounds like an aspergic trying to imitate an 80s high school movie bully.

back to your original post if you're so proud of it, >>843443, you say there's been a massive social change for the worse in development of ego fragility (i actually agree) but this generation is clearly the historic peak of video games as a 1 on 1 competition. What's up with that? I actually think the connection is true, you just have your conclusion backwards. Egos are weaker and more desperate for soothing than ever, and THAT'S WHY COMPETITIVE VIDEO GAMES ARE POPULAR.

>For the generation that grew up playing the classic RTS games many haven’t lived up to their life expectations and they can’t handle losses without feeling shit about themselves
>For the new generation, they’ve been taught that even for just participating in something you should get some gratification
This begs the question of why someone whose life is going WELL should want to do something that isn't fun or gratifying.
>inb4 'ackchyually playing 1000 plain balanced 1v1 rts skirmishes a year is the peak of fun'
if that's your answer we're back to cope and malding

>TLDR; people like OP (sad cunts) can’t play an RTS game just for fun anymore
I play video games for fun, which is why i don't play the same ones for years on end. and if i want to compete in something i'll play my sport of choice, which has always been tennis, a 1v1 game. do you believe soccer is more popular because spiritual untermenschen like being able to blame teammates too? can they not hack individual responsibility as well as me?
>>
>>843658
>based your entire argument on how people has "fragile" ego and can't handle "loss" just because they didn't play like you
>immediately backtracking when i point out that your autistic 1v1 doesn't mean anything
Let me say it again, games are popular because they're being actively marketed, not because they're more "casual" than your little pond and playing one game over another doesn't make you any "special". Maybe people spend their effort into something else instead of spending 20 hours playing videogames but i guess your head is too deep inside your asses to figure that out.
>>
>>843805
>>843809
Team games like mobas (dota, heroes of the storm, lol) and shooters (CS, COD, halo etc) are played way more than 1v1 games. What 1v1 games out there are SO popular you think this is a ‘historic peak’. You are talking out your ass. And it’s irrelevant anyway because I never said competitive games aren’t popular. I said the opposite, retard.
You also keep assuming that I have the opinion that you need to play like a pro and play 1000 games to be good enough to have fun, when I never said anything like that. That’s obviously a projection of your opinion and it’s fucking stupid. You can play whatever RTS casually, be a noob, still win 50% your games and have fun. I’m saying zoomers and pathetic cunts like you can’t enjoy it though because you can’t handle losing some games. So, go on, if I’m not right and you aren’t a fucking cry baby then explain to me why competitive RTS games can’t be fun casually, since that’s the real argument we’re having and you’re too stupid to argue without strawmanning
>>
>>843931
the point of team games being a significantly different phenomena to 1v1 feels like a contrivance , you didn't answer the soccer v tennis point. or the majority of points brought up by people disagreeing with you.

"competitive" games taken seriously by the faggots playing them has become a formalised and endorsed phenomena, with however many retards enslaved to AoE2, Starcraft 2 and whatever else as there are now doing explicitly as a part of that phenomena. past numbers might have been bigger, but the games had some actual novelty factor back then that would have been inflating the numbers. we could say we arguably aren't at a peak if you want to break out the analytics, but i think that when you consider the number of people who think of themselves as engaging in a genuine competitive arena rather than playing a game that happens to be 1v1 online we're probably peaked. of course this can't be measured, clever me. Either way i don't think there's any truth to the idea we've seen a drop due to a shift in attitudes.

