+ Show Spoiler +
It is DoW III.
Some first infos:
www.pcgamer.com
Forum Index > General Games |
RolleMcKnolle
Germany1054 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + It is DoW III. Some first infos: www.pcgamer.com | ||
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES49025 Posts
| ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
On May 03 2016 18:25 BLinD-RawR wrote: let it be like DoW1 dark crusade, didn't like soulstorm as much Hear hear. | ||
Velr
Switzerland10416 Posts
Still makes me sad | ||
OuchyDathurts
United States4588 Posts
| ||
Mafe
Germany5917 Posts
If they announce it, I just hope that this time, they dont go once again with the same four races at release. I never liked orks very much as a part of the 40k universe, and while the eldar units they have chosen for the pc games might have been the trademark units, I found that the dow-eldar never quite lived up to the "real" tabletop eldar (granted, I never really played dow2 myself). Cant state exactly why I felt like this though. | ||
Lachrymose
Australia1928 Posts
| ||
Faruko
Chile34158 Posts
If they want this game to survive, do not make it an RTS, dead genre. | ||
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
But iam 99% sure they wont do it properly but still, there is some hope. | ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
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. No DoW2/CoH2 like game is even close to popularity of Sc2 although going by SteamSpy DoW2 sold more than DoW1. I still think AAA version of RTS DoW3 could sell very well. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
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. They just need to get away from the stale RTS formula and really spice shit up. Take it a series of 10 minute tactical micro battles in a row. Get rid of base building and make a new system. Make people pick army line ups pre-battle. Include a pick and ban phase for special units or heroes. The ways to make RTS interesting are endless. Just anything but “find build orders online, move out and fight people on a map with fog of war. Lose early and often while you figure out the dynamic of the game.” Anything but the same shit people have been pooping out since BW. | ||
Faruko
Chile34158 Posts
On May 03 2016 22:08 -Archangel- wrote: Show nested quote + 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. No DoW2/CoH2 like game is even close to popularity of Sc2 although going by SteamSpy DoW2 sold more than DoW1. I still think AAA version of RTS DoW3 could sell very well. yeah, but even by sc standard that game is dead. and im pretty sure the game could sell well either way, but i doubt that unless your name is Starcraft or Warcraft a full fledge out RTS AAA game would do enough to justify a game that expensive. p6 is right, the problem is that the typical RTS gameplay hit a wall and that theres not enough space for SC2 and another RTS game | ||
Yhamm
France7248 Posts
| ||
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES49025 Posts
| ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
I hope DoW3 does crazy things. Edit: That is a very nice, stylized trailer. Now bring me something new. | ||
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
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? | ||
Weavel
Finland9213 Posts
| ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 03 2016 23:09 Assault_1 wrote: Show nested quote + 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. | ||
ShadowArm
23 Posts
OH MY EMPEROR!, also PCG had the entire thing covered in secret, the next ed will have all details about the game and a free DoW II master collection key this trailer!!!!!!! | ||
Yhamm
France7248 Posts
edit: http://www.pcgamer.com/dawn-of-war-3-inside-relics-biggest-rts-yet/ with screenshots graphics look like dow2? o_O | ||
zeo
Serbia6175 Posts
"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. | ||
ShadowArm
23 Posts
http://www.pcgamer.com/dawn-of-war-3-inside-relics-biggest-rts-yet/ http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/05/warhammer-dawn-of-war-3-announcement-details-trailer/ Also Holy crap, the entire DoW page was incredibly updated! https://www.dawnofwar.com/article/introduction-to-dawn-of-war 3 Armies they took the good things from all dow games and mods(UA and Elite) Chapter Master Gabe. Farseer Macha of Biel Tan and Gorgutz | ||
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
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. | ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On May 03 2016 23:16 Plansix wrote: Show nested quote + On May 03 2016 23:09 Assault_1 wrote: 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 | ||
zeo
Serbia6175 Posts
| ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 03 2016 23:30 -Archangel- wrote: Show nested quote + On May 03 2016 23:16 Plansix wrote: On May 03 2016 23:09 Assault_1 wrote: 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. | ||
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES49025 Posts
On May 03 2016 23:36 Plansix wrote: Show nested quote + On May 03 2016 23:30 -Archangel- wrote: On May 03 2016 23:16 Plansix wrote: On May 03 2016 23:09 Assault_1 wrote: 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. Show nested quote + 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. | ||
RolleMcKnolle
Germany1054 Posts
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? | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 03 2016 23:43 RolleMcKnolle wrote: Show nested quote + 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. | ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On May 03 2016 23:51 Plansix wrote: Show nested quote + On May 03 2016 23:43 RolleMcKnolle wrote: 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. | ||
Faruko
Chile34158 Posts
thats why RTS games are dying and fast. Even sc2 tried (and failed misserably) to speed up the process in lotv | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 03 2016 23:53 -Archangel- wrote: Show nested quote + On May 03 2016 23:51 Plansix wrote: On May 03 2016 23:43 RolleMcKnolle wrote: 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. | ||
Godwrath
Spain10091 Posts
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. | ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
On May 03 2016 23:36 Plansix wrote: Show nested quote + On May 03 2016 23:30 -Archangel- wrote: On May 03 2016 23:16 Plansix wrote: On May 03 2016 23:09 Assault_1 wrote: 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. Show nested quote + 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. | ||
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On May 03 2016 23:51 Plansix wrote: Show nested quote + On May 03 2016 23:43 RolleMcKnolle wrote: 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. | ||
Klowney
Sweden277 Posts
| ||
Faruko
Chile34158 Posts
what shake might that be ? i dont know | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 04 2016 00:23 blade55555 wrote: Show nested quote + On May 03 2016 23:51 Plansix wrote: On May 03 2016 23:43 RolleMcKnolle wrote: 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. | ||
JimmyJRaynor
Canada15564 Posts
nice to see Relic get another RTS project. On May 04 2016 00:23 blade55555 wrote: Show nested quote + On May 03 2016 23:51 Plansix wrote: On May 03 2016 23:43 RolleMcKnolle wrote: 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. | ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On May 04 2016 00:33 Plansix wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 00:23 blade55555 wrote: On May 03 2016 23:51 Plansix wrote: On May 03 2016 23:43 RolleMcKnolle wrote: 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. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 04 2016 01:18 -Archangel- wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 00:33 Plansix wrote: On May 04 2016 00:23 blade55555 wrote: On May 03 2016 23:51 Plansix wrote: On May 03 2016 23:43 RolleMcKnolle wrote: 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. AoA has a lot of problems and was not a very good game in general. This is on top of being in one of the most niche game genera’s out there. I don’t think that every failed RTS proves that all games should stick to the BW/SC2 formal as closely as possible. Constantly rehashing the same gameplay design choices is not going to magically make the game successful. If anything, it just dooms it to failure because that game already exists. | ||
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
On May 03 2016 23:09 Assault_1 wrote: Show nested quote + 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? Strategy game fans had a large group of conservative people. As a result everything that was not the standard rts game, was a different genre. Overall access to multiplayer grew, but isolationist groups like the rts genre, stayed rather the same size. Then the giant Warcraft 3 armageddon happened, everyone wanted a piece of the rts pie that Warcraft 3 was. And everyone failed because they didn't understand why Warcraft 3 was so popular. Afterwards people were just to scared to make rts games. As a result, people think its a dying genre and are scared a shitton that they will never see a rts again that they like. Thats why people are so vocal to get games changed the way they want them to be. And then Dota happened, that split of a large part of the rts community. Now some developers of the rts genre came back together to make a new rts game with the mechanics fell in love with using the newest technology, they never intended to make something new. They just wanted to see whats possible now. While everyone in the rts community wants to get back to the glory of old days, where they were a big community. And they feel like rts games need to be different to get more players etc. Because more people = more games produced = bigger chance they get a game they can all in love with. I am really curious about the next generation of rts games, now that developers got a feel for what you can do. On topic Seems like Dawn of War 3 will become a Hybrid of both Dawn of Wars, basically a Warcraft 3 thing. If they manage to take the best parts of 1 and 2 it will be glorius. | ||
Mafe
Germany5917 Posts
But maybe, just maybe, they have deliberately left out a 4th (5th?) race and surprise me with something other than chaos marines this time. On second thought (and after checking), dow2 actually included tyranids and only added chaos via addon? I guess I have to give the publishers a little bit more credit than I initally did. | ||
BEARDiaguz
Australia2362 Posts
| ||
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
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. Dawn of War always had aggression in the early game, so unless they move away from the control point based macro and squad based infantry, I doubt that will change. So don't worry about that. Dawn of War 2 had to much aggression. People don't want deathballs and constant action. Well Dawn of War 2 had that and showed, why it won't bring the success some people think it would bring. I loved seeing Dawn of War 2 competitions, but that game was just to much to handle for most people. Anyway if you look at the popular games, all have build up at the start and only small bursts of action. And then people crawl back into a defensive position the enemy can't risk to engange into to reorganize. And I hope Dawn of War will be just like this. Minus the burst of action, because Warhammer needs constant fighting. | ||
Faruko
Chile34158 Posts
they should fine tune that or change thedirection while taking what made dow2 exciting | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
And the damage/anti-armor system for vehicles. The previous system of lots of entrench anti tank guns was fine, but both lacked range and vision to be effective. I would prefer a better system for vehicles in general, where they are not in this binary state of “amazing” and then “fucking dead, you fucked up”. | ||
BEARDiaguz
Australia2362 Posts
Close enough? | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
JimmyJRaynor
Canada15564 Posts
lets make an RTS where 20 minutes into the game more than half your units are worker units continuously going back and forth from 1 building to a field of minerals...and you spend the first 10 minutes pressing the same button rhythmically every 12 seconds so that this 1 building keeps making worker units! lets call it StarFarmCraftville. | ||
Dysisa
Sweden2376 Posts
| ||
Andre
Slovenia3515 Posts
And you don't need to innovate to make good/interesting games. I mean look at blizzard aside from WC3 they didn't make anything new. | ||
JimmyJRaynor
Canada15564 Posts
On May 04 2016 02:20 Andre wrote: DoW1 was fun to play, campaign was great, MP was great. Didn't like DoW2 that much. Hope they try to copy DoW1. ya, i thought DoW1 >> DoW2 i hope its more like DoW1. | ||
NKB
United Kingdom608 Posts
| ||
Rial Hirau
Zimbabwe8 Posts
dow I and II was so boring, i dropped them both on middle | ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
| ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On May 04 2016 01:26 Plansix wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 01:18 -Archangel- wrote: On May 04 2016 00:33 Plansix wrote: On May 04 2016 00:23 blade55555 wrote: On May 03 2016 23:51 Plansix wrote: On May 03 2016 23:43 RolleMcKnolle wrote: 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. AoA has a lot of problems and was not a very good game in general. This is on top of being in one of the most niche game genera’s out there. I don’t think that every failed RTS proves that all games should stick to the BW/SC2 formal as closely as possible. Constantly rehashing the same gameplay design choices is not going to magically make the game successful. If anything, it just dooms it to failure because that game already exists. Except there has not been another AAA rts that tried to copy Blizzard recipy and failed or succeeded. So it is impossible to say if they should stop tyring to copy. Also CnC Generals was more similar to warcraft/starcraft than other C&C games and was most successful C&C game. | ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
On May 04 2016 02:26 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 02:20 Andre wrote: DoW1 was fun to play, campaign was great, MP was great. Didn't like DoW2 that much. Hope they try to copy DoW1. ya, i thought DoW1 >> DoW2 i hope its more like DoW1. I liked them both but personally I believe that DoW2 was a superior game in the end. I really liked how they brought in mechanics from CoH into it (that moment of dread when the first armored unit comes through the wall at your troops, you don't get that anywhere outside of Relic games). I guess that's because I've really enjoyed WC3 before and liked the micro aspect way more than macro (and the fact that you couldn't just send your units to die and you tried to preserve them as long as possible). Also, the epic artillery barrages and such. If they make DoW3 a bit more like CoH2 it'll be glorious. There's a lot of potential with global abilities and it all looks like a proper war with huge explosions, terrain being obliterated, mud flying all over the place and obscuring your camera. Epic. A bit disappointed with just 3 races at the start, although I don't mind it that much since I'm an Eldar player myself, and I guess it was a choice they pretty much had to take as to not completely alienate their existing customers. Would definitely prefer it if they did like Chaos, Mechanicum, Dark Eldar and Imperial Guard (whatever they're called now) for a change. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 04 2016 03:29 -Archangel- wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 01:26 Plansix wrote: On May 04 2016 01:18 -Archangel- wrote: On May 04 2016 00:33 Plansix wrote: On May 04 2016 00:23 blade55555 wrote: On May 03 2016 23:51 Plansix wrote: On May 03 2016 23:43 RolleMcKnolle wrote: 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. AoA has a lot of problems and was not a very good game in general. This is on top of being in one of the most niche game genera’s out there. I don’t think that every failed RTS proves that all games should stick to the BW/SC2 formal as closely as possible. Constantly rehashing the same gameplay design choices is not going to magically make the game successful. If anything, it just dooms it to failure because that game already exists. Except there has not been another AAA rts that tried to copy Blizzard recipy and failed or succeeded. So it is impossible to say if they should stop tyring to copy. Also CnC Generals was more similar to warcraft/starcraft than other C&C games and was most successful C&C game. Chasing the success of Blizzard has never really worked out for anyone. Making the same game they made, but better and more polished is a losing fight. Especially when even the most successful RTS games rare break 1 million units sold. Fuck, even Crusader kings 2 has better sales that most RTS games of the last decade, with the exclusion of SC2 and Dawn of War. But even those games only moved like 4 million units. The audience for hardcore RTS games like BW/SC2 is not worth the development money for AAA studio to cater to. | ||
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
On May 03 2016 23:16 Plansix wrote: Show nested quote + On May 03 2016 23:09 Assault_1 wrote: 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 don't think your assessment is correct. Look at FPS games, the most copy/pasted genre ever and it never changes. Why can't RTS get away with doing that? I love that you get to start from a simple base in bw, thats how it should be, you build yourself up. Your ideas are maybe better for the singleplayer campaign. I think the answer to why RTS is dying has more to with people seeing them as intellectual games and not as fun in general. Also I noticed with my friends, they have no problem buying a game , beating it in 10 hours then moving to the next. Maybe I'm just an oddball but I like to focus on playing a very small set of games for months/years. For me I basically just grew up on diablo 2/starcraft/counterstrike (which turns out to be the best of each genre). I'd like to figure a way to breath life into RTS games again.. I can't believe snooze games like LoL are doing so much better. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
Musicus
Germany23567 Posts
Keeping an eye on this for sure. | ||
Heartland
Sweden24562 Posts
On May 04 2016 01:34 BEARDiaguz wrote: They should pull a fast one and have Squats be the 4th race. you're just saying that because you are a Squat | ||
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
