"This is the Dawn of War that fans have been waiting for. Our biggest units ever? Check. Giant orbital lasers? Check. Base-building, epic heroes, huge battles, it's all in there. Get ready for the biggest Dawn of War yet. For the Emperor!"
Base building is back along with powerful hero units... Just might be the right Warcraft 3 formula we need. Its already better than DoW2.
I just have the needs to also point this out, even though plansix does it good already. The RTS genre is all about BUILD UP for along time. Nothing relevant happens. PLEASE fix that already. After 30sec very relevant stuff should happen and that relevant stuff should go on till the game ends.
Early game micro should be WAY more advanced. It shouldnt be about "he has 3stalkers, i have 3x units. He cant do anyhting", get rid of that and make the players be able to DO way more dancing none-stop.
On May 03 2016 20:54 Faruko wrote: DoW 2 was great, the mp was fun, the loot was cool and the campaign was really well done
If they want this game to survive, do not make it an RTS, dead genre.
why is the RTS genre on life support, is it just hard to make them good?
They don’t do anything new, ever. RTS do the same thing every time. You start with limited or no unit, you build up an army and one side snow balls to victory. Special units are rarely scene because games end before that happens. You fight for control of a blank map that you must take over. The victory condition is terrible, forcing the other side to quit, or just drag the game out. They focus on a very specific type of gameplay that revolves around juggling a lot of balls at once(micro, macro), but rarely focus on anything but adding more balls to juggle to increase “difficulty”.
I said this before, but give me a game where I own a 1/3 of the map already, with a 1/3 noman’s land to fight over. I have a robust economy right off the bat and I have to protect it from my enemy. Make is so I can’t rebuild things, so losses matter. Do all the things mobas do right by giving people clear objectives to fight over and a clear end game.
On May 03 2016 20:54 Faruko wrote: DoW 2 was great, the mp was fun, the loot was cool and the campaign was really well done
If they want this game to survive, do not make it an RTS, dead genre.
why is the RTS genre on life support, is it just hard to make them good?
They don’t do anything new, ever. RTS do the same thing every time. You start with limited or no unit, you build up an army and one side snow balls to victory. Special units are rarely scene because games end before that happens. You fight for control of a blank map that you must take over. The victory condition is terrible, forcing the other side to quit, or just drag the game out. They focus on a very specific type of gameplay that revolves around juggling a lot of balls at once(micro, macro), but rarely focus on anything but adding more balls to juggle to increase “difficulty”.
I said this before, but give me a game where I own a 1/3 of the map already, with a 1/3 noman’s land to fight over. I have a robust economy right off the bat and I have to protect it from my enemy. Make is so I can’t rebuild things, so losses matter. Do all the things mobas do right by giving people clear objectives to fight over and a clear end game.
I see nothing wrong with this
No one on TL is going to see a problem with more of the same. This is, in fact, the hard core audience of this type of game. I will likely enjoy DoW3. I just like to see new ideas. I like the idea of building bases, defenses and infrastructure. I just don’t want to do it on a blank map with a single builder unit every game and then scout to see my opponents starting location.
There is a game where we can have all the parts of RTS games we love with new ideas layered on top of them.
On May 03 2016 23:34 zeo wrote: I just don't want 50 different kinds of DLC on day 1 SEGA!!!!!
As a table top 40K fan, they can sell me unlimited cosmetic DLC. Dressing up your action figures is always fun. But all the races(like 4 races) should be available for the full price.
On May 03 2016 20:54 Faruko wrote: DoW 2 was great, the mp was fun, the loot was cool and the campaign was really well done
If they want this game to survive, do not make it an RTS, dead genre.
why is the RTS genre on life support, is it just hard to make them good?
They don’t do anything new, ever. RTS do the same thing every time. You start with limited or no unit, you build up an army and one side snow balls to victory. Special units are rarely scene because games end before that happens. You fight for control of a blank map that you must take over. The victory condition is terrible, forcing the other side to quit, or just drag the game out. They focus on a very specific type of gameplay that revolves around juggling a lot of balls at once(micro, macro), but rarely focus on anything but adding more balls to juggle to increase “difficulty”.