>You also keep assuming that I have the opinion that you need to play like a pro and play 1000 games to be good enough to have fun
I don't believe you think this or understand how you could have inferred that i do, so let's just write off however much of your post was engaging with that mistake...
>I’m saying zoomers and pathetic cunts like you can’t enjoy it though because you can’t handle losing some games
People lose in single player and custom games too. you lose to a set of rules, a set of scripts, multiple people, the game's designer, etc. it's still losing. to me at least this doesn't feel different to losing to the guy on the other end of 1v1.
>So, go on, if I’m not right and you aren’t a fucking cry baby then explain to me why competitive RTS games can’t be fun casually
they can be. i won /v/'s blood bowl 2 league once, though that's turn-based. i also played AoE2 for a while. again i don't believe what you think i do.
>>
>>843949
Great, so then you agree with everything I said and all this was just faggotry;
>>843510
>>843548
>>843676
Except for >>843949
>People lose in single player and custom games too. you lose to a set of rules, a set of scripts, multiple people, the game's designer, etc. it's still losing. to me at least this doesn't feel different to losing to the guy on the other end of 1v1.
So that’s all we disagree on. This subjective part? Whatever, I reckon you are wrong though. Zoomers don’t take it the same and neither do a lot of the old generation. Dota, LoL and shit don’t teach you sportsmanship or dealing with losses well at all. All of those games have tonnes of people sperging out and rage quitting or flaming team members. You can’t flame team members in 1v1, which the majority of RTS games are, and if you rage quit you get sent down in mmr and that’s too much for your average vidya player these days.
>>
>>842140
>But I don't understand the mindset of those who would reject a game because other players developed advanced tactics for it.
Some people primarily have fun in strategy games by figuring out that sort of thing. If the best tactics are already known for a game then that element is missing entirely.
>>
>>843990
the normal intuitive response when faced with comp gaming of "this isn't worth it" is completely right. it's a trap. a timesink. a slot machine that runs on self-esteem. you and the other guy ante up some confidence and rep and run through this tired 1v1 skirmish dance, winner takes from the loser, nobody is really satisfied, process is repeated forever, and who the hell wins? nobody's having much fun, game developers are trapped contriving ways to make this limited sideshow look novel forever, genre stagnates, bodies and souls of players stagnate, you act like people not wanting to get into this is a failing rather than a victory. all games with mmr systems are cursed.

Something Blood Bowl does right is no MMR, your first open league game can be with a top 1% global player. It's a loss on your team's record, but a team is for a season at most. if he kills your whole team just start again. you can do this every loss if you want. rather than an indefinite mmr dragon-chase end of season top teams enter a bracket and play to win definitively. you can be the objective winner of a season of blood bowl 2. rather than an MMR chase it's more like a self-contained game with a start middle and end in which your competition just happen to be other people because AI can't play the game well. they *could* be NPCs and the experience would still be fundamentally compelling. Even then after 164 hours I'm done with Blood Bowl. There are other games out there which due to being unexplored ground, will be more interesting to me than the elegance of Blood Bowl. That's the main thing, when i think of the aesthetic possibilities open to me as an owner of a computer and an internet connection and only so much time, being psychologically hamster-wheeled into one game indefinitely strikes me as a tragic fate.

Why is competitive gaming bad? Waste of a capacity to feel.
>>
>>843998
Just be good enough at the game to figure out the next meta shift. Surely you know all the ins and outs of the game since you wanted to invent the meta in the first place.
>>
>>844013
>people want to do strategy without having to be among the absolute best at the game
>just git gud and become one of the best at the game
?
>>
>>844018
>I want to figure out the best way to play!
>Sure, just keep practicing and you may get there.
>No, I don't want to.
???
>>
>>844024
I thought it'd be obvious that people generally aren't down for spending hundreds of hours to get to the part of the game they want to enjoy.
>>
>>844028
though shit then
>>
>>844028
then why do so many people play mmo's? It's all grind to get to a level to do pvp and then more grinding.
>>
>>844108
>why do so many people play mmo's
Mental illness
>>
>>844108
The social aspect seems to usually be what keeps people sticking around.

Also, MMOs are generally a lot less time investment (probably by an order of magnitude at least) to get to MMO endgame than it is to get into the top 0.001% of RTS players who can actually shape the meta.
>>
File: VQjgIjI.png (212 KB, 341x444)
212 KB
212 KB PNG
>>840393
>Total Annihilation
>Not gookclick
>>
suggestions for someone new to RTS? Mostly played turn based but want to try out RTS. messed around with AoE2 but didn't care for it. Enjoyed stellaris but that's more 4X than anything and the endgame blows + paradox is dogshit.
>>
>>844900
I love C&C
>>
>>840393
wargame: red dragon
also there's literally nothing wrong with starcraft just play protoss and you can get to B with sub 100 apm you don't have to be fast just smart
>>
>gookclick
what a fucking cope lmao git gud
>>
Real strategy games don’t revolve around apm
>>
>>840393
Spotted someone whos never played high level COH
>>
>>840393
There is not a single real strategy game on your list. All of those are gookclickers or just sleeping gookclickers for people who want to watch explosions and battle not strategize.
>>
>>842095
You'd be largely correct if you meant the original before bomber "fix". But you most certainly meant FAF.
>>
>>842642
>to squeeze out a few extra CPUs.
CPU in the personal computers sense means "central processing unit".
>>
>>842129
In German Anno and Settlers are considered to be part of the genre "Aufbaustrategie" (constructive strategy)
>>
>>843278
Just play low level games and don't sweat. Just leave a game in which you are being insulted for sucking as a team mate. Why do you want to climb the fucking ladder, you'll never make a living off this game.
The point of the ladder is to rank you with players, that are roughly on your level. That's it.
>>
>>840406
If you think anno and settlers are RTS then Baldurs gate is an RTS.
Just because you can control units on a map by pointing and clicking, that doesn't make the game an RTS.