On May 04 2016 04:04 Plansix wrote: I don’t think its that people view them as “intellectual” but as games that favor the person who can multitask and perfect muscle memory better. And people are not interested in difficultly presented in that fashion. People like challenging games. Sales of Dark Souls and other games show that challenge isn’t the problem. I like RTS games, but I am the only one of my friends that plays them anymore. Yeah might be right, one of the reasons I'm starting to drift away from BW a little is I'm getting older and intensive macro/micro becomes more difficult/exhausting. Maybe if RTS favoured more strategy over apm it would help? But this doesn't sound right either, sc2 made apm less relevant and it isn't very popular. Seems bw just managed to hit the perfect balance of everything. Apparently I'm not very good at assessing either because I've said a lot but can't reach a conclusion about anything. | ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On May 04 2016 03:41 Plansix wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 03:29 -Archangel- wrote: On May 04 2016 01:26 Plansix wrote: On May 04 2016 01:18 -Archangel- wrote: On May 04 2016 00:33 Plansix wrote: On May 04 2016 00:23 blade55555 wrote: On May 03 2016 23:51 Plansix wrote: On May 03 2016 23:43 RolleMcKnolle wrote: 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. AoA has a lot of problems and was not a very good game in general. This is on top of being in one of the most niche game genera’s out there. I don’t think that every failed RTS proves that all games should stick to the BW/SC2 formal as closely as possible. Constantly rehashing the same gameplay design choices is not going to magically make the game successful. If anything, it just dooms it to failure because that game already exists. Except there has not been another AAA rts that tried to copy Blizzard recipy and failed or succeeded. So it is impossible to say if they should stop tyring to copy. Also CnC Generals was more similar to warcraft/starcraft than other C&C games and was most successful C&C game. Chasing the success of Blizzard has never really worked out for anyone. Making the same game they made, but better and more polished is a losing fight. Especially when even the most successful RTS games rare break 1 million units sold. Fuck, even Crusader kings 2 has better sales that most RTS games of the last decade, with the exclusion of SC2 and Dawn of War. But even those games only moved like 4 million units. The audience for hardcore RTS games like BW/SC2 is not worth the development money for AAA studio to cater to. I just said that nobody tried it yet, so how can you say it never worked for anyone. LOL. And 4 million units is a very good number. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 04 2016 05:00 -Archangel- wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 03:41 Plansix wrote: On May 04 2016 03:29 -Archangel- wrote: On May 04 2016 01:26 Plansix wrote: On May 04 2016 01:18 -Archangel- wrote: On May 04 2016 00:33 Plansix wrote: On May 04 2016 00:23 blade55555 wrote: On May 03 2016 23:51 Plansix wrote: On May 03 2016 23:43 RolleMcKnolle wrote: 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. AoA has a lot of problems and was not a very good game in general. This is on top of being in one of the most niche game genera’s out there. I don’t think that every failed RTS proves that all games should stick to the BW/SC2 formal as closely as possible. Constantly rehashing the same gameplay design choices is not going to magically make the game successful. If anything, it just dooms it to failure because that game already exists. Except there has not been another AAA rts that tried to copy Blizzard recipy and failed or succeeded. So it is impossible to say if they should stop tyring to copy. Also CnC Generals was more similar to warcraft/starcraft than other C&C games and was most successful C&C game. Chasing the success of Blizzard has never really worked out for anyone. Making the same game they made, but better and more polished is a losing fight. Especially when even the most successful RTS games rare break 1 million units sold. Fuck, even Crusader kings 2 has better sales that most RTS games of the last decade, with the exclusion of SC2 and Dawn of War. But even those games only moved like 4 million units. The audience for hardcore RTS games like BW/SC2 is not worth the development money for AAA studio to cater to. I just said that nobody tried it yet, so how can you say it never worked for anyone. LOL. Yes, and I pointed out the reason why no one has tried. When you say AAA studio beyond Blizzard, you are talking about huge development costs for a niche genre. 4 million on two games with IPs that have penetration beyond the the RTS community. The rest don’t break 1 million in sales at all, which isn't great for any multiplayer game. | ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On May 04 2016 05:03 Plansix wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 05:00 -Archangel- wrote: On May 04 2016 03:41 Plansix wrote: On May 04 2016 03:29 -Archangel- wrote: On May 04 2016 01:26 Plansix wrote: On May 04 2016 01:18 -Archangel- wrote: On May 04 2016 00:33 Plansix wrote: On May 04 2016 00:23 blade55555 wrote: On May 03 2016 23:51 Plansix wrote: On May 03 2016 23:43 RolleMcKnolle wrote: [quote] 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. AoA has a lot of problems and was not a very good game in general. This is on top of being in one of the most niche game genera’s out there. I don’t think that every failed RTS proves that all games should stick to the BW/SC2 formal as closely as possible. Constantly rehashing the same gameplay design choices is not going to magically make the game successful. If anything, it just dooms it to failure because that game already exists. Except there has not been another AAA rts that tried to copy Blizzard recipy and failed or succeeded. So it is impossible to say if they should stop tyring to copy. Also CnC Generals was more similar to warcraft/starcraft than other C&C games and was most successful C&C game. Chasing the success of Blizzard has never really worked out for anyone. Making the same game they made, but better and more polished is a losing fight. Especially when even the most successful RTS games rare break 1 million units sold. Fuck, even Crusader kings 2 has better sales that most RTS games of the last decade, with the exclusion of SC2 and Dawn of War. But even those games only moved like 4 million units. The audience for hardcore RTS games like BW/SC2 is not worth the development money for AAA studio to cater to. I just said that nobody tried it yet, so how can you say it never worked for anyone. LOL. Yes, and I pointed out the reason why no one has tried. When you say AAA studio beyond Blizzard, you are talking about huge development costs for a niche genre. 4 million on two games with IPs that have penetration beyond the the RTS community. The rest don’t break 1 million in sales at all, which isn't great for any multiplayer game. No, you guessed why nobody tried. I don't agree with your guess. | ||
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On May 04 2016 05:41 Dangermousecatdog wrote: The problem is your strange fixation with AAA. AAA doesn't mean anything other than the company's own ability to promote itself in other people's mind as AAA. I don't agree with this. There is a definite difference between AAA and AA or A in most game genres. AAA does not mean automatically the game is better but the production quality difference is always noticeable. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
I would not consider Relic AAA, since they are so small. Same with the Total War folks. Those games just lack the million dollar markets pushes that EA and activision brings. | ||
teapot
United Kingdom266 Posts
Relic's RTS with CoH and DoW2 were going in a nice CP resources/VP which I liked a lot. More movement and map control. It feels good once you get a feel for it. I hope it's closer to this model than turtle in base and produce 500 worker units =/ | ||
JimmyJRaynor
Canada15564 Posts
On May 04 2016 03:30 Manit0u wrote: If they make DoW3 a bit more like CoH2 it'll be glorious. There's a lot of potential with global abilities and it all looks like a proper war with huge explosions, terrain being obliterated, mud flying all over the place and obscuring your camera. Epic. noted. On May 04 2016 03:30 Manit0u wrote: A bit disappointed with just 3 races at the start, although I don't mind it that much since I'm an Eldar player myself, and I guess it was a choice they pretty much had to take as to not completely alienate their existing customers. Would definitely prefer it if they did like Chaos, Mechanicum, Dark Eldar and Imperial Guard (whatever they're called now) for a change. i kinda like 3 races and no more. i like to be able to glance at a composition and have a pretty good idea what it can do. i can do that in RTS games with 3 races.. and i just give up when its more races and there are 100 different units with 1000s of possible unique interactions. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 04 2016 06:55 teapot wrote: DoW2 is so underrated. It was a great game. Such a shame if Relic have caved into these vocal base-building dummies. I know all they want is to AFK in their base and build a big blob and A-move it at the enemy. *sigh* Relic's RTS with CoH and DoW2 were going in a nice CP resources/VP which I liked a lot. More movement and map control. It feels good once you get a feel for it. I hope it's closer to this model than turtle in base and produce 500 worker units =/ I agree and I hope there are no worker units to control. I can deal with building a base to work out of, but I would rather go out on the map to collect resources. I strongly dislike worker units who's only job is to build things, collect $$$ and die. | ||
Latham
9507 Posts
I don't think making a hardcore RTS like SC1/SC2 will work, honestly. I think it'd be more successful with limited base building, more hero focus and smaller armies like warcraft 3. War3 had a high skill ceiling but the amount of HP units had made it newbie friendly so you could easily save 1 or 2 and feel rewarded. As for economy, I dunno if I want a limited eco like in war3 or nodes back from DoW1 / CoH. If they can pull off nodes, all the more power to them. Also, this is SEGA - inb4 day 1 Khaos DLC and a stand-alone Tyranid "expansion" a la Attila to Rome 2. Kill the mutant. Burn the heretic. Purge the unclean. | ||
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On May 04 2016 05:45 -Archangel- wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 05:41 Dangermousecatdog wrote: The problem is your strange fixation with AAA. AAA doesn't mean anything other than the company's own ability to promote itself in other people's mind as AAA. I don't agree with this. There is a definite difference between AAA and AA or A in most game genres. AAA does not mean automatically the game is better but the production quality difference is always noticeable. Problem with that difference is that AA or A or B or C or D games don't exist, nor can you point to a difference between these non existent categories. AAA is purely a marketing term that justifies how much money is spent on marketing. Not a useful concept. | ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On May 04 2016 07:27 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 05:45 -Archangel- wrote: On May 04 2016 05:41 Dangermousecatdog wrote: The problem is your strange fixation with AAA. AAA doesn't mean anything other than the company's own ability to promote itself in other people's mind as AAA. I don't agree with this. There is a definite difference between AAA and AA or A in most game genres. AAA does not mean automatically the game is better but the production quality difference is always noticeable. Problem with that difference is that AA or A or B or C or D games don't exist, nor can you point to a difference between these non existent categories. AAA is purely a marketing term that justifies how much money is spent on marketing. Not a useful concept. Sorry but no. It is how much overall money was spent. Pillars of Eternity is considered a AA rpg while Dragon Age Inquisition is AAA. DAI is bigger, has full VO and lots of polish and added content. It cost a lot more to make and yes, they marketed it a lot more. Blizzard RTS are like that. In addition to normal marketing Blizzard also invests a lot of money into promoting competition. Not to mention they invest a lot to polish the game. People made fun of bnet 0.2 but all the AA RTS that came after had all that worse. And features like coop watching of replies will never be done in AA RTS. | ||
Deleted User 26513
2376 Posts
1. The game will be released unfinished, because deadlines. 2. Day one DLC. 3. Countless other DLCs after that. | ||
Impervious
Canada4119 Posts
According to Steam, I have played 15 hrs worth of the first, and 2 hrs of the 2nd. I am a fairly big Warhammer fan. I am actually taking a bit of a break from painting a model for a Tyranid army. I have quite literally spent over 10 grand on models and paints/glues/tools/etc for the hobby, and surely thousands of hours. But the video games suck, much to my dismay. I am seriously hoping for Total War: Warhammer to be good though. It looks it. I don't have high hopes for this one though, sadly. | ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
On May 04 2016 03:51 Assault_1 wrote: Show nested quote + On May 03 2016 23:16 Plansix wrote: On May 03 2016 23:09 Assault_1 wrote: 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 don't think your assessment is correct. Look at FPS games, the most copy/pasted genre ever and it never changes. Why can't RTS get away with doing that? I love that you get to start from a simple base in bw, thats how it should be, you build yourself up. Your ideas are maybe better for the singleplayer campaign. I think the answer to why RTS is dying has more to with people seeing them as intellectual games and not as fun in general. Also I noticed with my friends, they have no problem buying a game , beating it in 10 hours then moving to the next. Maybe I'm just an oddball but I like to focus on playing a very small set of games for months/years. For me I basically just grew up on diablo 2/starcraft/counterstrike (which turns out to be the best of each genre). I'd like to figure a way to breath life into RTS games again.. I can't believe snooze games like LoL are doing so much better. FPS actually evolved and started with more action and less boring cycles from the get go. Things like regenerating health-bars, first person cutscenes, cover systems and limited weapon slots are big reasons why the scene is still alive (although I don't like many of them). You just have to look at the size of the oldschool communities (Quake, UT, Doom) and compare them to the real selling titles like battlefield and CoD. Given, they have less production value. Relic and THQ actually tried to implement changes with DoW and CoH, with some success. I'd like to breath life into RTS games again, and I think the way is removing all the boring elements from it. That includes extensive base building, worker building and probably means starting out with troops from the get go. I really liked a lot of the concepts DoW I already established. A big reason why the multiplayer of DoW 2 failed is probably that the campaign, while a lot of fun for me, taught me nothing about the actual multiplayer. | ||
zf
231 Posts
On May 04 2016 07:09 Plansix wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 06:55 teapot wrote: DoW2 is so underrated. It was a great game. Such a shame if Relic have caved into these vocal base-building dummies. I know all they want is to AFK in their base and build a big blob and A-move it at the enemy. *sigh* Relic's RTS with CoH and DoW2 were going in a nice CP resources/VP which I liked a lot. More movement and map control. It feels good once you get a feel for it. I hope it's closer to this model than turtle in base and produce 500 worker units =/ I agree and I hope there are no worker units to control. I can deal with building a base to work out of, but I would rather go out on the map to collect resources. I strongly dislike worker units who's only job is to build things, collect $$$ and die. I like your politics, but your taste in video games is awful! :-p | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 04 2016 11:37 zf wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 07:09 Plansix wrote: On May 04 2016 06:55 teapot wrote: DoW2 is so underrated. It was a great game. Such a shame if Relic have caved into these vocal base-building dummies. I know all they want is to AFK in their base and build a big blob and A-move it at the enemy. *sigh* Relic's RTS with CoH and DoW2 were going in a nice CP resources/VP which I liked a lot. More movement and map control. It feels good once you get a feel for it. I hope it's closer to this model than turtle in base and produce 500 worker units =/ I agree and I hope there are no worker units to control. I can deal with building a base to work out of, but I would rather go out on the map to collect resources. I strongly dislike worker units who's only job is to build things, collect $$$ and die. I like your politics, but your taste in video games is awful! :-p Variety is the spice of life. I want new experiences and mechanics. Rehashing the same old games gets dull. | ||
Tchado
Jordan1831 Posts
But serious , Space Marines , Eldar & Orcs........It just doesnt't feel like DOW without Chaos , I said the same thing when vanilla DOW 2 came out , then they got their own game , perhaps something like this will go down. But I was really hoping for some necron action, this race really needs a come back. | ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On May 04 2016 11:04 Blackfeather wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 03:51 Assault_1 wrote: On May 03 2016 23:16 Plansix wrote: On May 03 2016 23:09 Assault_1 wrote: 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 don't think your assessment is correct. Look at FPS games, the most copy/pasted genre ever and it never changes. Why can't RTS get away with doing that? I love that you get to start from a simple base in bw, thats how it should be, you build yourself up. Your ideas are maybe better for the singleplayer campaign. I think the answer to why RTS is dying has more to with people seeing them as intellectual games and not as fun in general. Also I noticed with my friends, they have no problem buying a game , beating it in 10 hours then moving to the next. Maybe I'm just an oddball but I like to focus on playing a very small set of games for months/years. For me I basically just grew up on diablo 2/starcraft/counterstrike (which turns out to be the best of each genre). I'd like to figure a way to breath life into RTS games again.. I can't believe snooze games like LoL are doing so much better. FPS actually evolved and started with more action and less boring cycles from the get go. Things like regenerating health-bars, first person cutscenes, cover systems and limited weapon slots are big reasons why the scene is still alive (although I don't like many of them). You just have to look at the size of the oldschool communities (Quake, UT, Doom) and compare them to the real selling titles like battlefield and CoD. Given, they have less production value. CS:GO has 21 million owners. I don't think you know what you are talking about. | ||
goiflin
Canada1217 Posts
On May 04 2016 07:09 Plansix wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 06:55 teapot wrote: DoW2 is so underrated. It was a great game. Such a shame if Relic have caved into these vocal base-building dummies. I know all they want is to AFK in their base and build a big blob and A-move it at the enemy. *sigh* Relic's RTS with CoH and DoW2 were going in a nice CP resources/VP which I liked a lot. More movement and map control. It feels good once you get a feel for it. I hope it's closer to this model than turtle in base and produce 500 worker units =/ I agree and I hope there are no worker units to control. I can deal with building a base to work out of, but I would rather go out on the map to collect resources. I strongly dislike worker units who's only job is to build things, collect $$$ and die. Not sure if you guys are forgetting or whatever, but you had workers and base building in DoW1, with the aspect of having to control CP's to gain resources, and relics to gain final tech options. It worked out great. Hopefully they stick with something like that, instead of something like a C&C/Starcraft. I think they will, too, since it's what they have experience with. | ||
Andre
Slovenia3515 Posts
Also, seems like other races are going to be DLCs? I sincerely doubt Relic would just stick with 3 races. It's not a DoW game without Chaos at least, and maybe necrons. | ||
Yhamm
France7248 Posts
I think they'll do as dow2 tho, and add new races with expansions (like Chaos & Imperial Guard)... (or DLC) | ||
goiflin
Canada1217 Posts
On May 04 2016 21:39 Yhamm wrote: for dow2, they announced the tyranids much later, so we can only hope they announce a 4th or even 5th later too I think they'll do as dow2 tho, and add new races with expansions (like Chaos & Imperial Guard)... (or DLC) The information that they released so far indicates that it's only three races for this game, specifically in the steam page for the game where it mentions the war being between three factions. Probably will have expansions with more, if their past games are any hint, however. | ||
Faruko
Chile34158 Posts
DoW2 Last Stand was one of the best coop modes in any rts ever created, well worth it | ||
Yhamm
France7248 Posts
| ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 04 2016 21:07 goiflin wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 07:09 Plansix wrote: On May 04 2016 06:55 teapot wrote: DoW2 is so underrated. It was a great game. Such a shame if Relic have caved into these vocal base-building dummies. I know all they want is to AFK in their base and build a big blob and A-move it at the enemy. *sigh* Relic's RTS with CoH and DoW2 were going in a nice CP resources/VP which I liked a lot. More movement and map control. It feels good once you get a feel for it. I hope it's closer to this model than turtle in base and produce 500 worker units =/ I agree and I hope there are no worker units to control. I can deal with building a base to work out of, but I would rather go out on the map to collect resources. I strongly dislike worker units who's only job is to build things, collect $$$ and die. Not sure if you guys are forgetting or whatever, but you had workers and base building in DoW1, with the aspect of having to control CP's to gain resources, and relics to gain final tech options. It worked out great. Hopefully they stick with something like that, instead of something like a C&C/Starcraft. I think they will, too, since it's what they have experience with. I loved DoW 1, but I felt the workers were pretty superfluous and didn’t add a lot to the game. Expect the snotlings, which were super amusing. But they didn’t do much else but beyond be a menu for what you wanted to build. CoH had combat engineers and I think that is a much better route for base building in a game like DoW. Each race can have its own flavor of combat engineers, which also add something to a fight. I hope they go a better route with vehicles this time. The worst part of DoW was sinking power into anti vehicle tech just to deal with one dreadnaught. I always felt CoH did it better with more infantry based options to deal with tanks that were microed poorly or caught off guard. Edit: I’ll be ok with 3 races if they are robust and varied. DoW2 felt a little thin with 4. I get people don’t like DLC races added later on, but I don’t mind dropping like $15 for a new multiplayer race later on. I would rather that route than the full expansion model, because long term it means I might get to play Tau, Dark Eldar or Necrons. Mostly Tau. | ||
RolleMcKnolle
Germany1054 Posts