I said this before, but give me a game where I own a 1/3 of the map already, with a 1/3 noman’s land to fight over. I have a robust economy right off the bat and I have to protect it from my enemy. Make is so I can’t rebuild things, so losses matter. Do all the things mobas do right by giving people clear objectives to fight over and a clear end game.
I see nothing wrong with this
No one on TL is going to see a problem with more of the same. This is, in fact, the hard core audience of this type of game. I will likely enjoy DoW3. I just like to see new ideas. I like the idea of building bases, defenses and infrastructure. I just don’t want to do it on a blank map with a single builder unit every game and then scout to see my opponents starting location.
There is a game where we can have all the parts of RTS games we love with new ideas layered on top of them.
On May 03 2016 23:34 zeo wrote: I just don't want 50 different kinds of DLC on day 1 SEGA!!!!!
As a table top 40K fan, they can sell me unlimited cosmetic DLC. Dressing up your action figures is always fun. But all the races(like 4 races) should be available for the full price.
yes 4, we need chaos, I won't touch this game until chaos is playable.
On May 03 2016 23:29 Foxxan wrote: I just have the needs to also point this out, even though plansix does it good already. The RTS genre is all about BUILD UP for along time. Nothing relevant happens. PLEASE fix that already. After 30sec very relevant stuff should happen and that relevant stuff should go on till the game ends.
Early game micro should be WAY more advanced. It shouldnt be about "he has 3stalkers, i have 3x units. He cant do anyhting", get rid of that and make the players be able to DO way more dancing none-stop.
wasnt that always the point of DoW? action from the first unit u build until the end of the game?
On May 03 2016 23:29 Foxxan wrote: I just have the needs to also point this out, even though plansix does it good already. The RTS genre is all about BUILD UP for along time. Nothing relevant happens. PLEASE fix that already. After 30sec very relevant stuff should happen and that relevant stuff should go on till the game ends.
Early game micro should be WAY more advanced. It shouldnt be about "he has 3stalkers, i have 3x units. He cant do anyhting", get rid of that and make the players be able to DO way more dancing none-stop.
wasnt that always the point of DoW? action from the first unit u build until the end of the game?
Yes, but they need to take it farther. The first part of the game is all about capping order and building up power to get the much needed tech. There is fighting a little, but its mostly build up. It’s the problem with RTS games, you scaled your power and its ever increasing until the supply cap.
But what if the game started out and you had 1/3 of the map already and a robust army that you picked before the match. An interlinked economy that covered the 1/3 of the map you owned, with defenses built it. Of course there would be 1/3 of the map to fight over and bigger, better units to get.
The coolest part of RTS games are the fights with big armies. The build up and victory are pretty dull. Just make the whole game the mid-game all the time.
On May 03 2016 23:29 Foxxan wrote: I just have the needs to also point this out, even though plansix does it good already. The RTS genre is all about BUILD UP for along time. Nothing relevant happens. PLEASE fix that already. After 30sec very relevant stuff should happen and that relevant stuff should go on till the game ends.
Early game micro should be WAY more advanced. It shouldnt be about "he has 3stalkers, i have 3x units. He cant do anyhting", get rid of that and make the players be able to DO way more dancing none-stop.
wasnt that always the point of DoW? action from the first unit u build until the end of the game?
Yes, but they need to take it farther. The first part of the game is all about capping order and building up power to get the much needed tech. There is fighting a little, but its mostly build up. It’s the problem with RTS games, you scaled your power and its ever increasing until the supply cap.
But what if the game started out and you had 1/3 of the map already and a robust army that you picked before the match. An interlinked economy that covered the 1/3 of the map you owned, with defenses built it. Of course there would be 1/3 of the map to fight over and bigger, better units to get.
The coolest part of RTS games are the fights with big armies. The build up and victory are pretty dull. Just make the whole game the mid-game all the time.
Build up is the strategy part which you seem to not like. You just want the tactics part. There are games like that. Go play CoH2 or MOBA games.