>>848256
>constructive strategy
That's more like it.

Command and Conquer and Age of Empires, despite sharing ideas, are entirely different from Settlers and Anno. That's like saying Chess and Warhammer are the same genre.

>>842016
>All of these games require strategy to win.
By your logic every game is RTS.
There's not a single game in the planet that doesn't require some sort of strategy.

Game genres need to be classified based on objectively observed gameplay features. Saying that a game is a strategy game because it requires strategy is just retarded.
>>
>>848266
unless the discrepancy is insane i prefer unmatched games.
>The point of the ladder is to rank you with players, that are roughly on your level. That's it.
pretty sure ladder systems are programmed to get you invested in the game, not to give you satisfying games.

>>848285
>By your logic every game is RTS.
Not him but yes. The games we call rts could just as well be described as extremely retarded and unwieldy action games.
>>
>>848295
>pretty sure ladder systems are programmed to get you invested in the game, not to give you satisfying games.
This is actually true for modern games, but not boomer games like sc2 or aoe2
>>
I like dawn of war
>>
>>849081
its gookclick
>>
>>844004
Just play unranked until you get out of your feelings.
>>
>>840393
Patrician taste OP. I would go for anno 1404 though, anno 1800 is gookclick territory.
>>
>>849246
i want to feel as deeply as possible. that's why i don't play comp games at all. A new structured single player experience every week will give you way more in the way of stimulation than the same game every day forever.
>>
>>849644
>A new structured single player experience every week will give you way more in the way of stimulation than the same game every day forever.
That's why you're a tourist, and that's why RTS makers don't bother marketing to you.
>>
>>849677
at the current rate eventually nobody will market to me, because i want an aesthetically oriented experience with a beginning, middle, and end, not a slot machine with more moving parts. There's way more money in chasing you. Only new strategy games i buy now are Slitherine.
>>
>>840393
what makes a RTS non-gookclicking? MOBA-like hotkeys? simple mechanics?
I usually play Warzone 2100 with some pals, been playing for almsot 20 years already, never thought of learning it's hotkeys, and while the resources are simple the techtree ressemble the Tree of Life
>>
>>849723
Usually they simulate realism by having delays in the units actions. For example the unit has to reorientate itself in the direction it wants to go before accelerating.
Clicking more doesn’t make it do anything faster and can even be a detrimental waste of time.
>>
>>845246
The real advancement in RTS that hasn't happened yet but needs to be done is actual per-unit AI. As in, the units still follow orders but they can understand that they are in a squad if they are, can take cover and skirmish on their own, are capable of setting up and executing patrols automatically, can be set to pursue targets, etc. Some spring engine games, mainly Zero-K already have a few of these but there's more to be done. APM gookclicking will go the way of the dinosaur eventually.
Also this kind of thing would let RTS jump to console much easier so it's inevitable that someone will do it for extra market shekels.
>>
>>849728
I'm pretty sure it would be absolutely ass to play, but it would be interesting as an experiment to try and have spamming clicks reduce the efficiency of units. Either by having a delay each time you give a command or have units have mana that you need to use to give any commands.
>>
>>849723
If there was an RTS that was entirely played at a similar pace as the first 5 minutes of SC2, I would love that. My knowledge of potential games is really small because I've pretty much just played SC(2), WC3 and AoE 2 for thousands of hours.
>>
>>850281
>I've pretty much just played SC(2), WC3 and AoE 2
sorry to disappoint you lad, but pretty much everything else is just shovelware in comparison
>>
>>850287
>>850281
depend on whether he's a compfag or a campaignfag. either way a few more worthy, high effort and high production value games with both decent sp and mp exist, like company of heroes, ground control games, world in conflict, tiberian sun, red alert, dawn of war. admittedly, these games lean more on the sp side of things but they have a decent mp scene.
>>
>>849765
>As in, the units still follow orders but they can understand that they are in a squad if they are, can take cover and skirmish on their own, are capable of setting up and executing patrols automatically, can be set to pursue targets, etc.
All of this. And something less braindead than the choice between "free to move away from current position as much as I deem necessary, including but not limited to following a bait into an enemy outposts where I become a sieve" and "hold position no matter what, even if a tank is about to turn me into a smear".
>>
>>850691