On May 04 2016 22:07 Plansix wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 21:07 goiflin wrote: On May 04 2016 07:09 Plansix wrote: On May 04 2016 06:55 teapot wrote: DoW2 is so underrated. It was a great game. Such a shame if Relic have caved into these vocal base-building dummies. I know all they want is to AFK in their base and build a big blob and A-move it at the enemy. *sigh* Relic's RTS with CoH and DoW2 were going in a nice CP resources/VP which I liked a lot. More movement and map control. It feels good once you get a feel for it. I hope it's closer to this model than turtle in base and produce 500 worker units =/ I agree and I hope there are no worker units to control. I can deal with building a base to work out of, but I would rather go out on the map to collect resources. I strongly dislike worker units who's only job is to build things, collect $$$ and die. Not sure if you guys are forgetting or whatever, but you had workers and base building in DoW1, with the aspect of having to control CP's to gain resources, and relics to gain final tech options. It worked out great. Hopefully they stick with something like that, instead of something like a C&C/Starcraft. I think they will, too, since it's what they have experience with. I loved DoW 1, but I felt the workers were pretty superfluous and didn’t add a lot to the game. Expect the snotlings, which were super amusing. But they didn’t do much else but beyond be a menu for what you wanted to build. CoH had combat engineers and I think that is a much better route for base building in a game like DoW. Each race can have its own flavor of combat engineers, which also add something to a fight. I hope they go a better route with vehicles this time. The worst part of DoW was sinking power into anti vehicle tech just to deal with one dreadnaught. I always felt CoH did it better with more infantry based options to deal with tanks that were microed poorly or caught off guard. Edit: I’ll be ok with 3 races if they are robust and varied. DoW2 felt a little thin with 4. I get people don’t like DLC races added later on, but I don’t mind dropping like $15 for a new multiplayer race later on. I would rather that route than the full expansion model, because long term it means I might get to play Tau, Dark Eldar or Necrons. Mostly Tau. As someone who played DoW quite extensively in Multiplayer (modded and unmodded) I can tell you that you are wrong. workers were an integral part of how games played out. not regarding mods where they got even more important (bomb-planitng-grretchin, capable-fightin-sob-worker), even in the base game there was an important focus on workers. Examples: Chaos worker: a big weakness of Chaos were their very fragile workers, and one of the std early games was worker hunting in the chaos base. good bm movement was able to bring you a huge early game lead in OvC. Eldar: There were times when eldar worker were used for scouting and binding, since their teleport allowed for very early movement, u were able to assess the enemy strategy early. Yes wraithtomb wasnt used that much into the later expansions of DoW, but there were times when it was used to great effect, when DoW was still played competitevely. Servitor: kinda boring unit tbh Gretchin: despite being hilarious they also were good scouting tools and very well suited to block fleeing rhinos. For vehicles it seems as if you mainly played the early versions of DoW. Unfortunately they moved away from the hardcounter system used in Vanilla. So the amount of av u had to produce was rather limited. but then even in earlier games av wasnt just produced to kill that one dread, since av usually also worked great against buildings and was rocket-based, so had a large range. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
And vehicles were more of a problem in DoW 2, where it was this real binary state of "useful" or "useless". I liked DoW 1 model a lot better, where the anti armor units were more evenly distributed. | ||
ShadowArm
23 Posts
graphics and optimization comes out later, just look at the early DoW 2 screens, its almost the same Also Dat true looking Wraithbone | ||
Disengaged
United States6994 Posts
| ||
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On May 03 2016 23:18 Yhamm wrote: trailer looks really good, but this focus on only Orkz, Space Marine & Eldar, hmm... If they want to only show 3 forces (I hope not T_T), they could at least use something else :x edit: http://www.pcgamer.com/dawn-of-war-3-inside-relics-biggest-rts-yet/ with screenshots graphics look like dow2? o_O The start (Czevak quote or whatever his name is) made me think about tyranids ; the quote is about tyranid invasion in the lore if I reckon well. Maybe the campaign is about space marine, eldars and orks vs tyranids. | ||
iamCHOMP
Canada15 Posts
| ||
JimmyJRaynor
Canada15564 Posts
On May 04 2016 09:23 Pr0wler wrote: Well at least with DoW2 Relic showed that they want to inovate and they will probably do it with DoW3, too. The problem now is that they are owned by Sega and that means : 1. The game will be released unfinished, because deadlines. 2. Day one DLC. 3. Countless other DLCs after that. the Sega/Relic team produced CoH2 which still has an active multiplayer community. Sega picked Relic off the scrap heap and continued to fund a game in its fetal stages of development. Give Sega some cred man. if the Sega/Relic team can repeat the success of CoH2 we're in for some good fun. i got no problem spending money on a good game.. | ||
RolleMcKnolle
Germany1054 Posts
On May 04 2016 22:48 Plansix wrote: I think you missed my point that all of those abilities could have been on a unit that was useful in combat in some way. That is the way Relic went with CoH and it added a lot of depth to how “worker” units were used in that game. And vehicles were more of a problem in DoW 2, where it was this real binary state of "useful" or "useless". I liked DoW 1 model a lot better, where the anti armor units were more evenly distributed. What you said was that the workers added nothing to the game. And i gave you reasons why they did. Just because you kept your workers idle in ur base it doesnt mean it was like this for everyone else. I don't really think giving them the ability to shoot more does add that much to the game, when you have the ability to do other things with them. They add depth in many ways. not every unit has to be at the frontline. Especially in a harass-heavy game like DoW. | ||
Yhamm
France7248 Posts
On May 05 2016 03:37 iamCHOMP wrote: Terran Protoss and Zerg XD yeah... it's the other way around though | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 05 2016 03:47 RolleMcKnolle wrote: Show nested quote + On May 04 2016 22:48 Plansix wrote: I think you missed my point that all of those abilities could have been on a unit that was useful in combat in some way. That is the way Relic went with CoH and it added a lot of depth to how “worker” units were used in that game. And vehicles were more of a problem in DoW 2, where it was this real binary state of "useful" or "useless". I liked DoW 1 model a lot better, where the anti armor units were more evenly distributed. What you said was that the workers added nothing to the game. And i gave you reasons why they did. Just because you kept your workers idle in ur base it doesnt mean it was like this for everyone else. I don't really think giving them the ability to shoot more does add that much to the game, when you have the ability to do other things with them. They add depth in many ways. not every unit has to be at the frontline. Especially in a harass-heavy game like DoW. I specifically said in DoW1 they felt superfluous and then cited the design in CoH for an alternative type of unit with similar abilities. In previous discussions about RTSs in general I have said that I don’t like workers as a design, since are passive units and can be a time sink. | ||
Frudgey
Canada3367 Posts
On May 05 2016 03:48 Yhamm wrote: yeah... it's the other way around though So Space Marines are Zerg, Eldar are Protoss, and Orks are Terran? Sounds about right. Also I'd like to see Necrons before I see Tyranids again. Not that Tyranids are bad or anything, but we did just see them in DoW II. That said, I'm happy to have just three races if it means tighter balance. | ||
Lugh
36 Posts
| ||
Latham
9507 Posts
On May 05 2016 06:36 Lugh wrote: I would actually prefer if we would not get the exact same races that we had in every other Vanilla DoW. Why not Tau instead of Eldar or Necrons instead of Orcs? And replace Space Marines with Imperial Guard. | ||
ShadowArm
23 Posts
On May 05 2016 02:37 WhiteDog wrote: Show nested quote + On May 03 2016 23:18 Yhamm wrote: trailer looks really good, but this focus on only Orkz, Space Marine & Eldar, hmm... If they want to only show 3 forces (I hope not T_T), they could at least use something else :x edit: http://www.pcgamer.com/dawn-of-war-3-inside-relics-biggest-rts-yet/ with screenshots graphics look like dow2? o_O The start (Czevak quote or whatever his name is) made me think about tyranids ; the quote is about tyranid invasion in the lore if I reckon well. Maybe the campaign is about space marine, eldars and orks vs tyranids. Inquisitor Bronslaw Czevak is heavily involved with the Eldar and the Black library In fact, The Webway made him more younger than he was he's 433 years old but he looks like 30 years old man now http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Bronislaw_Czevak http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Bronislaw_Czevak So, prepare yourselves for a Tzeenthian Enemy This time, GeeDubs is giving so much love for the BLOODY MAGPIES lately, that they even received a Special Character and Book on Deathwatch Also they are with Odds with the Inquisition, mainly after Kyras, so the inquisition is keeping an eye on them in case of any sign of Kyras/Daemon of Maledictum or Ulkair Taint also i hope they keep the superb job that they Did With DoW II cast | ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
On May 04 2016 09:59 Impervious wrote: I am a fairly big Warhammer fan. I am actually taking a bit of a break from painting a model for a Tyranid army. I have quite literally spent over 10 grand on models and paints/glues/tools/etc for the hobby, and surely thousands of hours. But the video games suck, much to my dismay. You like my HT? And the games are awesome. I've spent over 500 hours on DoW II alone according to Steam. | ||
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
On May 05 2016 06:36 Lugh wrote: I would actually prefer if we would not get the exact same races that we had in every other Vanilla DoW. Why not Tau instead of Eldar or Necrons instead of Orcs? Apparently we always got the space marines and other races/factions due to licensing issues. | ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
| ||
arb
Noobville17915 Posts
| ||
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES49025 Posts
On May 05 2016 15:19 Manit0u wrote: Space Marines are GW's poster boys so (unfortunately) they'll always be there. I have no problems with space marines per say, other than the fact that they are fools who worship the corpse emperor, but I'm tired of blood ravens. | ||
JoeCool
Germany2517 Posts
On May 05 2016 06:36 Lugh wrote: I would actually prefer if we would not get the exact same races that we had in every other Vanilla DoW. Why not Tau instead of Eldar or Necrons instead of Orcs? Come on boyz letz smash deez git and den loot da bodie! Seriously Orks are the greatest thing in Warhammer, Eldar are quite popular and well... you could argue about Necs or Nids but Tau? Seriously? | ||
Jerubaal
United States7676 Posts
| ||
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On May 05 2016 09:12 ShadowArm wrote: Show nested quote + On May 05 2016 02:37 WhiteDog wrote: On May 03 2016 23:18 Yhamm wrote: trailer looks really good, but this focus on only Orkz, Space Marine & Eldar, hmm... If they want to only show 3 forces (I hope not T_T), they could at least use something else :x edit: http://www.pcgamer.com/dawn-of-war-3-inside-relics-biggest-rts-yet/ with screenshots graphics look like dow2? o_O The start (Czevak quote or whatever his name is) made me think about tyranids ; the quote is about tyranid invasion in the lore if I reckon well. Maybe the campaign is about space marine, eldars and orks vs tyranids. Inquisitor Bronslaw Czevak is heavily involved with the Eldar and the Black library In fact, The Webway made him more younger than he was he's 433 years old but he looks like 30 years old man now http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Bronislaw_Czevak http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Bronislaw_Czevak So, prepare yourselves for a Tzeenthian Enemy This time, GeeDubs is giving so much love for the BLOODY MAGPIES lately, that they even received a Special Character and Book on Deathwatch Also they are with Odds with the Inquisition, mainly after Kyras, so the inquisition is keeping an eye on them in case of any sign of Kyras/Daemon of Maledictum or Ulkair Taint also i hope they keep the superb job that they Did With DoW II cast https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQykP9NHJXU Thanks man. Been quite a while since I followed warhammer 40k lore lol. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 05 2016 15:19 Manit0u wrote: Space Marines are GW's poster boys so (unfortunately) they'll always be there. They are the top selling army for 40K for like forever. That is why there are like 35 different versions of them and an evil faction using similar design. People love dat power armor. Always need Orks. Would like Tau, though. | ||
Heartland
Sweden24562 Posts
On May 05 2016 22:12 Jerubaal wrote: I found the Necrons quite dull in Dark Crusade. The Tau were kind of boring story-wise, but they were really fun to play. Tyranids are super cool, but I hate their place in the story. why? | ||
ShadowArm
23 Posts
On May 05 2016 22:18 Plansix wrote: Show nested quote + On May 05 2016 15:19 Manit0u wrote: Space Marines are GW's poster boys so (unfortunately) they'll always be there. They are the top selling army for 40K for like forever. That is why there are like 35 different versions of them and an evil faction using similar design. People love dat power armor. Always need Orks. Would like Tau, though. remember geeDubs since the late end of 2016 has someowhat.... changed 40k starter sets are now being sold on every toy store for kids they are LISTENING and talking to everyone in the community on Facebook and Twitter Epic, Gorkamoka and all old 40k games including BFG are back in fact here's the entire stuff with GW(took from 1d4chan wiki, they update it all time) And then suddenly... It was not expected, we couldn't have known, since the resignation of supreme leader Tom Kirby there has started to appear a pattern, sporadic reports of real discounts at Forgeworld and Black Library, and then, in the last days of 2015 it has been revealed that major changes are coming, the sudden resurrection of specialist games, Games Workshop releasing starter sets with real saving, all around the internet neckbeards are discussing and watching, wondering what's going on, perhaps the new guy in charge has decided is time to take some contingencies for the inevitable demise of tabletop gaming with the ever increasing development in 3D printing and the emergence of new alternatives. It seems like the boxes are a replacement for the old Battleforce packs, and while you don't get as many units as the old box, they are cheaper and usually come with a good mix of units to start a small army. And now, there's an official (as in hosted and ran by the almighty GeeDubs themselves) Blood Bowl tournament going on at Warhammer World on May 21st. Truly these are strange times. GW also appears to be preparing to starting selling their product in toy stores (Toys-R-Us Etc.) as well as producing various Warhammer Merchandise such as pillows and journals (For Some Reason). Also now they've made a 40k starter set with simplified rules and all the paint you need to assemble the models. Clearly the sky is falling. (Also they've started making conversion tutorials and stuff, for some reason). Did the Man Emperor of mankind showed up and put some order on the house? | ||
Godwrath
Spain10091 Posts
| ||
Jerubaal
United States7676 Posts
On May 05 2016 23:20 Heartland wrote: Show nested quote + On May 05 2016 22:12 Jerubaal wrote: I found the Necrons quite dull in Dark Crusade. The Tau were kind of boring story-wise, but they were really fun to play. Tyranids are super cool, but I hate their place in the story. why? Which part? | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 06 2016 01:23 Godwrath wrote: GW listening ? Are you on drugs ? Like comic books, their audience is aging and shrinking. They know they need to diversify or die. Listen and letting licencing is part of that. Also, all those PC small games, which are apparently pretty good. | ||
Sentenal
United States12398 Posts
On May 06 2016 01:23 Godwrath wrote: GW listening ? Are you on drugs ? Its crazy, but they seem to be listening. The Starter Boxes they have released have like $30 worth of free models in them, and they are even releasing a big Rules FAQ on Facebook right now, that is largely community driven. They are even listening to the fans about Age of Sigmar stuff, and trying to fix that debacle. | ||
Godwrath
Spain10091 Posts
On May 06 2016 01:47 Plansix wrote: Like comic books, their audience is aging and shrinking. They know they need to diversify or die. Listen and letting licencing is part of that. Also, all those PC small games, which are apparently pretty good. Except that's untrue and has been shown by other games, which had gladly taken spot that belonged to GW earlier, or even surpassed it on sales. I don't disagree with licensing, i am just talking about the tabletop stuff, many of the warhammer videogames had been great and really enjoyable for me. On May 06 2016 01:52 Sentenal wrote: Its crazy, but they seem to be listening. The Starter Boxes they have released have like $30 worth of free models in them, and they are even releasing a big Rules FAQ on Facebook right now, that is largely community driven. They are even listening to the fans about Age of Sigmar stuff, and trying to fix that debacle. Starter boxes were always like that, i haven't followed much of GW's path the last years, so i don't know if they removed the starter packs or something. Hell, the Tau one was a hell of an investment back in the day, i bought 4 of them. Many of the problems that the game has are related to their support to their rules for me, which is extremely lacking and there is no amount of FAQin that can help Age of Sigmar, or their current Giant robot wars that is wh40k. And now that i managed to play other games thx to GW inability to playtest and write rules, there is no way i am going back. | ||
Sentenal
United States12398 Posts
| ||
RolleMcKnolle
Germany1054 Posts
For everyone who isnt able to buy it: | ||
Endymion
United States3701 Posts
| ||
Heartland
Sweden24562 Posts
On May 06 2016 01:37 Jerubaal wrote: Show nested quote + On May 05 2016 23:20 Heartland wrote: On May 05 2016 22:12 Jerubaal wrote: I found the Necrons quite dull in Dark Crusade. The Tau were kind of boring story-wise, but they were really fun to play. Tyranids are super cool, but I hate their place in the story. why? Which part? the nids part in the story | ||
Jerubaal
United States7676 Posts
On May 05 2016 23:20 Heartland wrote: Show nested quote + On May 05 2016 22:12 Jerubaal wrote: I found the Necrons quite dull in Dark Crusade. The Tau were kind of boring story-wise, but they were really fun to play. Tyranids are super cool, but I hate their place in the story. why? I'm going to assume you mean about the Tyranids. I think they are cool in their way, but what I hate about them is how they seem to wipe away all of the other subplots. We have the Imperium, Chaos, Orks, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons but don't worry because a race with basically no distinct characters is going to come wipe out literally the whole galaxy. | ||
solidbebe
Netherlands4921 Posts
| ||
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On May 06 2016 04:54 Jerubaal wrote: What, the Necrons?Show nested quote + On May 05 2016 23:20 Heartland wrote: On May 05 2016 22:12 Jerubaal wrote: I found the Necrons quite dull in Dark Crusade. The Tau were kind of boring story-wise, but they were really fun to play. Tyranids are super cool, but I hate their place in the story. why? I'm going to assume you mean about the Tyranids. I think they are cool in their way, but what I hate about them is how they seem to wipe away all of the other subplots. We have the Imperium, Chaos, Orks, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons but don't worry because a race with basically no distinct characters is going to come wipe out literally the whole galaxy. | ||
ShadowArm
23 Posts
On May 06 2016 03:12 Sentenal wrote: The Bundles that were on GW's webstore prior to the Starting Boxes didn't offer any actual savings. I dunno what sort of starter packs you are referring to way back when, but if they were a thing, they stopped being a thing years ago. Anyway, it doesn't really matter if you don't like GW or the direction they are going in, its a fact of the matter that in the present, they are listening to the community. Look at Bell of the lost souls website, they are updating everything http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2016/05/breaking-forge-world-brings-back-chaos-dwarfs.html Also the FAQ review, everyone is loving it, for once IN ALL THESE YEARS, Geedubs is doing right https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1610528622601104&id=1575682476085719 http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2016/05/top-dozen-40k-faq-changes.html | ||
Jerubaal
United States7676 Posts
On May 06 2016 04:58 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Show nested quote + What, the Necrons?On May 06 2016 04:54 Jerubaal wrote: On May 05 2016 23:20 Heartland wrote: On May 05 2016 22:12 Jerubaal wrote: I found the Necrons quite dull in Dark Crusade. The Tau were kind of boring story-wise, but they were really fun to play. Tyranids are super cool, but I hate their place in the story. why? I'm going to assume you mean about the Tyranids. I think they are cool in their way, but what I hate about them is how they seem to wipe away all of the other subplots. We have the Imperium, Chaos, Orks, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons but don't worry because a race with basically no distinct characters is going to come wipe out literally the whole galaxy. No, the Tyranids. | ||
Sentenal
United States12398 Posts