On May 03 2016 23:29 Foxxan wrote: I just have the needs to also point this out, even though plansix does it good already. The RTS genre is all about BUILD UP for along time. Nothing relevant happens. PLEASE fix that already. After 30sec very relevant stuff should happen and that relevant stuff should go on till the game ends.
Early game micro should be WAY more advanced. It shouldnt be about "he has 3stalkers, i have 3x units. He cant do anyhting", get rid of that and make the players be able to DO way more dancing none-stop.
wasnt that always the point of DoW? action from the first unit u build until the end of the game?
Yes, but they need to take it farther. The first part of the game is all about capping order and building up power to get the much needed tech. There is fighting a little, but its mostly build up. It’s the problem with RTS games, you scaled your power and its ever increasing until the supply cap.
But what if the game started out and you had 1/3 of the map already and a robust army that you picked before the match. An interlinked economy that covered the 1/3 of the map you owned, with defenses built it. Of course there would be 1/3 of the map to fight over and bigger, better units to get.
The coolest part of RTS games are the fights with big armies. The build up and victory are pretty dull. Just make the whole game the mid-game all the time.
Build up is the strategy part which you seem to not like. You just want the tactics part. There are games like that. Go play CoH2 or MOBA games.
I already play those games. And I don’t mind the build up, I enjoy it. I would like to see new versions of that build up, rather than a rehashing of the opening phases of BW and SC2 matches. And better victory conditions. Though Dawn of War and CoH did a lot of that with the command points.
On May 03 2016 23:56 Faruko wrote: ? Nobody likes the build up part
thats why RTS games are dying and fast.
Even sc2 tried (and failed misserably) to speed up the process in lotv
Its the weakest part of the game because there are so many points of failure, no safety net and the rest of the game snow balls off of the opening. The fact that people still have to look up build orders online highlights this problem.
Note: I want a guide system like DOTA in a RTS. It would solve so many of the problems. And savable map hotkeys. Or…preset hot keys.
Meh, it will have the new stupid big models that had made 40k go to shit.
DoW 2 was fighting since the very start. i understand the building part being boring, but that wasn't the case on DoW2, even tho most people hate it because you didn't have a more deep building system. It was pretty fun to play online. At least on the smallest maps it was fun to play.
On May 03 2016 20:54 Faruko wrote: DoW 2 was great, the mp was fun, the loot was cool and the campaign was really well done
If they want this game to survive, do not make it an RTS, dead genre.
why is the RTS genre on life support, is it just hard to make them good?
They don’t do anything new, ever. RTS do the same thing every time. You start with limited or no unit, you build up an army and one side snow balls to victory. Special units are rarely scene because games end before that happens. You fight for control of a blank map that you must take over. The victory condition is terrible, forcing the other side to quit, or just drag the game out. They focus on a very specific type of gameplay that revolves around juggling a lot of balls at once(micro, macro), but rarely focus on anything but adding more balls to juggle to increase “difficulty”.
I said this before, but give me a game where I own a 1/3 of the map already, with a 1/3 noman’s land to fight over. I have a robust economy right off the bat and I have to protect it from my enemy. Make is so I can’t rebuild things, so losses matter. Do all the things mobas do right by giving people clear objectives to fight over and a clear end game.
I see nothing wrong with this
No one on TL is going to see a problem with more of the same. This is, in fact, the hard core audience of this type of game. I will likely enjoy DoW3. I just like to see new ideas. I like the idea of building bases, defenses and infrastructure. I just don’t want to do it on a blank map with a single builder unit every game and then scout to see my opponents starting location.
There is a game where we can have all the parts of RTS games we love with new ideas layered on top of them.
On May 03 2016 23:34 zeo wrote: I just don't want 50 different kinds of DLC on day 1 SEGA!!!!!
As a table top 40K fan, they can sell me unlimited cosmetic DLC. Dressing up your action figures is always fun. But all the races(like 4 races) should be available for the full price.
Yeah I agree. The genre has a lot of old burdens like the super slow start, the "we introduce units one by one"-campaigns, the for most people relatively boring aspect of macro (like f.e. building supply buildings, which really is only a dog-trainer, not like build-orders, which include decision making) and annihilation being the main goal (although I can live with that). Nobody on TL will hate the game for it, but it probably stops them from achieving larger audiences.