I really think they could expand the control style of zero-k for that easily. The click-drag circle could really easily be a "stay inside of here" range, with an option to instead draw a freehand shape if a circle isn't desired. Then, when inside that area they could have orders like "stay near the center by default" or "patrol the whole thing" or "patrol along edge" etc. It's simple stuff really, it's just that nobody has done it because all of that is currently managed by gookclick. However the first game to do it really effectively will surely change the genre forever.
>>
>>850764
>However the first game to do it really effectively will surely change the genre forever.
Only if the units won't be able to respond to player input with the speed of ADHD sufferers saturated with cocaine so thoroughly that they breathe out little clouds of it.
>>
>>850778
All you need to do to stop the mashing is add an anti-mash mechanic like
>changing squad orders takes x seconds and giving another set of new orders resets the timer
or something. Units that have turn times and inertia also really fuck with gookclick in funny ways.
>>
>>850789
>turn times and inertia
Pretty much this. Grey Goo got them incandescent levels of mad.
>>
>>850789
TW:Medieval 2 got it right in this sense, telling units to constantly do new shit isn't really gonna help them at all, it'll just make them confused, slow and ineffective. You have to commit to your orders.
>>
>>850808
Yeah, the ideal RTS control scheme in my view would be something like
>make units
>select group of units
>group is now a "squad" and functions like one
>give orders to squad (ex: patrol designated area, raid designated area, scout designated area and return when attacked, etc.)
>>the best example of this would be "patrol this area and attack as a group of enemy encountered" with any arbitrary polygon as the zone, with a separate optional leash distance that can be larger than the patrol zone to allow pursuit
>squad does orders relatively autonomously, alerting you if there's some interruption and acting with some degree of self-preservation unless otherwise ordered not to
>can issue new orders to squads but they don't respond instantly so mashing is discouraged
>can add "commander" or "sergeant" units to squads to allow them to be re-ordered more effectively (for things like specialist squads that you want to have some micro over) but these units are limited
It's sort of like a cross between Total War and spring engine games, with some CoH mixed in for good measure. Literally as anti gookclick as you can get while still being an RTS. Favors smart macro strategy and good unit makeups/variety over deathballing dozens of one unit type and microing them out of the way of enemy fire.
>>850806
I still never played that. If the campaign is good I might pick it up.
>>
>>850810
Also I forgot to add, the control scheme/mechanics I listed there are very easy for a strategy AI to use, even without cheating. In fact they're very similar to how a lot of RTS AIs work under the hood, just simplified for human use. This would have a secondary effect of enabling the game's AI to be a lot less shit than the usual modern RTS AI, given the appropriate level of effort.
>>
>>850810
> >give orders to squad (ex: patrol designated area, raid designated area, scout designated area and return when attacked, etc.)
Gangsters 2: Vendetta had this. You could hire mooks to protect your business and they'd stand in the front of it and get aggroed if any opposing gangsters passed by - and if the business was under heavy contest you could assign one of your 8 gangsters to either patrol it, stand out front or get inside (he would be forced out and into a fight when the enemy tried to take it over). They would get aggro, as I said, when an enemy passed by them if they were set to be aggressive, or only when the enemy entered the building otherwise. If the enemy gangster tried to run, they would give chase but for a very limited distance.
>>
>>850808
TW:M2 was instantly one of my favourite rts off the bat because of this. At last here was a game I could employ real strategy concepts in real time.
>>
>>850810
Kohan functions similar to how you described.
Instead of recruiting individual units, you create a custom company made up of 1 leader, four frontline units, two flanking units, and two support units.
When the company engages in battle, units fight autonomously until the battle is over or you order a retreat.
Companies in your supply zones also get a morale boost and recover lost units automatically, which heavily discourages rushing tactics.
>>
>>850372
>depend on whether he's a compfag or a campaignfag.
I'm definitely both. I appreciate good SP design way, way more than good mp design. But I mostly play comp. The thing I don't much care for is story. So for me it's absolutely gameplay design >>>> story. If a game has actually good mission design, it automatically puts it into a higher tier for me.
I have coh since I got it in a bundle a long time ago, but I've never played it. So I don't see a reason to not give it a try.
>>
File: 1636123091886.png (2.89 MB, 2000x1508)
2.89 MB
2.89 MB PNG
>>840393
Needs supreme commander/FA. (nigga you have TA on the list, how did you forget this?)
Needs all of the total wars.
Needs Wargame EE/Airland/Red Dragon.
Halo wars, if you wanna be cheeky.





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.