On May 06 2016 04:54 Jerubaal wrote: Show nested quote + On May 05 2016 23:20 Heartland wrote: On May 05 2016 22:12 Jerubaal wrote: I found the Necrons quite dull in Dark Crusade. The Tau were kind of boring story-wise, but they were really fun to play. Tyranids are super cool, but I hate their place in the story. why? I'm going to assume you mean about the Tyranids. I think they are cool in their way, but what I hate about them is how they seem to wipe away all of the other subplots. We have the Imperium, Chaos, Orks, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons but don't worry because a race with basically no distinct characters is going to come wipe out literally the whole galaxy. I don't see how they wipe away other subplots. Sure, they don't have distinct characters (because they are a swarm of locust) and therefore a narrative of their own, but their existence creates plenty of subplots for other races. Such as different races teaming up against them, or an Inquistor diverting a Hive Fleet into a WAAAGH, and what not. They serve as a pretty good foil and adversary for pretty much every other race. | ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
On May 05 2016 22:18 Plansix wrote: Show nested quote + On May 05 2016 15:19 Manit0u wrote: Space Marines are GW's poster boys so (unfortunately) they'll always be there. They are the top selling army for 40K for like forever. That is why there are like 35 different versions of them and an evil faction using similar design. People love dat power armor. I think that them being the top selling army has something to do with most frequent codice releases (they got one every year/edition while some armies were waiting for 7+ years to get updated), being more powerful with each incarnation. 40K is all about powergaming, sadly. Thankfully for me, I've tried Infinity and never looked back. Sold all my 40K stuff (apart from the HT I posted earlier) for $50 (about 5k points worth of SM and CSM, with drop pods, tanks, dreadnaughts and all) and am a happy person. Now I can play a tabletop game with awesome minis, real skill required, balanced for tournament play, literally no useless units (which is also cool because I don't think I've played a tournament with the same list twice and I'm playing one at least once a month) and developed by the company that really does listen to their community. It's like heaven and earth compared to 40K. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
Godwrath
Spain10091 Posts
On May 06 2016 03:12 Sentenal wrote: The Bundles that were on GW's webstore prior to the Starting Boxes didn't offer any actual savings. I dunno what sort of starter packs you are referring to way back when, but if they were a thing, they stopped being a thing years ago. Anyway, it doesn't really matter if you don't like GW or the direction they are going in, its a fact of the matter that in the present, they are listening to the community. Oh well, that's the good thing about having started to follow GW for 20 years. The starter packs existed atleast until 5th edition. I guess they removed them, because GW reasons. And well, the community left nowadays is more than dubious in their opinion regarding quality gameplay, so yeah, if they are listening them, it's not like i am gaining anything, but good for you. As i said, i already play other games (infinity in my case), and i am not looking back,. About being hard to find player in the US, is that true ? have you checked the forums or checked on the warcors ? (people who you can contact with to get you into the game) https://its.infinitythegame.com/warcors/list | ||
Jerubaal
United States7676 Posts
On May 06 2016 05:06 Sentenal wrote: Show nested quote + On May 06 2016 04:54 Jerubaal wrote: On May 05 2016 23:20 Heartland wrote: On May 05 2016 22:12 Jerubaal wrote: I found the Necrons quite dull in Dark Crusade. The Tau were kind of boring story-wise, but they were really fun to play. Tyranids are super cool, but I hate their place in the story. why? I'm going to assume you mean about the Tyranids. I think they are cool in their way, but what I hate about them is how they seem to wipe away all of the other subplots. We have the Imperium, Chaos, Orks, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons but don't worry because a race with basically no distinct characters is going to come wipe out literally the whole galaxy. I don't see how they wipe away other subplots. Sure, they don't have distinct characters (because they are a swarm of locust) and therefore a narrative of their own, but their existence creates plenty of subplots for other races. Such as different races teaming up against them, or an Inquistor diverting a Hive Fleet into a WAAAGH, and what not. They serve as a pretty good foil and adversary for pretty much every other race. Idk, the way they have the story currently set up, unless I missed something, is there is a seemingly endless flood of tyranids coming in across the galaxy. They block out the warp. Nobody has a chance of stopping them besides the orks. Seems like it's pretty much game over. | ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
On May 06 2016 05:38 Plansix wrote: I would play Infinity, but no one plays in my area at all. Its sad, because it looks like a good game. But its really hard to find players in the US. Go and visit their forums. Contact some US Warcor and see if there really aren't any players in your area (US is pretty big on Infinity). I also thought there was no one in my area but then I discovered that there are 10+ players in my hometown. As a sidenote, it's really easy to convince new people to play Infinity. With Operation: Icestorm starter set you get the perfect tool to hook someone in. People all around are quitting 40K for Infinity, you might try with them. On May 06 2016 07:05 Jerubaal wrote: Show nested quote + On May 06 2016 05:06 Sentenal wrote: On May 06 2016 04:54 Jerubaal wrote: On May 05 2016 23:20 Heartland wrote: On May 05 2016 22:12 Jerubaal wrote: I found the Necrons quite dull in Dark Crusade. The Tau were kind of boring story-wise, but they were really fun to play. Tyranids are super cool, but I hate their place in the story. why? I'm going to assume you mean about the Tyranids. I think they are cool in their way, but what I hate about them is how they seem to wipe away all of the other subplots. We have the Imperium, Chaos, Orks, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons but don't worry because a race with basically no distinct characters is going to come wipe out literally the whole galaxy. I don't see how they wipe away other subplots. Sure, they don't have distinct characters (because they are a swarm of locust) and therefore a narrative of their own, but their existence creates plenty of subplots for other races. Such as different races teaming up against them, or an Inquistor diverting a Hive Fleet into a WAAAGH, and what not. They serve as a pretty good foil and adversary for pretty much every other race. Idk, the way they have the story currently set up, unless I missed something, is there is a seemingly endless flood of tyranids coming in across the galaxy. They block out the warp. Nobody has a chance of stopping them besides the orks. Seems like it's pretty much game over. Nonono. You get it completely wrong. The Tyranid plot is actually pretty cool because of many unknowns, for example: - Are hive fleets independent or are they all a part of a bigger picture? - What happened to their galaxy? Have they destroyed everything and are only moving on to another feeding grounds or are they trying to escape something even more horrible? Also, if you followed various info on them it's damn interesting (creating gravity pulls to hasten their travel towards planets, the entire genestealer angle), especially the fact that what seems to be drawing their to our galaxy is actually the Astronomican. Also: | ||
Impervious
Canada4119 Posts
On May 06 2016 04:54 Jerubaal wrote: Show nested quote + On May 05 2016 23:20 Heartland wrote: On May 05 2016 22:12 Jerubaal wrote: I found the Necrons quite dull in Dark Crusade. The Tau were kind of boring story-wise, but they were really fun to play. Tyranids are super cool, but I hate their place in the story. why? I'm going to assume you mean about the Tyranids. I think they are cool in their way, but what I hate about them is how they seem to wipe away all of the other subplots. We have the Imperium, Chaos, Orks, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons but don't worry because a race with basically no distinct characters is going to come wipe out literally the whole galaxy. Have you ever played a 6 player game of Risk before? With people who are competent at the game? The game quite literally goes forever..... When someone gets a bit too big, everyone else starts having to adjust their strategy to beat them back a little more than the others. There's a set number of countries you can control, and the more you control, the bigger target you become for everyone else. The same thing happens in 40k. And the storyline revolves around that for 10 000 years worth of history. Sure, the Tau are a relatively new race, but as their empire gets bigger, they end up having a bigger target on them as well. Eldar and Dark Eldar are also a bit different as they are essentially completely space-faring, but craftworlds are essentially another planet that just moves around. And Chaos is a bit different as well, because they don't really have worlds under their control like the other races do. But basically, there's only so much real-estate to go around, and the bigger share you have, the harder it is to defend it, and more people are out trying to take chunks of it from you. Tyranids are a game changer. Instead of taking over a planet for themselves, they remove it from play forever. They land, eat all the biomass, drink the oceans, siphon up the air, and then move on to the next planet, leaving nothing but a barren rock in their wake. They don't have anything to really defend when they take over something, and every single planet they take over is one less for everyone else to share. Forever. Unless they are stopped, they will quite literally wipe everyone out. Necrons want to destroy sentient life, yea, but the planets are still habitable when they are done, to an extent. Maybe not right away, but it is nowhere near as devastating. And the more planets they take over, the stronger they get, and the weaker everyone else gets as a collective. And the better the fight their prey puts up, the harder they have to fight to win. They evolve at a frightening rate, and the more they have to adapt in one fight, the better they get at overcoming resistance in all future fights. So yea, they quite literally are the biggest threat to the entire galaxy. They don't need distinct characters to be terrifying. They just weren't portrayed very well..... | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
Sentenal
United States12398 Posts
On May 06 2016 07:05 Jerubaal wrote: Show nested quote + On May 06 2016 05:06 Sentenal wrote: On May 06 2016 04:54 Jerubaal wrote: On May 05 2016 23:20 Heartland wrote: On May 05 2016 22:12 Jerubaal wrote: I found the Necrons quite dull in Dark Crusade. The Tau were kind of boring story-wise, but they were really fun to play. Tyranids are super cool, but I hate their place in the story. why? I'm going to assume you mean about the Tyranids. I think they are cool in their way, but what I hate about them is how they seem to wipe away all of the other subplots. We have the Imperium, Chaos, Orks, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons but don't worry because a race with basically no distinct characters is going to come wipe out literally the whole galaxy. I don't see how they wipe away other subplots. Sure, they don't have distinct characters (because they are a swarm of locust) and therefore a narrative of their own, but their existence creates plenty of subplots for other races. Such as different races teaming up against them, or an Inquistor diverting a Hive Fleet into a WAAAGH, and what not. They serve as a pretty good foil and adversary for pretty much every other race. Idk, the way they have the story currently set up, unless I missed something, is there is a seemingly endless flood of tyranids coming in across the galaxy. They block out the warp. Nobody has a chance of stopping them besides the orks. Seems like it's pretty much game over. Hive Fleets tend to go out of their way to avoid Tomb Worlds. If the Necrons get united, they'd certainly be a threat. After all, they are barely even woken up yet, and those that are are fighting amongst themselves. If the Emperor dies and comes back, the Imperium would be able to stop the Tyranids. If the Emperor dies and becomes a new Chaos God, nothing would stop Chaos. Ghazghkull crushed the Tyranids on Octarius, so if he got a big enough WAAAGH going, he'd be a real threat to them. Honestly pretty much every faction other than the weak factions (both Eldar and Tau) stand a chance, theoretically. | ||
ShadowArm
23 Posts
that certain C'tan was never banished or destroyed as it was banished inside of a Dyson Sphere and then threw out of the galaxy due for guilt and madness and then out of nowhere, The Silent king Shows up and wakes up the entire necron race, due to fear against the nids, not only because the living are their food, but because he saw something else driving them towards the galaxy | ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
On May 06 2016 10:14 Sentenal wrote: Show nested quote + On May 06 2016 07:05 Jerubaal wrote: On May 06 2016 05:06 Sentenal wrote: On May 06 2016 04:54 Jerubaal wrote: On May 05 2016 23:20 Heartland wrote: On May 05 2016 22:12 Jerubaal wrote: I found the Necrons quite dull in Dark Crusade. The Tau were kind of boring story-wise, but they were really fun to play. Tyranids are super cool, but I hate their place in the story. why? I'm going to assume you mean about the Tyranids. I think they are cool in their way, but what I hate about them is how they seem to wipe away all of the other subplots. We have the Imperium, Chaos, Orks, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons but don't worry because a race with basically no distinct characters is going to come wipe out literally the whole galaxy. I don't see how they wipe away other subplots. Sure, they don't have distinct characters (because they are a swarm of locust) and therefore a narrative of their own, but their existence creates plenty of subplots for other races. Such as different races teaming up against them, or an Inquistor diverting a Hive Fleet into a WAAAGH, and what not. They serve as a pretty good foil and adversary for pretty much every other race. Idk, the way they have the story currently set up, unless I missed something, is there is a seemingly endless flood of tyranids coming in across the galaxy. They block out the warp. Nobody has a chance of stopping them besides the orks. Seems like it's pretty much game over. Hive Fleets tend to go out of their way to avoid Tomb Worlds. If the Necrons get united, they'd certainly be a threat. After all, they are barely even woken up yet, and those that are are fighting amongst themselves. If the Emperor dies and comes back, the Imperium would be able to stop the Tyranids. If the Emperor dies and becomes a new Chaos God, nothing would stop Chaos. Ghazghkull crushed the Tyranids on Octarius, so if he got a big enough WAAAGH going, he'd be a real threat to them. Honestly pretty much every faction other than the weak factions (both Eldar and Tau) stand a chance, theoretically. Imperium is doomed. According to the prophecy there were 2 possible outcomes when Chaos first appeared: 1. Horus succeeds, Chaos wins and takes over the galaxy. It's a brief (relatively speaking) flicker and then dies out as it consumes itself (taking humanity with it). 2. Horus fails, fight goes on, Chaos gods get the time they need to fully form, feed and grow strong. That's why Alpha Legion joined Horus in the first place. They think that aiding him in overcoming the Imperium quickly will actually work against Chaos (and that's why they still shout 'For the Emperor!' as they go to battle). | ||
Frudgey
Canada3367 Posts
I also seem to recall that the Eldar saying something that when the Emperor truly "dies", then he'll come back as a (Chaos?) god and just be SIGNIFICANTLY stronger than any of the current gods. Again, I'm not a lore buff, but I'd love to know if I'm talking nonsense or not. That said, there seems to be several indications that the Imperium is just boned. But that's pretty 40k if you think about it. | ||
Heartland
Sweden24562 Posts
| ||
arb
Noobville17915 Posts
On May 06 2016 16:20 Heartland wrote: Let's just face it that WH40K has lore that makes no sense and seems to be written like a parody of action clichés. i dunno about that | ||
beef42
Denmark1037 Posts
GW would never allow this to happen, of course. | ||
Godwrath
Spain10091 Posts
On May 06 2016 17:43 arb wrote: Show nested quote + On May 06 2016 16:20 Heartland wrote: Let's just face it that WH40K has lore that makes no sense and seems to be written like a parody of action clichés. i dunno about that Two words, Kaldor Draigo. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
Still excited for the game, but that was not a good trailer at all... really weak audio, and boring action. Nothing felt like it had any impact (like when the banshee draws her sword, wtf is that sound). | ||
Gorsameth
Netherlands20759 Posts
On May 06 2016 20:34 Liquid`Jinro wrote: I like 40k, I like DoW... but that trailer sucked. Still excited for the game, but that was not a good trailer at all... really weak audio, and boring action. Nothing felt like it had any impact (like when the banshee draws her sword, wtf is that sound). I agree, the action falls flat when compared to DoW 1 and 2 trailers. They also screwed up the space marine models themselves, Massive long slim legs and tiny waists >< ugh, they look more like ballerina's then genetically engineered human tanks. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 06 2016 17:43 arb wrote: Show nested quote + On May 06 2016 16:20 Heartland wrote: Let's just face it that WH40K has lore that makes no sense and seems to be written like a parody of action clichés. i dunno about that 40K has always been a sort of fun satire of sci-fi action taken to 2000%. The game space hulk is so clearly inspired by the movie Aliens. Space Marines are the sci-fi wet dream of future tech and every single battle scene has the sole goal of being the most bad ass heavy metal album cover art possible. Of course it makes sense in its own narrative, but secret Warhammer and Warhammer 40K is that its satire that takes itself deadly serious. Which is part of the joke, as the legions of Space Romans who worship space Jesus fight a race of warlike space fungus with chain saw swords. Its beyond dumb and beautiful. On May 06 2016 21:53 Gorsameth wrote: Show nested quote + On May 06 2016 20:34 Liquid`Jinro wrote: I like 40k, I like DoW... but that trailer sucked. Still excited for the game, but that was not a good trailer at all... really weak audio, and boring action. Nothing felt like it had any impact (like when the banshee draws her sword, wtf is that sound). I agree, the action falls flat when compared to DoW 1 and 2 trailers. They also screwed up the space marine models themselves, Massive long slim legs and tiny waists >< ugh, they look more like ballerina's then genetically engineered human tanks. I remember Relic talking about having to change the basic design of Space Maries to make them animate as people expect them to. A lot the designs for 40K are focused on being still models, which can be hard to put into motion. It’s similar to the problem a lot of super hero costumes have when they transition from page to screen. Iron man didn’t use to use his hands as rockets and flew more like superman before the movies. | ||
Sentenal
United States12398 Posts
On May 06 2016 14:58 Manit0u wrote: Show nested quote + On May 06 2016 10:14 Sentenal wrote: On May 06 2016 07:05 Jerubaal wrote: On May 06 2016 05:06 Sentenal wrote: On May 06 2016 04:54 Jerubaal wrote: On May 05 2016 23:20 Heartland wrote: On May 05 2016 22:12 Jerubaal wrote: I found the Necrons quite dull in Dark Crusade. The Tau were kind of boring story-wise, but they were really fun to play. Tyranids are super cool, but I hate their place in the story. why? I'm going to assume you mean about the Tyranids. I think they are cool in their way, but what I hate about them is how they seem to wipe away all of the other subplots. We have the Imperium, Chaos, Orks, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons but don't worry because a race with basically no distinct characters is going to come wipe out literally the whole galaxy. I don't see how they wipe away other subplots. Sure, they don't have distinct characters (because they are a swarm of locust) and therefore a narrative of their own, but their existence creates plenty of subplots for other races. Such as different races teaming up against them, or an Inquistor diverting a Hive Fleet into a WAAAGH, and what not. They serve as a pretty good foil and adversary for pretty much every other race. Idk, the way they have the story currently set up, unless I missed something, is there is a seemingly endless flood of tyranids coming in across the galaxy. They block out the warp. Nobody has a chance of stopping them besides the orks. Seems like it's pretty much game over. Hive Fleets tend to go out of their way to avoid Tomb Worlds. If the Necrons get united, they'd certainly be a threat. After all, they are barely even woken up yet, and those that are are fighting amongst themselves. If the Emperor dies and comes back, the Imperium would be able to stop the Tyranids. If the Emperor dies and becomes a new Chaos God, nothing would stop Chaos. Ghazghkull crushed the Tyranids on Octarius, so if he got a big enough WAAAGH going, he'd be a real threat to them. Honestly pretty much every faction other than the weak factions (both Eldar and Tau) stand a chance, theoretically. Imperium is doomed. According to the prophecy there were 2 possible outcomes when Chaos first appeared: 1. Horus succeeds, Chaos wins and takes over the galaxy. It's a brief (relatively speaking) flicker and then dies out as it consumes itself (taking humanity with it). 2. Horus fails, fight goes on, Chaos gods get the time they need to fully form, feed and grow strong. That's why Alpha Legion joined Horus in the first place. They think that aiding him in overcoming the Imperium quickly will actually work against Chaos (and that's why they still shout 'For the Emperor!' as they go to battle). That's the story the Cabal of Xenos gave, but they aren't infallible, since they are filthy xenos scum. Afterall, there are plenty of other plot threads that imply the opposite, like the Emperor potentially being a Perpetual, and the Golden Throne is keeping him from regenerating. Plus, no one really knows for sure why the Alpha Legion does what the Alpha Legion does, or even if they are really doing the things it seems like they are doing. That's their thing, to be completely covered in mystery and contradiction, and you never know what they are doing. On May 06 2016 16:20 Heartland wrote: Let's just face it that WH40K has lore that makes no sense and seems to be written like a parody of action clichés. This is true. WH40K is, IMO, best looked at as an action comedy. | ||