I like relic's idea to create a drafting phase for strategies/heroes. That telegraphs your game plan and takes the blindness out of rock->paper->scissor of defensive play, rush and greed.
On May 03 2016 23:29 Foxxan wrote: I just have the needs to also point this out, even though plansix does it good already. The RTS genre is all about BUILD UP for along time. Nothing relevant happens. PLEASE fix that already. After 30sec very relevant stuff should happen and that relevant stuff should go on till the game ends.
Early game micro should be WAY more advanced. It shouldnt be about "he has 3stalkers, i have 3x units. He cant do anyhting", get rid of that and make the players be able to DO way more dancing none-stop.
wasnt that always the point of DoW? action from the first unit u build until the end of the game?
Yes, but they need to take it farther. The first part of the game is all about capping order and building up power to get the much needed tech. There is fighting a little, but its mostly build up. It’s the problem with RTS games, you scaled your power and its ever increasing until the supply cap.
But what if the game started out and you had 1/3 of the map already and a robust army that you picked before the match. An interlinked economy that covered the 1/3 of the map you owned, with defenses built it. Of course there would be 1/3 of the map to fight over and bigger, better units to get.
The coolest part of RTS games are the fights with big armies. The build up and victory are pretty dull. Just make the whole game the mid-game all the time.
Man am I happy that RTS creators don't listen to you. No offense, but man that would be so boring if an "RTS" was just "here's your army, economy already setup now go!". That's why most RTS's have different game modes, like deathmatch so they can do that.
On May 03 2016 23:29 Foxxan wrote: I just have the needs to also point this out, even though plansix does it good already. The RTS genre is all about BUILD UP for along time. Nothing relevant happens. PLEASE fix that already. After 30sec very relevant stuff should happen and that relevant stuff should go on till the game ends.
Early game micro should be WAY more advanced. It shouldnt be about "he has 3stalkers, i have 3x units. He cant do anyhting", get rid of that and make the players be able to DO way more dancing none-stop.
wasnt that always the point of DoW? action from the first unit u build until the end of the game?
Yes, but they need to take it farther. The first part of the game is all about capping order and building up power to get the much needed tech. There is fighting a little, but its mostly build up. It’s the problem with RTS games, you scaled your power and its ever increasing until the supply cap.
But what if the game started out and you had 1/3 of the map already and a robust army that you picked before the match. An interlinked economy that covered the 1/3 of the map you owned, with defenses built it. Of course there would be 1/3 of the map to fight over and bigger, better units to get.
The coolest part of RTS games are the fights with big armies. The build up and victory are pretty dull. Just make the whole game the mid-game all the time.
Man am I happy that RTS creators don't listen to you. No offense, but man that would be so boring if an "RTS" was just "here's your army, economy already setup now go!". That's why most RTS's have different game modes, like deathmatch so they can do that.
See, all I view that as is a lack of vision. If you give a player 1/3 of the map and a functioning “economy” on that third of the map, it opens up new possibilities.
What if the resources had to be shipped back to the base and could be raided by the other side? What if there are complex transportation for units on parts of the map that could be attacked to slow new units to the front line? What if the base had a limit number of support structures for air born units that could be raided? What if there were powerful defensive towers that couldn’t rebuilt or repaired, but some factions could tunnel under them?
What you see as free base building and units, I see as something that can be finite and adds depth.
Edit: Once again, I am not saying that RTS games shouldn’t have tech trees or base building. I just think they should change the way those systems work. We have far more power computers than the era of BW and C&C. Making the economy automated, but more complex by moving it out of tiny corner of the base could change things. And providing more way to do economic damage than “kill workers, forcing construction of new workers” would be good.
For all its flaws, Ruse, had an interesting take on economy and fog of war. I would to see more complex systems that we interact with.
On May 03 2016 23:29 Foxxan wrote: I just have the needs to also point this out, even though plansix does it good already. The RTS genre is all about BUILD UP for along time. Nothing relevant happens. PLEASE fix that already. After 30sec very relevant stuff should happen and that relevant stuff should go on till the game ends. Early game micro should be WAY more advanced. It shouldnt be about "he has 3stalkers, i have 3x units. He cant do anyhting", get rid of that and make the players be able to DO way more dancing none-stop.
wasnt that always the point of DoW? action from the first unit u build until the end of the game?