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On May 07 2016 01:36 Sentenal wrote: Show nested quote + On May 06 2016 14:58 Manit0u wrote: On May 06 2016 10:14 Sentenal wrote: On May 06 2016 07:05 Jerubaal wrote: On May 06 2016 05:06 Sentenal wrote: On May 06 2016 04:54 Jerubaal wrote: On May 05 2016 23:20 Heartland wrote: On May 05 2016 22:12 Jerubaal wrote: I found the Necrons quite dull in Dark Crusade. The Tau were kind of boring story-wise, but they were really fun to play. Tyranids are super cool, but I hate their place in the story. why? I'm going to assume you mean about the Tyranids. I think they are cool in their way, but what I hate about them is how they seem to wipe away all of the other subplots. We have the Imperium, Chaos, Orks, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons but don't worry because a race with basically no distinct characters is going to come wipe out literally the whole galaxy. I don't see how they wipe away other subplots. Sure, they don't have distinct characters (because they are a swarm of locust) and therefore a narrative of their own, but their existence creates plenty of subplots for other races. Such as different races teaming up against them, or an Inquistor diverting a Hive Fleet into a WAAAGH, and what not. They serve as a pretty good foil and adversary for pretty much every other race. Idk, the way they have the story currently set up, unless I missed something, is there is a seemingly endless flood of tyranids coming in across the galaxy. They block out the warp. Nobody has a chance of stopping them besides the orks. Seems like it's pretty much game over. Hive Fleets tend to go out of their way to avoid Tomb Worlds. If the Necrons get united, they'd certainly be a threat. After all, they are barely even woken up yet, and those that are are fighting amongst themselves. If the Emperor dies and comes back, the Imperium would be able to stop the Tyranids. If the Emperor dies and becomes a new Chaos God, nothing would stop Chaos. Ghazghkull crushed the Tyranids on Octarius, so if he got a big enough WAAAGH going, he'd be a real threat to them. Honestly pretty much every faction other than the weak factions (both Eldar and Tau) stand a chance, theoretically. Imperium is doomed. According to the prophecy there were 2 possible outcomes when Chaos first appeared: 1. Horus succeeds, Chaos wins and takes over the galaxy. It's a brief (relatively speaking) flicker and then dies out as it consumes itself (taking humanity with it). 2. Horus fails, fight goes on, Chaos gods get the time they need to fully form, feed and grow strong. That's why Alpha Legion joined Horus in the first place. They think that aiding him in overcoming the Imperium quickly will actually work against Chaos (and that's why they still shout 'For the Emperor!' as they go to battle). That's the story the Cabal of Xenos gave, but they aren't infallible, since they are filthy xenos scum. Afterall, there are plenty of other plot threads that imply the opposite, like the Emperor potentially being a Perpetual, and the Golden Throne is keeping him from regenerating. Plus, no one really knows for sure why the Alpha Legion does what the Alpha Legion does, or even if they are really doing the things it seems like they are doing. That's their thing, to be completely covered in mystery and contradiction, and you never know what they are doing. Show nested quote + On May 06 2016 16:20 Heartland wrote: Let's just face it that WH40K has lore that makes no sense and seems to be written like a parody of action clichés. This is true. WH40K is, IMO, best looked at as an action comedy. That's what makes 40K so fucking awesome. If you're taking it seriously, you're doing it wrong. | ||
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
The average 40k tabletop player doesn't give a shit about these. The Holy Emperor isn't going to step of his Golden Throne and play the game for them. Foer them the 30 years of 40k background stories simply means that there is no one truth, only current codexes. Dark Eldar is a new race, that worships Slaanesh into torture for desperate soul relief. Necrons were robot Tomb Kings in space, into souless robots, into characterful robots with personalities. Orks were green football hooligans, into serious gorkamorka combats orks into waaagh is a holy crusade that if united will rule the galaxy. The imperium is a billion different things, as is chaos and the nature of warp space. This disconnect of internet warriors, explains the odd preponderence of memes and novels as gospel truth, whilst the avergae 40k tabletop player simply enjoys the atmosphere it give to their own games. Also the trailer was kinda bad. The Inception style music was just...wierd. I was expecting Leonardo DiCaprio to pop up. Howling banshee armour is not meant to be bone. The building they were standing in looked more chaos than eldar. The scene introducing the wraithlord was awesome though. they needed more of that. Also the space marines all died pathetic deaths. They die to a stiff breeze. One lies helpless and gets his body ripped apart by an ork administering the emperor's grace. Another seemingly dies from being bashed on the head by a grot. Another has a wraithlord fall on him. I suppose the makers of the trailer really hate space marines. | ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
Must see. | ||
Deathstar
9150 Posts
I don't know what they can add to dw1 so I'm guessing this will be more towards dw2 style. Or even a FPS. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
http://www.spacehulk-deathwing.com/ It does not look bad for a mid tier shooter with a very focused setting. | ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
On May 07 2016 06:41 Deathstar wrote: I didn't like the Eldars and Necrons in DW1. Tau is cool but I never got the hang of their playstyle. They seemed pretty weak. I don't know what they can add to dw1 so I'm guessing this will be more towards dw2 style. Or even a FPS. Heh, Necron and Eldar were my 2 favorite factions in DoW | ||
arb
Noobville17915 Posts
Despite how Space Marine(the third person shooter thing) may not have been great by any means, it didnt disappoint me since i guess i was expecting to chainsaw people in half blow off arms and shit like that i just hope this game does the same | ||
HeatEXTEND
Netherlands836 Posts
On May 06 2016 21:53 Gorsameth wrote: Show nested quote + On May 06 2016 20:34 Liquid`Jinro wrote: I like 40k, I like DoW... but that trailer sucked. Still excited for the game, but that was not a good trailer at all... really weak audio, and boring action. Nothing felt like it had any impact (like when the banshee draws her sword, wtf is that sound). I agree, the action falls flat when compared to DoW 1 and 2 trailers. They also screwed up the space marine models themselves, Massive long slim legs and tiny waists >< ugh, they look more like ballerina's then genetically engineered human tanks. This. Space marines aren't beanstalks ffs | ||
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
| ||
Elegy
United States1629 Posts
On May 06 2016 15:39 Frudgey wrote: I'm not a huge 40K lore buff, but I seem to recall there being a theory that when the Emperor comes back, he comes back stronger than ever and could wipe the remaining factions quite easily. I also seem to recall that the Eldar saying something that when the Emperor truly "dies", then he'll come back as a (Chaos?) god and just be SIGNIFICANTLY stronger than any of the current gods. Again, I'm not a lore buff, but I'd love to know if I'm talking nonsense or not. That said, there seems to be several indications that the Imperium is just boned. But that's pretty 40k if you think about it. 40k lore has a theory that the Emperor's spirit is sort of stuck in limbo in the Golden Throne; he needs to die to be released into the universe and be reborn as a new god. There's also the idea that the Emperor dies, the devices he powers fails, and the Imperium and therefore the galaxy gets consumed by chaos Another theory is that the Emperor requires the sacrifice of some SUPER powerful psykers all at once and that would jumpstart him back into kicking ass And another theory that the Emperor reborn may be related to the idea of Ynnead, the Eldar god of death. The idea is that in the Eldar Craftworlds, Ynnead is slowly taking shape with the slow death of the Eldar race (Similar to how Slaanesh grew and eventually came into being from the hedonistic wastefulness of the Eldar). Its possible that, once all the Eldar are dead, Ynnead will come into being and destroy the Chaos gods...or that jack shit will happen and the universe will be consumed by chaos. Regardless, like another posted said above me, 40k isn't about the lore, the lore just provides a setting. The universe in 40k is fairly static in terms of lore: Imperium beset on all sides, Tyranids slowly invading, Orcs invading, Chaos invading, Tau expanding, Emperor's life support failing, and so on. those are universal constants that can't and won't really change unless GW pulls an End Times thing like they did for Warhammer Fantasy and actually (canonically) destroy their entire universe. | ||
Sentenal
United States12398 Posts
| ||
pr0n3d91
18 Posts
On May 06 2016 17:43 arb wrote: Hide nested quote - On May 06 2016 16:20 Heartland wrote: Let's just face it that WH40K has lore that makes no sense and seems to be written like a parody of action clichés. i dunno about that Two words, Kaldor Draigo. Draigo addicted to that warp dust! | ||
ShadowArm
23 Posts
On May 08 2016 04:48 pr0n3d91 wrote: Show nested quote + On May 06 2016 17:43 arb wrote: Hide nested quote - On May 06 2016 16:20 Heartland wrote: Let's just face it that WH40K has lore that makes no sense and seems to be written like a parody of action clichés. i dunno about that Two words, Kaldor Draigo. Draigo addicted to that warp dust! "That man is High on Narcotics" - Rogal Dorn | ||
Impervious
Canada4119 Posts
On May 07 2016 06:27 Manit0u wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rR8Six9qpcA&list=PLyiDf91_bTEgnBN0jAvzNbqzrlMGID5WA&index=1 Must see. I had not seen this before. I had low hopes for it, but I figured it would be at least some background noise while I was painting some warhammer. I have now watched a bunch of those "episodes" Some of the one-liners in that are fucking great. The downside is that I now have a bunch of paint touchups needed. Would definitely recommend watching it, but not while painting..... | ||
ShadowArm
23 Posts
On May 08 2016 22:32 Impervious wrote: Show nested quote + On May 07 2016 06:27 Manit0u wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rR8Six9qpcA&list=PLyiDf91_bTEgnBN0jAvzNbqzrlMGID5WA&index=1 Must see. I had not seen this before. I had low hopes for it, but I figured it would be at least some background noise while I was painting some warhammer. I have now watched a bunch of those "episodes" Some of the one-liners in that are fucking great. The downside is that I now have a bunch of paint touchups needed. Would definitely recommend watching it, but not while painting..... best 40k seriesson yourube EVEr also, wait til magnus and dorn gets in also the creator is a damn nice guy also there are other shorts made by the alfa legion guys | ||
Klowney
Sweden277 Posts
| ||
eviltomahawk
United States11132 Posts
| ||
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES49025 Posts
On May 08 2016 22:32 Impervious wrote: Show nested quote + On May 07 2016 06:27 Manit0u wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rR8Six9qpcA&list=PLyiDf91_bTEgnBN0jAvzNbqzrlMGID5WA&index=1 Must see. I had not seen this before. I had low hopes for it, but I figured it would be at least some background noise while I was painting some warhammer. I have now watched a bunch of those "episodes" Some of the one-liners in that are fucking great. The downside is that I now have a bunch of paint touchups needed. Would definitely recommend watching it, but not while painting..... this shit is fucking dope. On June 13 2016 21:42 eviltomahawk wrote: New gameplay footage (with German commentary) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyspr4Tkt58 how do you say "this shit is fucking dope" in german? | ||
JoeCool
Germany2517 Posts
On June 13 2016 21:59 BLinD-RawR wrote: how do you say "this shit is fucking dope" in german? "Sieht (extrem) geil aus..." Unfortunately there is not a lot of information in this video, since this is the earliest version of the game but I'll translate the most important things for the users who don't understand german: - According to relic this game will be the biggest, best but also "meanest" part of the trilogy. Including the biggest battles we've seen so far. - The game will have a comic-look (which is kinda obvious ) - The game tells the story of the Space Marines, Orks and Eldar that try to get their hands on a super-weapon that has been found on some planet. - The base building will return with DoW III but there's no further information on how important these structures are apart from building units. - Cover-system was removed. - The game is expected to be released somwhere in 2017. | ||
ShadowArm
23 Posts
| ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
HeatEXTEND
Netherlands836 Posts
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. Kane's Wrath ? | ||
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
| ||
TaShadan
Germany1959 Posts
| ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
Not really feeling it, even though I loved DoW and DoW2... Maybe it's because I'm not in love with 40k any more. | ||
KaiserJohan
Sweden1808 Posts
| ||
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
The micro feeling looks to be bad. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
But ye, they might change it tons I hope they do, really hope. | ||
Disengaged
United States6994 Posts
| ||
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
But pre alpha those things can all change still. Just like the hinted 4th non playable race could be anything from Necrons to Tyranids. I think relic knows that Chaos is the best expansion pack seller race and one you better not fuck up. So doubt it will be them. | ||
Disengaged
United States6994 Posts
Sorry if I'm remembering wrong, its been quite awhile since I've last played the DoW1 games. By games I mean Winter Assault, Dark Crusade, Soulstorm, and etc | ||
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On June 22 2016 01:18 Disengaged wrote: Well, didn't the DoW1 games have cover? Like how running through water was "No Cover" and small craters were "Low cover" and whatever it was with High/Full cover. Sorry if I'm remembering wrong, its been quite awhile since I've last played the DoW1 games. By games I mean Winter Assault, Dark Crusade, Soulstorm, and etc You aren't. The game had low and high cover, it wasn't positional/directional like CoH if I remember correctly, but rather if you were standing in the area or not. | ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
On June 24 2016 05:26 Logo wrote: Show nested quote + On June 22 2016 01:18 Disengaged wrote: Well, didn't the DoW1 games have cover? Like how running through water was "No Cover" and small craters were "Low cover" and whatever it was with High/Full cover. Sorry if I'm remembering wrong, its been quite awhile since I've last played the DoW1 games. By games I mean Winter Assault, Dark Crusade, Soulstorm, and etc You aren't. The game had low and high cover, it wasn't positional/directional like CoH if I remember correctly, but rather if you were standing in the area or not. Correct. Except it wasn't low and high cover but penalty or bonus to your armour. | ||
Weavel
Finland9213 Posts
http://www.pcgamer.com/dawn-of-war-3-multiplayer-hands-on-tough-complicated-spectacular/ http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-03-06-dawn-of-war-3s-multiplayer-reveals-moba-influence | ||
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
I like that there are different points of interest outside of resource outposts. That your base was never at risk in Dawn of War, was one thing I disliked about it. Could always pull back out of a resource spot to put more units on another to just end up trading around. The map design worries me though. I see deathball potential, despite so many efforts to prevent them. | ||
Gorsameth
Netherlands20759 Posts
On March 10 2017 06:41 Weavel wrote: Developers completely dropped the ball with the multiplayer on this game. On release the only multiplayer mode will be heavily moba influenced mode called Power Core. In this mode you need to take down your opponents energy shield, turret and core. I watched 20 minutes of multiplayer video for all races and the game doesn't look fun at all. Here are some articles and gameplay video. http://www.pcgamer.com/dawn-of-war-3-multiplayer-hands-on-tough-complicated-spectacular/ http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-03-06-dawn-of-war-3s-multiplayer-reveals-moba-influence https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ant5lA81Cg0 Or maybe they are trying something new because the multiplayer RTS genre is (almost) 6 feet under. | ||
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On March 10 2017 07:47 Gorsameth wrote: Show nested quote + On March 10 2017 06:41 Weavel wrote: Developers completely dropped the ball with the multiplayer on this game. On release the only multiplayer mode will be heavily moba influenced mode called Power Core. In this mode you need to take down your opponents energy shield, turret and core. I watched 20 minutes of multiplayer video for all races and the game doesn't look fun at all. Here are some articles and gameplay video. http://www.pcgamer.com/dawn-of-war-3-multiplayer-hands-on-tough-complicated-spectacular/ http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-03-06-dawn-of-war-3s-multiplayer-reveals-moba-influence https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ant5lA81Cg0 Or maybe they are trying something new because the multiplayer RTS genre is (almost) 6 feet under. If you get past the map looking influenced by MOBA's, it looks like what they are trying might actually work. Multiple lanes of attack encourages multitasking. As they have described, their new map system also counteracts limited information/scouting issues in early game, which has been a large issue throughout the whole life of SC2 (and most of all in LotV with the strength of harassment). It should be much more successful as a team game as well. The larger battles look great, and ability usage is still there but seems to be used much more sparingly than LotV. Looks like it might be pretty solid imo. My only issue is the movement of most units seems a bit sluggish. But I will reserve judgement until I see how they "feel". | ||
DannyJ
United States5110 Posts
| ||
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On March 10 2017 08:11 DannyJ wrote: Seems kind of repulsive to me at first glance, but yeah it's probably a good move. I mean even if it sucks and it's junk the sad fact is they would never get anything but a super miniscule player base with a more stereotypical RTS mode no matter how good it is. I think at this point, all the ex-SC2 players are so repulsed by the glaring issues of SC2, that DoW3 devs figure it would be good for marketing if they specifically address those glaring issues as a primary goal. Not sure if the overall design of the multiplayer is good yet. But if it is designed well, the marketing plan may just work out nicely. I'm fairly sure there's more players disenfranchised by SC2 than are still playing. | ||
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
Its more about how the units move, how they are microable, how they feel when they move that troubles me with this game AND ALL OTHER RTS games. It looks like several units come as squads aswell, which is very discouraged. | ||
Yurie
11533 Posts
On March 10 2017 10:23 Foxxan wrote: Nah, neutral buildings on the map is not any problem whatsoever, infact i would encourage such things. Its more about how the units move, how they are microable, how they feel when they move that troubles me with this game AND ALL OTHER RTS games. It looks like several units come as squads aswell, which is very discouraged. Squads should be expected after DoW 2. All basic units and even some advanced ones were squads there. I don't really have a problem with that. If you want to you can see it as a tree with some branches sticking out and attacking, when a branch dies the tree keeps attacking and if you feed it nutrients it grows out its limbs again. (I am going to sleep now, that was just sad.) | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
Totally understandable that people who played dow 1 and 2 and were waiting for a more traditional dow entry would be less excited tho. Btw was it just my limited experience with the game or did 3v3 in dow 2 feel like a moba already? | ||
Yurie
11533 Posts
On March 10 2017 10:59 Liquid`Jinro wrote: I've wanted to see a traditional rts/moba hybrid for a long time now... so I'm very much fine with seeing how this plays out. Totally understandable that people who played dow 1 and 2 and were waiting for a more traditional dow entry would be less excited tho. Btw was it just my limited experience with the game or did 3v3 in dow 2 feel like a moba already? Not really. Even a hero such as meepo or Chen in Dota had much less units to control and no real construction choices (though you can argue items are it). DoW 2 felt like an RTT game more than an RTS. You often fought with your hero and 2-3 squads early on your lane. Then when somebody lost it you moved around and did pushes together. If it went late you had vehicles and stuff like that. Almost felt like playing the commander role in Battlefield 2 in some ways. From what little I've seen of DoW 3 it seems pretty similar to 2 with some development and changes, as expected of a higher number. | ||
Disengaged
United States6994 Posts
On March 10 2017 10:50 Yurie wrote: Show nested quote + On March 10 2017 10:23 Foxxan wrote: Nah, neutral buildings on the map is not any problem whatsoever, infact i would encourage such things. Its more about how the units move, how they are microable, how they feel when they move that troubles me with this game AND ALL OTHER RTS games. It looks like several units come as squads aswell, which is very discouraged. Squads should be expected after DoW 2. All basic units and even some advanced ones were squads there. I don't really have a problem with that. If you want to you can see it as a tree with some branches sticking out and attacking, when a branch dies the tree keeps attacking and if you feed it nutrients it grows out its limbs again. (I am going to sleep now, that was just sad.) I'm confused. Squads have been a thing since DoW, Dark Crusade, Soulstorm. Or is that somehow not what you meant? | ||
Yurie
11533 Posts
On March 10 2017 11:35 Disengaged wrote: Show nested quote + On March 10 2017 10:50 Yurie wrote: On March 10 2017 10:23 Foxxan wrote: Nah, neutral buildings on the map is not any problem whatsoever, infact i would encourage such things. Its more about how the units move, how they are microable, how they feel when they move that troubles me with this game AND ALL OTHER RTS games. It looks like several units come as squads aswell, which is very discouraged. Squads should be expected after DoW 2. All basic units and even some advanced ones were squads there. I don't really have a problem with that. If you want to you can see it as a tree with some branches sticking out and attacking, when a branch dies the tree keeps attacking and if you feed it nutrients it grows out its limbs again. (I am going to sleep now, that was just sad.) I'm confused. Squads have been a thing since DoW, Dark Crusade, Soulstorm. Or is that somehow not what you meant? They have been. I was just wondering why Foxxan was surprised and was tired, so did a mental example of how to think of them as one unit. | ||
Mafe
Germany5917 Posts
But yeah, this new multiplayer version doesnt really excite me. It will join the list of rts-games of my childhood/youth whose successors deviate too much from what at liked about the first few games of the series (other members: AoE-series after the conquerors, die Siedler 5+). | ||
_Spartak_
Turkey236 Posts
| ||
Nezgar
Germany513 Posts
Just looking at the art of the game is a huge turnoff for me. Whatever this game is, it has little to nothing to do with the Warhammer 40k that I love... except for the title. Warhammer is supposed to be a grimdark universe and not some flashy comic nonsense where people do jumps and flips in Terminator armor! The artstyle doesn't fit the lore. The animations don't fit the lore. The effects and sounds certainly don't fit the lore. That aside I am incredibly disappointed that they are only launching with a bare minimum of vanilla factions. At the core of Warhammer has always been the diversity of the factions and races and all the crazy stuff that it entails. While I can understand that they are not able to pander to everyone and include all factions, leaving out some of the biggest and most important factions is just plain unacceptable for me. I am certainly not going to support a game that has only slapped "Warhammer" somewhere in the title to attract a bigger audience while doing little to nothing with the universe it is set in. | ||
Nezgar
Germany513 Posts
| ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
Than all it has left is to be fun enough to play while still presenting some challenge to overcome with practice. | ||
Yurie
11533 Posts
On March 10 2017 20:31 -Archangel- wrote: As long as it is less crazy with kill speed and ability use than sc2 it will be OK. Than all it has left is to be fun enough to play while still presenting some challenge to overcome with practice. DoW 2 had abilities on all units. This means there is more ability usage per unit (longish cooldowns) than in SC2 but with much fewer units and slower movement speed it works out. Also removing a lot of the macro stuff and single units killing your economy means you have more time for the micro. Kill speed tends to be much slower. From the little I played of DoW 2 in 3v3 you often had 1-2 units left to guard resources or try to take them and the rest more or less leapfrogging forward and with your focus on them. | ||
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On March 10 2017 22:55 Yurie wrote: Show nested quote + On March 10 2017 20:31 -Archangel- wrote: As long as it is less crazy with kill speed and ability use than sc2 it will be OK. Than all it has left is to be fun enough to play while still presenting some challenge to overcome with practice. DoW 2 had abilities on all units. This means there is more ability usage per unit (longish cooldowns) than in SC2 but with much fewer units and slower movement speed it works out. Also removing a lot of the macro stuff and single units killing your economy means you have more time for the micro. Kill speed tends to be much slower. From the little I played of DoW 2 in 3v3 you often had 1-2 units left to guard resources or try to take them and the rest more or less leapfrogging forward and with your focus on them. I was talking about DoW3. Don't care for DoW2. | ||
ramon
Germany4842 Posts
| ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
NKB
United Kingdom608 Posts
Edit: spelling | ||
MotherOfRunes
Germany2861 Posts
| ||
reneg
United States859 Posts
On April 06 2017 23:29 NKB wrote: Really am quite interested to see how this turns out, really enjoyed the other dow games. Hoping this one is just as good. Edit: spelling I"m super interested myself, but right now, I'm just sitting here spinning on "Finding Match..." for basically ever. Not sure if no one else is searching (?) or if the beta pool is that small (?) or if there's some issue with the matchmaking (?) | ||
MotherOfRunes
Germany2861 Posts
On April 08 2017 11:23 reneg wrote: Show nested quote + On April 06 2017 23:29 NKB wrote: Really am quite interested to see how this turns out, really enjoyed the other dow games. Hoping this one is just as good. Edit: spelling I"m super interested myself, but right now, I'm just sitting here spinning on "Finding Match..." for basically ever. Not sure if no one else is searching (?) or if the beta pool is that small (?) or if there's some issue with the matchmaking (?) i was playing almost all night long and i always found a match quickly | ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
Are heroes much more emphasized? How does it compare to games like Battle for middle earth f.e.? | ||
TaShadan
Germany1959 Posts
| ||
FarmI3oy
United States255 Posts
| ||
Disengaged
United States6994 Posts
| ||
reneg
United States859 Posts
On April 08 2017 13:31 MotherOfRunes wrote: Show nested quote + On April 08 2017 11:23 reneg wrote: On April 06 2017 23:29 NKB wrote: Really am quite interested to see how this turns out, really enjoyed the other dow games. Hoping this one is just as good. Edit: spelling I"m super interested myself, but right now, I'm just sitting here spinning on "Finding Match..." for basically ever. Not sure if no one else is searching (?) or if the beta pool is that small (?) or if there's some issue with the matchmaking (?) i was playing almost all night long and i always found a match quickly Hrmm...guess it might have just been me then. I sat there for about 5 minutes waiting to queue (had all vs. modes selected), before finally being matched up against someone. On April 08 2017 16:32 Archeon wrote: ^so what's your impression? It got a lot of flag beforehand, but imo a lot of the criticism I read was fairly baseless. Are heroes much more emphasized? How does it compare to games like Battle for middle earth f.e.? It's a fun game, though it's definitely not like Starcraft 2 - It's extremely small squad based (i.e. you aren't running around making a few dozen of a particular unit, but rather a small handfull of guys). The heroes are really strong, and (in my admittedly limited experience) do tend to just mow down your grunts / melee / standard guys; so it really follows along the lines of a hero management game with supporting units around (game opens and it's grunts vs. grunts, then transitions into hero+grunts vs. hero+grunts). On April 08 2017 22:06 FarmI3oy wrote: Does not look like an RTS. Well, it is one. | ||
jpg06051992
United States580 Posts
I don't mind if the multiplayer is bad again because only Blizzard knows how to do an RTS any justice at all, but is the single player fun? | ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
On April 09 2017 02:35 jpg06051992 wrote: Anyone wanna give me the low down? I loved playing the single player from DOW 2 and all of it's spin offs because the campaign was very well set up but I think we all know that multiplayer was a joke. I don't mind if the multiplayer is bad again because only Blizzard knows how to do an RTS any justice at all, but is the single player fun? Idk, I haven't played a lot of dow2 multiplayer, but a lot of people really liked it and I can see what they were going for. The main problem for me was actually starting to play multiplayer when I didn't even have a campaign to get used to the fairly unique components. Also DoW1 had an amazing MP, I liked many aspects like the outposts better than sc2's counterparts f.e.. | ||
Disengaged
United States6994 Posts
On April 09 2017 02:35 jpg06051992 wrote: Anyone wanna give me the low down? I loved playing the single player from DOW 2 and all of it's spin offs because the campaign was very well set up but I think we all know that multiplayer was a joke. I don't mind if the multiplayer is bad again because only Blizzard knows how to do an RTS any justice at all, but is the single player fun? We won't know if the singleplayer is fun until the game releases. The multiplayer is pretty fun though. | ||
PaztheLobster
Philippines25 Posts
| ||
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
On March 10 2017 19:25 _Spartak_ wrote: From the gameplay video, the game doesn't seem to play radically different from previous DoW games. I don't think it will be the next big multiplayer RTS but it won't be because of "MOBA influence". Relic RTSes are always critically acclaimed and sell a lot of copies but they are incapable of producing long-standing multiplayer scenes and that is due to how economy management and unit control are handled in those games so since there is no radical change in those aspects, I don't see DoW 3 being a better multiplayer game than its predecessors regardless of its game modes or balance. I think you've got to take into account that a lot of people also don't ever touch multiplayer. I loved the DoW 2 campaign (it was a lot better and fun than SC2's, in my opinion), but never bothered playing the game online. | ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
On March 11 2017 06:54 -Archangel- wrote: Show nested quote + On March 10 2017 22:55 Yurie wrote: On March 10 2017 20:31 -Archangel- wrote: As long as it is less crazy with kill speed and ability use than sc2 it will be OK. Than all it has left is to be fun enough to play while still presenting some challenge to overcome with practice. DoW 2 had abilities on all units. This means there is more ability usage per unit (longish cooldowns) than in SC2 but with much fewer units and slower movement speed it works out. Also removing a lot of the macro stuff and single units killing your economy means you have more time for the micro. Kill speed tends to be much slower. From the little I played of DoW 2 in 3v3 you often had 1-2 units left to guard resources or try to take them and the rest more or less leapfrogging forward and with your focus on them. I was talking about DoW3. Don't care for DoW2. DoW2 was actually a very underrated game, despite having pretty amazing mechanics and punishing you heavily for your mistakes. The chance to win against a better player was rather slim and some of the stuff they introduced there was pretty novel. They basically took the best parts of DoW and CoH, merged them together and released this beast of a game. Campaign was shit though | ||
NKB
United Kingdom608 Posts
| ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On April 10 2017 05:01 NKB wrote: From reading some of the comments here this might be the first game where i play the mulitplayer. Just one question though, is there base building in multiplayer or is it all unit management? There is base building and unit building, just don't expect anything like Starcraft. | ||
reneg
United States859 Posts
On April 10 2017 05:01 NKB wrote: From reading some of the comments here this might be the first game where i play the mulitplayer. Just one question though, is there base building in multiplayer or is it all unit management? Comparatively little Base building. There is definitely since, you build structures that make units, but you end up running around the map with a very limited number of units (think: a dozen, plus a few elite units) | ||
arb
Noobville17915 Posts
On April 10 2017 02:47 Manit0u wrote: Show nested quote + On March 11 2017 06:54 -Archangel- wrote: On March 10 2017 22:55 Yurie wrote: On March 10 2017 20:31 -Archangel- wrote: As long as it is less crazy with kill speed and ability use than sc2 it will be OK. Than all it has left is to be fun enough to play while still presenting some challenge to overcome with practice. DoW 2 had abilities on all units. This means there is more ability usage per unit (longish cooldowns) than in SC2 but with much fewer units and slower movement speed it works out. Also removing a lot of the macro stuff and single units killing your economy means you have more time for the micro. Kill speed tends to be much slower. From the little I played of DoW 2 in 3v3 you often had 1-2 units left to guard resources or try to take them and the rest more or less leapfrogging forward and with your focus on them. I was talking about DoW3. Don't care for DoW2. DoW2 was actually a very underrated game, despite having pretty amazing mechanics and punishing you heavily for your mistakes. The chance to win against a better player was rather slim and some of the stuff they introduced there was pretty novel. They basically took the best parts of DoW and CoH, merged them together and released this beast of a game. Campaign was shit though I think CoH Is probably my favorite Relic RTS, I enjoyed DoW1 far far far more than DoW2 though. | ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
As a player you probably get used to this mess and understand what I going on after a while, but this game is DOA as an esport because of this design. | ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
I don't have problems separating units from terrain so far though and really like how the terrain and the buildings look. I just think the units look somehow low resolution. | ||
iloveav
Poland1464 Posts
I bought it as sale, and probably will buy DoW III at sale as well. | ||
Velr
Switzerland10416 Posts
It Looks a bit like a Dow2 polished up and enlarged a bit? I also haven't seen any Units that require to set up (heavy gunners and stuff like this), are these gone? I kinda liked these. | ||
Cuce
Turkey1127 Posts
| ||
PaztheLobster
Philippines25 Posts
| ||
Klowney
Sweden277 Posts
| ||
reneg
United States859 Posts
On April 14 2017 19:13 Klowney wrote: If it's open beta, why do you need keys? You definitely shouldn't need anything. Iirc, the open beta is to the end of the month, right before release (I guess this is just to promote their game? Kind of like how ghost recon did?) I feel like open 'betas' right before release night be indicative of lower preorder sales in an attempt to get more people to buy early. Of course that is pure speculation, and I have literally zero evidence. Edit: I don't know what I'm talking about - every DoW game has had an open beta period, so there's nothing strange about this one. | ||
PaztheLobster
Philippines25 Posts
On April 14 2017 19:13 Klowney wrote: If it's open beta, why do you need keys? No idea, but that's how it is. | ||
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On April 15 2017 21:52 reneg wrote: You definitely shouldn't need anything. Iirc, the open beta is to the end of the month, right before release (I guess this is just to promote their game? Kind of like how ghost recon did?) I feel like open 'betas' right before release night be indicative of lower preorder sales in an attempt to get more people to buy early. Of course that is pure speculation, and I have literally zero evidence. Every dawn of war (and company of heroes I think) has had an open beta. Though I guess I don't rightly remember how close to release those open betas were. | ||
reneg
United States859 Posts
On April 16 2017 00:11 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Show nested quote + On April 15 2017 21:52 reneg wrote: On April 14 2017 19:13 Klowney wrote: If it's open beta, why do you need keys? You definitely shouldn't need anything. Iirc, the open beta is to the end of the month, right before release (I guess this is just to promote their game? Kind of like how ghost recon did?) I feel like open 'betas' right before release night be indicative of lower preorder sales in an attempt to get more people to buy early. Of course that is pure speculation, and I have literally zero evidence. Every dawn of war (and company of heroes I think) has had an open beta. Though I guess I don't rightly remember how close to release those open betas were. That's fair - I honestly don't know the history of the other DoW games - so didn't realize that. I'm just starting to grow a lot more cautious about "Open Betas" that a lot of games are having - when they happen a few days before actual release, the amount of items they can fix is pretty small, unless it's something absolutely catastrophic. Then again, maybe that's the point? To have a quick stress test so they can make sure the release goes as smoothly as possible | ||
Yurie
11533 Posts
On April 16 2017 03:32 reneg wrote: Show nested quote + On April 16 2017 00:11 Liquid`Jinro wrote: On April 15 2017 21:52 reneg wrote: On April 14 2017 19:13 Klowney wrote: If it's open beta, why do you need keys? You definitely shouldn't need anything. Iirc, the open beta is to the end of the month, right before release (I guess this is just to promote their game? Kind of like how ghost recon did?) I feel like open 'betas' right before release night be indicative of lower preorder sales in an attempt to get more people to buy early. Of course that is pure speculation, and I have literally zero evidence. Every dawn of war (and company of heroes I think) has had an open beta. Though I guess I don't rightly remember how close to release those open betas were. That's fair - I honestly don't know the history of the other DoW games - so didn't realize that. I'm just starting to grow a lot more cautious about "Open Betas" that a lot of games are having - when they happen a few days before actual release, the amount of items they can fix is pretty small, unless it's something absolutely catastrophic. Then again, maybe that's the point? To have a quick stress test so they can make sure the release goes as smoothly as possible Probably two major things they are looking for. Stress testing and simple things to fix that they didn't spot in internal testing. For the recent Mass Effect Andromeda there was a conflict with Corsair drivers that made the game unplayable while they were installed. That was patched in the day 1 patch for PC as an example of something that can be fixed and is easy to miss. | ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
And if I don't like the beta there's a good chance I'm gonna wait until it's cheaper/a gold version with a bunch of add-ons is out, which would translate to relic loosing money because of the beta. It's basically a free demo for a few days before release. | ||
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
I agree that open betas are mostly demos now. And that the only thing that will change from demo to release, will be day 1 patch and driver updates. | ||
BretZ
United States1510 Posts
| ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