Yes, but they need to take it farther. The first part of the game is all about capping order and building up power to get the much needed tech. There is fighting a little, but its mostly build up. It’s the problem with RTS games, you scaled your power and its ever increasing until the supply cap. But what if the game started out and you had 1/3 of the map already and a robust army that you picked before the match. An interlinked economy that covered the 1/3 of the map you owned, with defenses built it. Of course there would be 1/3 of the map to fight over and bigger, better units to get. The coolest part of RTS games are the fights with big armies. The build up and victory are pretty dull. Just make the whole game the mid-game all the time.
Man am I happy that RTS creators don't listen to you. No offense, but man that would be so boring if an "RTS" was just "here's your army, economy already setup now go!". That's why most RTS's have different game modes, like deathmatch so they can do that.
trying listening to some of Day9's insights about game making. you don't really know what will be fun until you throw it together and experience it first hand.
stuff that sounds boring can wind up being fun in a way you never could have anticipated. stuff that sounds amazing ends up being worse that watching paint dry when it is experienced first hand.
allow yourself to be surprised.
i think this idea could work if executed properly, HOWEVER, it must be play tested by a group. if people think its boring or even the smallest detail of its execution is mishandled then it must be scraped and thrown into the garbage bin.
with RA3 u start with 10,000 Ore and you can set up 2 Ore NOdes in like 4 clicks and BAM your base economy is set. it offers far less in base "house keeping" than SC1 and SC2, "base building that is not a chore" is a core tenet of C&C.
On May 03 2016 23:29 Foxxan wrote: I just have the needs to also point this out, even though plansix does it good already. The RTS genre is all about BUILD UP for along time. Nothing relevant happens. PLEASE fix that already. After 30sec very relevant stuff should happen and that relevant stuff should go on till the game ends.
Early game micro should be WAY more advanced. It shouldnt be about "he has 3stalkers, i have 3x units. He cant do anyhting", get rid of that and make the players be able to DO way more dancing none-stop.
wasnt that always the point of DoW? action from the first unit u build until the end of the game?
Yes, but they need to take it farther. The first part of the game is all about capping order and building up power to get the much needed tech. There is fighting a little, but its mostly build up. It’s the problem with RTS games, you scaled your power and its ever increasing until the supply cap.
But what if the game started out and you had 1/3 of the map already and a robust army that you picked before the match. An interlinked economy that covered the 1/3 of the map you owned, with defenses built it. Of course there would be 1/3 of the map to fight over and bigger, better units to get.
The coolest part of RTS games are the fights with big armies. The build up and victory are pretty dull. Just make the whole game the mid-game all the time.
Man am I happy that RTS creators don't listen to you. No offense, but man that would be so boring if an "RTS" was just "here's your army, economy already setup now go!". That's why most RTS's have different game modes, like deathmatch so they can do that.
See, all I view that as is a lack of vision. If you give a player 1/3 of the map and a functioning “economy” on that third of the map, it opens up new possibilities.
What if the resources had to be shipped back to the base and could be raided by the other side? What if there are complex transportation for units on parts of the map that could be attacked to slow new units to the front line? What if the base had a limit number of support structures for air born units that could be raided? What if there were powerful defensive towers that couldn’t rebuilt or repaired, but some factions could tunnel under them?
What you see as free base building and units, I see as something that can be finite and adds depth.
Edit: Once again, I am not saying that RTS games shouldn’t have tech trees or base building. I just think they should change the way those systems work. We have far more power computers than the era of BW and C&C. Making the economy automated, but more complex by moving it out of tiny corner of the base could change things. And providing more way to do economic damage than “kill workers, forcing construction of new workers” would be good.
For all its flaws, Ruse, had an interesting take on economy and fog of war. I would to see more complex systems that we interact with.
AoA vanilla tried to make more interesting resource management and it only cost them bad reviews. I don't think a game like you propose has a big market out there.