Currently I lack a game to feed my multiplayer/competition-addiction and with the Dota ranked queue changes I don't feel like getting back into it, so I kinda threw money at Relic cause I'm bored and like the concept. And the beta games were fun. The game could take some refinement though, at the beginner level hero nukes make and break the game. In most situations I'd rather have Weirdboy (3) than Gorkonaut (9), so there's definitely some need for rebalancing. The imperial knight is actually the only titan that seemed really good in the beta. | ||
Klowney
Sweden277 Posts
| ||
ZeromuS
Canada13372 Posts
I liked DoW1, never played DoW2 though. And the price is steep enough that I'm not sure I want to commit without knowing if I enjoy it or not. | ||
Mistakes
United States1101 Posts
| ||
ionONE
Germany605 Posts
Lots of mechanics that made coh/dow special in the rts environment got removed. The core does not belong in the game, able to drag out games by a lot. Don´t like the bubbles that are placed on the map. There is still no road map that shows what is planned in the future, dow 2 had 8 dlc´s, coh2 similiar + all the commander that give a small advantages and skins. | ||
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
Core doesn't matter at all, as games are over before that. But shield + towers is basically the rock wall at your natural in WoL. When you played the training mode before the real matches. Did find some funny orc cheese though. And I don't think we will ever get a mode that won't have the 15 minutes no rush rule. Don't think the races are balanceable to make some matchups possible without it. Which is weird, because the races are really similar. Guess they could release a Space Marine hero that is anti orc waagh cheese. My advice would be to wait. Unless you love Warhammer 40k and like 15 minutes no rush 30 apm rts games. Then again I'll pass on Dawn of War 3 completely. Unless they do Ordo Hereticus. Or people say the Singleplayer campaign is Sc2 good and has finishers unlike the multiplayer. Combined with an Sc2 coop commander like mode. So my opinion is rather biased against DoW3. (loved 1 so much and 2 was fun micro) This time Dawn of War seems to be made for Warhammer40k fans and not rts fans. Just my impression so far and there is nothing wrong with it. As people think rts doesn't sell anymore. But they should have learned from recent multiplayer games, that cutting out everything that might frustrate someone, usually removes something way more people enjoy. And since they want to sell skins for their heroes, they should try to life longer then a month. sigh i am just salty that Dawn of War 3 turned into this, after waiting for it since the release of Dawn of War 2. | ||
ZeromuS
Canada13372 Posts
I wanted something different from Overwatch/Mass Effect that I could play when tired and wanted to chill with explosions and do after work. | ||
Sbrubbles
Brazil5763 Posts
If DoW3's campaign is good I'll pick it up. Sadly, I don't think any game will ever match SC2's single player campaign level design. | ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
@FeyFey I find hero units and race powers more frustrating than any rts mechanic except for Marine-Medievac. But I'm also having a lot of fun with the heroes. I agree that the core is a very minor aspect of the game, it only means that 3v3 games end as fast as 1v1 games once you reach the base and crushed the resistance. Overall I'd describe the game as a hybrid of Bfme-Eco and unit management, DoW1 Scenario and basebuilding and wc3 heroes. I really like the multiplayer concepts, the 3v3s I played with some friends were a blast and coordination plays a big role in those matches. The game feels often like a faster paced Bfme actually. 1v1's felt very snowball-oriented because of the small 1v1 map, but that goes for a lot of RTS-1v1's. Relic announced that they will deliver a mapmaker, so here's hoping that they'll update the pool with some bigger maps on which multipronged attacks play a bigger role in 1v1 as well. Unless you are hyped or bored I recommend getting it when it's on sale. Imo there are a bunch of things that could be better with little tweaks and I can see the game being really good in 1-2 years if relic continues to finetune. 60€ is a pretty steep entry price though and 3 races mean a lot of room for dlcs/add-ons, the game could reach a similar price tag like EU4 or TWW over time. | ||
Sbrubbles
Brazil5763 Posts
Anyway, hopefully the campaign is more like one of those two and less like DoW2 (which was awful) | ||
Velr
Switzerland10416 Posts
| ||
lestye
United States4104 Posts
I think gameplay wise SC2's campaigns have been the best in RTS, in regards to all the weird untraditional objectives and mechanics you do, as well as the unit upgrades/sidegrades you earn, as opposed to a lot of the RTS campaigns which tend to be regular skirmishes. | ||
Madkipz
Norway1643 Posts
Elites are a bit too strong against all other unit types in this iteration of DOW, but that's a balancing problem that is either fixed by upping regular unit hp so they don't evaporate, or they don't fix it and the game is worse for it. Right now you time a good aoe and half the enemy army evaporates. These issues are both things that can be solved so long as the devs play ball and don't split the community by making well-made maps into DLC. | ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
On April 27 2017 15:05 lestye wrote: Was Dawn of War 2 the game that had campaign maps on top of skirmish maps? I think that was DoW2 or one of the Dow1 expacs. I think gameplay wise SC2's campaigns have been the best in RTS, in regards to all the weird untraditional objectives and mechanics you do, as well as the unit upgrades/sidegrades you earn, as opposed to a lot of the RTS campaigns which tend to be regular skirmishes. If you are talking about a tile based campaign map with skirmish maps in each tile, that's DoW1 dark crusade and SS. I like a balance between regular skirmish maps and "fun" maps like defense, hero missions and objective based. I didn't like that in sc2 you could basically never go 3-base in the campaign, the two add-ons were a bit too heavy on the fun map-side for me. I think my favorite LotV map was the one with immortals where you had a human ally and had to push the hybrid base. I also think that the item system and more direct leveling feedback enriched the wc3 campaigns. But I agree that the unit upgrades were nice in HotS and LotV and both had very good campaigns gameplay wise. | ||
lestye
United States4104 Posts
Yeah, I liked the item system as well.... I wasted so much time destroying every single neutral building and prop to see if there were hidden items. Yeah, I didnt like you couldnt 3 base in SC2's campaign, well you could if you took over an enemy's base but it'd be close to over at that point. What I didnt like about WC3 was how creeping was nonexistent. Which seems very silly in retrospect. I think levelling was really pointless because you were capped at what level you could be depending on the level. Although it was really cool how TFT took away levels to intertwine the gameplay and the story. | ||
ZeromuS
Canada13372 Posts
the last DoW I played was the first and it feels real different so it will take some getting used to but its fun. Smashin up things as orks is as dumb as ever and its great. | ||
NKB
United Kingdom608 Posts
On April 28 2017 12:14 ZeromuS wrote: Only had time to play the first 2 missions on normal difficulty, but I am having fun. the last DoW I played was the first and it feels real different so it will take some getting used to but its fun. Smashin up things as orks is as dumb as ever and its great. Ive only had time to play first two missions as well. Was a lot of fun but i felt like units on both sides just died to quickly compared to the past games, maube it is just one of those changes i need to get used to. | ||
ZeromuS
Canada13372 Posts
On April 28 2017 17:39 NKB wrote: Show nested quote + On April 28 2017 12:14 ZeromuS wrote: Only had time to play the first 2 missions on normal difficulty, but I am having fun. the last DoW I played was the first and it feels real different so it will take some getting used to but its fun. Smashin up things as orks is as dumb as ever and its great. Ive only had time to play first two missions as well. Was a lot of fun but i felt like units on both sides just died to quickly compared to the past games, maube it is just one of those changes i need to get used to. The axe boys died quick, but then I started upgrading them with scrap and they turned to 'ard boyz and they lasted a lot longer. The general orcs get mowed down on approach to ranged units issue remained. It got much easier when I realised that bringing gretchin along to build waaagh towers on my attack path and raising my waaagh meter (along with hyping up the boyz with their ability) made a big big difference. I want to try playing on hard on the weekend, when I'll have time to experiment with more of the mechanics. My biggest gripe is honestly just the fact that control group management sucks. If I could shift add or remove units from my army groups without having to reselect all of them or click their icons on the bottom of the screen I would be real happy. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 28 2017 22:34 ZeromuS wrote: Show nested quote + On April 28 2017 17:39 NKB wrote: On April 28 2017 12:14 ZeromuS wrote: Only had time to play the first 2 missions on normal difficulty, but I am having fun. the last DoW I played was the first and it feels real different so it will take some getting used to but its fun. Smashin up things as orks is as dumb as ever and its great. Ive only had time to play first two missions as well. Was a lot of fun but i felt like units on both sides just died to quickly compared to the past games, maube it is just one of those changes i need to get used to. The axe boys died quick, but then I started upgrading them with scrap and they turned to 'ard boyz and they lasted a lot longer. The general orcs get mowed down on approach to ranged units issue remained. It got much easier when I realised that bringing gretchin along to build waaagh towers on my attack path and raising my waaagh meter (along with hyping up the boyz with their ability) made a big big difference. I want to try playing on hard on the weekend, when I'll have time to experiment with more of the mechanics. My biggest gripe is honestly just the fact that control group management sucks. If I could shift add or remove units from my army groups without having to reselect all of them or click their icons on the bottom of the screen I would be real happy. They do nothing to explain that at all. Even with the Eldar, who get big buffs from warp gates, they do almost nothing to explain why they are cool and how to use them. It is like they designed all these really cool systems to use infrastructure on the battlefield for multi-player and didn't really bother to explain how any of that shit works in the single player. | ||
imre
France9263 Posts
| ||
Coriolis
United States1152 Posts
| ||
ZeromuS
Canada13372 Posts
| ||
Coriolis
United States1152 Posts
| ||
Yurie
11533 Posts
| ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
Grinding heroes up is fairly easy in the campaign so far. That the AI doesn't really work helps with grinding, devalues the hard campaign a lot though. | ||
superstartran
United States4013 Posts
On April 29 2017 04:37 Coriolis wrote: No I mean the grind to get level 8 on a hero to use the doctrine as an army doctrine. Level 8 on assault terminators gets you a doctrine that gives tac marines a grenade which is a massive powerboost. You can use it as a hero doctrine starting at level 3 but that requires you to change the loadout which may or may not be what you actually want. Yeah grenades + flame slow is a huge deal vs orc spam | ||
AffixAU
1 Post
Lack of maps/ladder are the only disappointing aspects. Hoping these will be added sooner rather than later. | ||
PaztheLobster
Philippines25 Posts
| ||
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
| ||
Wtfux
Northern Ireland163 Posts
Reckon I'll refund soon, it's just I really wanted to play this | ||
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On April 30 2017 22:32 AffixAU wrote: Having a lot fun with this game, got addicted after the beta and its the first game ive pre ordered. Its a good evolution of the RTS genre, the hero element is interesting similar to WC3 or HOTS campaign. Lack of maps/ladder are the only disappointing aspects. Hoping these will be added sooner rather than later. I only played beta, but I liked it quite a bit as well. Was a lot deeper than I thought it would be. Will prob pick it up on a sale, or sooner if I see the mutliplayer community is successful | ||
JimmyJRaynor
Canada15564 Posts
i'd be worried about the long term future of the game though. Peak ever is 25,000 and less than 200,000 units were sold. ouch. i like Relic and i hope the game does well and can be supported a long time like they did with CoH1 and CoH2. CoH2 sold a lot better than DoW3 though. | ||
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
On May 01 2017 15:56 JimmyJRaynor wrote: played the open beta and it was pretty fun. i'd be worried about the long term future of the game though. Peak ever is 25,000 and less than 200,000 units were sold. ouch. i like Relic and i hope the game does well and can be supported a long time like they did with CoH1 and CoH2. CoH2 sold a lot better than DoW3 though. CoH2 was the sequel to what many consider to be one of the best RTS ever made. DoW has always been more of a niche RTS, i.e. a niche game in what has become a niche genre. That said, I thoroughly enjoyed DoW 2's campaign back in the day, much more than SC2's. | ||
RolleMcKnolle
Germany1054 Posts
So I agree that DoW is by now a niche game, but once upon a time it was different. | ||
Velr
Switzerland10416 Posts
On May 01 2017 17:09 RolleMcKnolle wrote: DoW1 at its prime was not a niche game. And there are lots of people who consider it one of the best RTS ever made, especially vanilla (Game of the Year 2004). There was a time when DoW1 was part of the WCG cycle, which was at the time arguably the most important multigame tournament. Horrendous addons and patch policy destroyed the competetive scene and helped the Multiplayer base decline. So I agree that DoW is by now a niche game, but once upon a time it was different. So much this. Dow 1 vanilla was awesome, then patches/addons happened. | ||
Endymion
United States3701 Posts
dawn of war 1 was a great rts though, from a casual standpoint at least. i have never heard of competitive dawn of war though.. i think DoW2 had a small competitive scene but it never really took off, although it had a pro mod i believe? no idea how their servers work, do they play on something similar to fish or are they on official servers? DoW3 doesn't look too great though.. i watched totalbiscuit's video, and while i think he's an RTS noobzor i agreed with his conclusions about the way the new mechanics will affect the longevity of the competitive scene. all of these "anti rush" and "anti eco" mechanics are just cutting out the perceived "non-fun" aspects of rts, but the breadth of possible builds is what makes rts games so fun. it's like in poker if you were to be like "ok, playing with 75o- is boring because you rarely win and playing against TT+ QJs+ isn't fun, so we're just going to remove those parts of everyone's range. now you only have 50% of the cards, but at least you won't have to play those non-fun hands!!" it just doesn't make sense | ||
JimmyJRaynor
Canada15564 Posts
On May 01 2017 20:33 Endymion wrote: it's like in poker if you were to be like "ok, playing with 75o- is boring because you rarely win and playing against TT+ QJs+ isn't fun, so we're just going to remove those parts of everyone's range. now you only have 50% of the cards, but at least you won't have to play those non-fun hands!!" it just doesn't make sense a euchre deck is much smaller than a normal deck and it is fun. On May 01 2017 20:33 Endymion wrote: and while i think he's an RTS noobzor i agreed with his conclusions about the way the new mechanics will affect the longevity of the competitive scene. i think his perspective on RTS games is far more representative of the average consumer than a GM player in SC2. | ||
Endymion
United States3701 Posts
| ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
I am still waiting for a hard to master RTS that is F2P like LoL, Dota2 or CSGO (well that one is 10$ but almost free) | ||
ToT)OjKa(
Korea (South)2437 Posts
If streaming was big back then it would have taken off a lot more because the matches are fast and you can get into the action within a minute. I don't think the expansions hurt the game much though.The additional races were interesting to play as but Relic's patching back then was um...well it got pretty fucking random at times. They'd fix some shit but then throw in some random buffs/nerfs which would create more problems. Saying that though, DoW's imbalances actually made the game kinda balanced. It was like when the stars align - every race had some minor imbalances that could battle the other faction's imbalances. Fun shit. Just an addon, I think DoW 3's killing Core and stuff is kinda dumb. I can live with it but then being able to make your Core immune for a period of time, being able to warp your whole army back to HQ as well as having your Core regenerate rather quickly is fucking stupid. People complain about backdooring and shit like that when they don't bother scout and have 2/3rds of the map in blackness...get a grip. | ||
Sbrubbles
Brazil5763 Posts
| ||
404AlphaSquad
838 Posts
On May 01 2017 21:51 -Archangel- wrote: Best RTS are easy to learn and hard to master. Or at least easy to start playing hard to master. I am still waiting for a hard to master RTS that is F2P like LoL, Dota2 or CSGO (well that one is 10$ but almost free) Like Brood War? ^^ Also I dont consider the games you mentioned RTS. Not everything that is in "real-time" and some strategy has to be dubbed an "RTS" in the traditional sense. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 02 2017 00:01 Sbrubbles wrote: I'm hearing conflicting things about the core system and turtling in this game. Some people say the core system stops rushes and allows (too much) turtling, while others say the core system is pointless because having map control already determines the outcome of the game (because more resources). So, why is it? I played just a little of the beta, and most of it 2v2 and 3v3. Defense is pretty powerful and it can be hard to push into an area if you let people build up. The main issue is that people are not comfortable with being offensive, so they don’t know how to deal with it efficiently. I’m still not 100% the exact number of tier one units needed to kill a listening post. A lot of people still bring the big ultimate elite units into the matches, even though the match is unlikely to last long enough to get 10 elite points. But once you get to tier two and get a couple units that have good heavy armor damage, it shield generators fall quickly. But the games economy is also unnecessarily complicated with no pay off. The power vs resources vs tech is fine. But then they add all these uninterested upgrades to the resource nodes. | ||
Velr
Switzerland10416 Posts
| ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 02 2017 01:46 Velr wrote: How do you actually get elite points? I put 0 thought in it and allways had man at the time my opponents did, safe for totally onesided stomps. It is a resource node, just like power. Normally they are in the center of the map and people fight over control of them. They build up passively too. You spend them up your ultimate power, which is also interesting because it is easier to get to tier 3 than to get 10 elite points in a 1v1. So maybe the wraith knight isn't the best choice for a 1v1 match. | ||
RolleMcKnolle
Germany1054 Posts
| ||
Coriolis
United States1152 Posts
On May 02 2017 03:52 RolleMcKnolle wrote: I hate that you can't see your resource income. There are so many stupid design decisions that are easily fixable, it is really hard to take in from a competetive standpoint. hover over the resource amount | ||
NKB
United Kingdom608 Posts
| ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 02 2017 03:52 RolleMcKnolle wrote: I hate that you can't see your resource income. There are so many stupid design decisions that are easily fixable, it is really hard to take in from a competetive standpoint. I hate the entire resource system and that man power is based on points captured/upgrades. Then you have three escalation phases and some other bullshits. Its like they layered 3 systems on top of each other and then forgot to trim any of them. | ||
Velr
Switzerland10416 Posts
feels kinda good that age old sc/bw and wc3 skills kinda translate and you can still crush newbs aaand got put in place by an eldar that knew his rts too :p... 1on1 is actually fun because it is positional. 2on2 and 3on3? which i played way more... is kinda shit. btw. love my stormboy elite.. just needs 2 points and screws up opponents so much that don't have an elitw. Sadly they are useless if it goes later | ||
Yoav
United States1874 Posts
On May 01 2017 21:51 -Archangel- wrote: Best RTS are easy to learn and hard to master. Or at least easy to start playing hard to master. I am still waiting for a hard to master RTS that is F2P like LoL, Dota2 or CSGO (well that one is 10$ but almost free) Pretty sure everybody agrees Brood War is the best RTS ever made and its hard for both. I've lost half the friends I've introduced SC2 to halfway through the very most elementary basics, and that has MBS etc. And I'm generally pretty good at getting people in to these things. | ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On May 02 2017 11:01 Yoav wrote: Show nested quote + On May 01 2017 21:51 -Archangel- wrote: Best RTS are easy to learn and hard to master. Or at least easy to start playing hard to master. I am still waiting for a hard to master RTS that is F2P like LoL, Dota2 or CSGO (well that one is 10$ but almost free) Pretty sure everybody agrees Brood War is the best RTS ever made and its hard for both. I've lost half the friends I've introduced SC2 to halfway through the very most elementary basics, and that has MBS etc. And I'm generally pretty good at getting people in to these things. If under everybody you count people only on TL. Outside of TL, BW is just another RTS and not very popular. | ||
superstartran
United States4013 Posts
On May 02 2017 19:33 -Archangel- wrote: Show nested quote + On May 02 2017 11:01 Yoav wrote: On May 01 2017 21:51 -Archangel- wrote: Best RTS are easy to learn and hard to master. Or at least easy to start playing hard to master. I am still waiting for a hard to master RTS that is F2P like LoL, Dota2 or CSGO (well that one is 10$ but almost free) Pretty sure everybody agrees Brood War is the best RTS ever made and its hard for both. I've lost half the friends I've introduced SC2 to halfway through the very most elementary basics, and that has MBS etc. And I'm generally pretty good at getting people in to these things. If under everybody you count people only on TL. Outside of TL, BW is just another RTS and not very popular. Even BW being the best RTS is arguable. Most competitive in Korea for sure, and very high quality. However I don't think it ever held the same global appeal as something like WC3 or SC2 did/do. Sure, it's popular among its niche audience, but it never really took off in the West like those two games did. | ||
Velr
Switzerland10416 Posts
I do not know a single person that still plays actual WC3, they either stopped or are now playing Dota or just footmen frenzy and stuff like this . | ||
KrOjah
United Kingdom68 Posts
On May 02 2017 19:33 -Archangel- wrote: Show nested quote + On May 02 2017 11:01 Yoav wrote: On May 01 2017 21:51 -Archangel- wrote: Best RTS are easy to learn and hard to master. Or at least easy to start playing hard to master. I am still waiting for a hard to master RTS that is F2P like LoL, Dota2 or CSGO (well that one is 10$ but almost free) Pretty sure everybody agrees Brood War is the best RTS ever made and its hard for both. I've lost half the friends I've introduced SC2 to halfway through the very most elementary basics, and that has MBS etc. And I'm generally pretty good at getting people in to these things. If under everybody you count people only on TL. Outside of TL, BW is just another RTS and not very popular. Well Koreans generally aswell, but yeah in the UK Wc3, AoE2 and a couple C&C games were more popular than Broodwar, at least the multiplayer aspect. | ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On May 02 2017 22:29 KrOjah wrote: Show nested quote + On May 02 2017 19:33 -Archangel- wrote: On May 02 2017 11:01 Yoav wrote: On May 01 2017 21:51 -Archangel- wrote: Best RTS are easy to learn and hard to master. Or at least easy to start playing hard to master. I am still waiting for a hard to master RTS that is F2P like LoL, Dota2 or CSGO (well that one is 10$ but almost free) Pretty sure everybody agrees Brood War is the best RTS ever made and its hard for both. I've lost half the friends I've introduced SC2 to halfway through the very most elementary basics, and that has MBS etc. And I'm generally pretty good at getting people in to these things. If under everybody you count people only on TL. Outside of TL, BW is just another RTS and not very popular. Well Koreans generally aswell, but yeah in the UK Wc3, AoE2 and a couple C&C games were more popular than Broodwar, at least the multiplayer aspect. Not just those. There a lot of players that play Total Annihilation type RTS, then there is a lot of people that play CoH/CoH2/DoW2 type RTS. Then there are also people that like slower and more realistic RTS like Wargame or recently released Steel Division. | ||
JimmyJRaynor
Canada15564 Posts
On May 02 2017 22:29 KrOjah wrote: Show nested quote + On May 02 2017 19:33 -Archangel- wrote: On May 02 2017 11:01 Yoav wrote: On May 01 2017 21:51 -Archangel- wrote: Best RTS are easy to learn and hard to master. Or at least easy to start playing hard to master. I am still waiting for a hard to master RTS that is F2P like LoL, Dota2 or CSGO (well that one is 10$ but almost free) Pretty sure everybody agrees Brood War is the best RTS ever made and its hard for both. I've lost half the friends I've introduced SC2 to halfway through the very most elementary basics, and that has MBS etc. And I'm generally pretty good at getting people in to these things. If under everybody you count people only on TL. Outside of TL, BW is just another RTS and not very popular. Well Koreans generally aswell, but yeah in the UK Wc3, AoE2 and a couple C&C games were more popular than Broodwar, at least the multiplayer aspect. RA2 is the C&C franchise's best long term success. RA2 sold 4 million units in 2 years. it has small cult-like community for multiplayer that is nowhere near as big as Brood War. i like the game...and i'm glad to see it has people still playing it.. it deserves it. but Brood War is far bigger with a much higher loyal following. guess who was the lead designer of RA2? | ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
@resource system: the more I play, the more I can see what they were going for. I somewhat like the manpower vs resource system, although it's not enough to enable comebacks. But on bigger maps it could allow the smaller supply player to stay competitive. Are escalation phases reached when both player tech up? I like 3v3 for the bigger maps mostly, teamplay and tactic plays a bigger role than clutch micro in these matches imo. 2/3 1v1 maps are too small for counterattacks. @RTS: Since RTS isn't well defined at all, I'm not sure how you decide which one is the best. Also depends on which part of the gameplay you actually put the focus on. Btw BW is basically nonexistent on LANs in Germany, at least where I live. | ||
KrOjah
United Kingdom68 Posts
On May 03 2017 00:13 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Show nested quote + On May 02 2017 22:29 KrOjah wrote: On May 02 2017 19:33 -Archangel- wrote: On May 02 2017 11:01 Yoav wrote: On May 01 2017 21:51 -Archangel- wrote: Best RTS are easy to learn and hard to master. Or at least easy to start playing hard to master. I am still waiting for a hard to master RTS that is F2P like LoL, Dota2 or CSGO (well that one is 10$ but almost free) Pretty sure everybody agrees Brood War is the best RTS ever made and its hard for both. I've lost half the friends I've introduced SC2 to halfway through the very most elementary basics, and that has MBS etc. And I'm generally pretty good at getting people in to these things. If under everybody you count people only on TL. Outside of TL, BW is just another RTS and not very popular. Well Koreans generally aswell, but yeah in the UK Wc3, AoE2 and a couple C&C games were more popular than Broodwar, at least the multiplayer aspect. RA2 is the C&C franchise's best long term success. RA2 sold 4 million units in 2 years. it has small cult-like community for multiplayer that is nowhere near as big as Brood War. i like the game...and i'm glad to see it has people still playing it.. it deserves it. but Brood War is far bigger with a much higher loyal following. guess who was the lead designer of RA2? No mate. I am talking about a decade+ ago in UK, and some other European countries I used to visit.. I didn't even know the servers were still open for a game like RA2 in recent years lol. Also If it wasn't for the Korean interest and KeSPA then Broodwar would have been about on the same level. Wc3 was always a lot more popular in particular here, both the competitive scene and custom maps. | ||
Velr
Switzerland10416 Posts
It was a very different environment once WC3 came out. | ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
@RTS-spread: If you take the times into account, BW was in a time when people had lower expectations and were willing to go the extra mile for a good game. Stuff like the SC worker macro and the mega balance patches later on would massively limit it's growth if it was released today. Wc3 was a lot more friendly to new players. | ||
ApBuLLet
United States604 Posts
I'm playing as Orks and I'm having some trouble against Space Marine players who get a lot of assault marines early with the Kill Team elite equipped with flamethrowers, then transition into a later game mech army with dreadnoughts and eventually predator tanks and whatnot. I find that the assault marines are so good vs early Ork armies that I have to play pretty passively and sit on one or maybe two resource points early game (depending on the map). Lately I've been getting 2 squads of boyz, then going directly for 2 lootas (skipping boyz hut) and a truck along with Stormboyz and Zapnoggin. I can make a timing push here that leads to a pretty equal fight that comes down to micro to determine the winner. But the SM player seems to have a pretty significant defender's advantage since I'm normally forced to push into a listening post to try to do any damage. I occasionally do enough damage here to get some map control and be able to expand a little and get my economy going, but other times I lose the fight and end up in an even worse position. This build seems to be pretty volatile and depends a lot on getting big hits with Zapnoggin's fist and Stormboyz kamikaze, which isn't always reliable. Any Ork players here that have had success against Space Marines? If so, care to share your thoughts on the matchup and what your general strategy is? | ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
I've read that rushing lootas and trucks is the right strat though, keep the asm bound in melee with boys and keep your lootas safe with truck micro. Commando is an option for stun mine next to your lootas. | ||
ZeromuS
Canada13372 Posts
Then they have two abilities with the doctrine to chase and its even harder to stay alive vs them. I play a lot of Eldar, and if I don't control my striking scorpions properly I can't win, seems to be the same issue for many others. The issue with Orks is I'm not sure if they really have an early game solution to the speed with which ASM spam comes out other than maybe doing some sort of rush? ASM is very power heavy early game so they have next to no units. If you can force them to invest in more scouts early game, that might help you out with buying time to trukks? The main thing I've seen about ASM is that if you can outmaneuver from range and do any AoE to land on them, they fall apart pretty quick. So hitting them when they use their mobility spells to engage with a suicide guy from the trukk should go pretty far :D | ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
Also trucks are a lot worse than against Eldar bc once power swords hits the SM can snipe the truck easily. Nobz do well, but they are basically a t2 unit and way too late. I'm not sure how boyz fare in a direct fight with scrap. Shootas with sraps fare okay, but scrap is a problem in the early game. The two real options are probably either rushing and trying to hit the barracks with the boyz before ASM appear (ASM rush plays 0 units pre-rax), or get a bunch of boyz fodder, a truck and some lootaz and use the truck to evacuate the lootaz once they jump them. And yes, a lot of people are expecting that power swords is gonna get a t2 or t3 requirement in the next balance patch. ASM opening is the dominant meta opening atm that every competitive build has to be able to deal with. | ||
Coriolis
United States1152 Posts
| ||
ZeromuS
Canada13372 Posts
On May 15 2017 11:47 Archeon wrote: I don't think the Eldar approach, baiting out the jumps and then punish with grenades or banshee-charges works for Orks. According to my (little) experience non-scrap boys get slaughtered by ASM. Without scrap their shootas also can't cc ASMs. Also trucks are a lot worse than against Eldar bc once power swords hits the SM can snipe the truck easily. Nobz do well, but they are basically a t2 unit and way too late. I'm not sure how boyz fare in a direct fight with scrap. Shootas with sraps fare okay, but scrap is a problem in the early game. The two real options are probably either rushing and trying to hit the barracks with the boyz before ASM appear (ASM rush plays 0 units pre-rax), or get a bunch of boyz fodder, a truck and some lootaz and use the truck to evacuate the lootaz once they jump them. And yes, a lot of people are expecting that power swords is gonna get a t2 or t3 requirement in the next balance patch. ASM opening is the dominant meta opening atm that every competitive build has to be able to deal with. Well I know that its not the same as playing eldar to do orks vs ASM I think the main issue with asm spam is just how much they melt buildings with their high mobility. So its really hard to spread out since they have tons of map control at that point. I don't think that the 2 EP ork elites can fight them well either unless they spam their suicide boy ability? Thats pretty strong defensively. And sure they can jump on trukks but if they do then you can punish them with your boyz who will either launch into their faces for a CC or they'll bleed models -- and reinforcing asm with true damage swords is quite pricey. The boyz probably need the stun on melee charge doctrine as well if you want to even stand a chance. And if you dont scrap up the boyz, you could scrap up the shootas for their stikk bombs which do quite a bit of damage. The biggest thing about ASM is their assault charge or whatever the doctrine the ven dread gives them. That thing melts T1 units. | ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
| ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
I dunno. I'll give it some more chances but my hopes are pretty low at this point. | ||
RolleMcKnolle
Germany1054 Posts
| ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
On August 28 2017 01:00 RolleMcKnolle wrote: In case you are feeling nostalgic, there is still a small but very active community around DoWpro. A mod aimed to improve competitive Gameplay and balance. In case you are interested you can just hop over to our Discord https://discordapp.com/invite/nN8Nxsx. Or just download the mod here http://www.moddb.com/mods/dowpro/downloads/dowpro-soulstorm-359-full-version with the newest update here http://www.moddb.com/mods/dowpro/downloads/dowpro-soulstorm-364-update I actually like DoW2 more than the original one. I still like to watch me some faction wars: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOwxs4qK99SMFadc1ewH5F_KsfIKakaOK | ||
deffscream
6 Posts
On August 28 2017 01:00 RolleMcKnolle wrote: In case you are feeling nostalgic, there is still a small but very active community around DoWpro. A mod aimed to improve competitive Gameplay and balance. In case you are interested you can just hop over to our Discord https://discordapp.com/invite/nN8Nxsx. Or just download the mod here http://www.moddb.com/mods/dowpro/downloads/dowpro-soulstorm-359-full-version with the newest update here http://www.moddb.com/mods/dowpro/downloads/dowpro-soulstorm-364-update DOW pro for serious Gameplay and Ultimate Apocalypse for Tabletop madness | ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
I gave this game another go (had to pretty much force myself to do so). This is simply not a DoW game at all. There are super long and boring periods of nothing happening in a game (just building/upgrading stuff) instead of constant tug-of-war and vying for map control with plenty of skirmishes in-between. Power core, WTF? Cover bubble instead of good old cover, WTF?! 2 (yes, that's TWO) armour types and 3 damage types? No more destructible terrain (which looks super weird when all of those huge units walk through the walls without destroying them). Micro is pretty much just for using special abilities now. Bullshit about bases being back (unless you count 5 buildings top as a real base). Huge armies being back is pretty much bullshit too since it's a byproduct of long periods of stagnation when you build tons of stuff which is there just to blob and be obliterated in seconds with elites without doing much most of the time (which leads to another period of stagnation). Unless you play it more like previous titles with more action, then you never have a lot of units because they're being recycled all the time and you can't build a real mass of them. Turrets feel super weird too, like some dumb stuff straight out of MOBA... Even customization is dumbed down and worthless. It blows real hard My time was wasted. I've been thoroughly disappointed with this title and feel betrayed by Relic now. I can only quote ArchWarhammer here: "Failure of apocalyptic proportions." | ||
Rococo
United States331 Posts
On May 02 2017 20:39 superstartran wrote: Show nested quote + On May 02 2017 19:33 -Archangel- wrote: On May 02 2017 11:01 Yoav wrote: On May 01 2017 21:51 -Archangel- wrote: Best RTS are easy to learn and hard to master. Or at least easy to start playing hard to master. I am still waiting for a hard to master RTS that is F2P like LoL, Dota2 or CSGO (well that one is 10$ but almost free) Pretty sure everybody agrees Brood War is the best RTS ever made and its hard for both. I've lost half the friends I've introduced SC2 to halfway through the very most elementary basics, and that has MBS etc. And I'm generally pretty good at getting people in to these things. If under everybody you count people only on TL. Outside of TL, BW is just another RTS and not very popular. Even BW being the best RTS is arguable. Most competitive in Korea for sure, and very high quality. However I don't think it ever held the same global appeal as something like WC3 or SC2 did/do. Sure, it's popular among its niche audience, but it never really took off in the West like those two games did. I feel like you're conflating success as an e-sport with general popularity. Starcraft never had much of an e-sports scene outside of Korea but we could hardly call The Sims niche for not being an e-sport. Even excluding Korean sales Starcraft is either the #2 or #3 best-selling RTS of all time and much more successful than Warcraft 3 was. RTS games in general aren't very popular anymore but saying that Starcraft never "took off in the West" like Warcraft 3 has no basis. | ||
JimmyJRaynor
Canada15564 Posts
the Game Director for Dawn of War 3 left Relic August 25th. | ||
cha0
Canada485 Posts
| ||
Latham
9507 Posts
| ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
Gorsameth
Netherlands20759 Posts
| ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
On September 01 2017 01:43 Gorsameth wrote: ah Space Marine, one of the few games to capture the feel of being a walking tank carrying around an rpg-machine gun and a chainsaw sword. Man, this game was boss. I can't really recall any other game right now that would make you feel so badass from the beginning to end (not even Saints Row). Also, I like 40k and my Steam is a testament to that... I also have every single DLC for those (the only one I regret is DoW3). Pity GW is going to extreme lengths to copyright everything, changing stuff, renaming things etc. Just so that they can sue everyone and don't have to concern themselves with people who actually buy their products... | ||
KrOjah
United Kingdom68 Posts
On August 31 2017 23:53 cha0 wrote: Thank god he won't be touching the new Age of Empires Agreed.. Relic needs a shuffle around and the Microsoft money for developing AoE4 should be able to secure some nice talent. | ||
Godwrath
Spain10091 Posts
| ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
On September 01 2017 08:42 Godwrath wrote: Is he the same Jay Wilson who was the game director of diablo 3? Did you mean: Another failure? | ||
JimmyJRaynor
Canada15564 Posts
https://www.pcgamesn.com/warhammer-40000-dawn-of-war-iii/dawn-of-war-3-abandoned | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
And seriously, RTS games need to learn that their maps need to be compelling play spaces. It is more important to have nuanced environments to play than to have these over-tooled units with 14 special abilities. | ||
Chris_Havoc
United States583 Posts
Makes me more than a bit bit worried about Relic's development of Age of Empires IV. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
I'm not really worried about Age of Empires IV as long as it doesn't try to be all things to all people. They can't make every old fan happy while also making a new, modern game. | ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
| ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
Velr
Switzerland10416 Posts
The maps just ranged from trash to barely passable and games played very similary. The maps weren't interesting and the shield generators just made games go way longer than they shoul... If i totally trash someone, let me trash him, but i often found myself just being bored to death with a giant advantage - luckily most people just left in these situations but if not... UGH.. 2-3 games like that in a row made me quit. Earlygame was extremly punishing (but fun if it turns out evenish)and lategame was just plain dumb. Oh.. And constantly gathering trash as Ork for every Unit was the worst mechanic ever. Larva injects or mules feel natural in comparison.. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
The rest I agree with. That game didn’t really know what it wanted to be. | ||
BEARDiaguz
Australia2362 Posts
They've got the AoE 4 contract so that might be interesting, though I fear it'll be windows 10 exclusive like AoE:DE is, because microsoft are cunts and don't like sharing. | ||
Yurie
11533 Posts
On February 09 2018 15:39 BEARDiaguz wrote: Good to see Relic aren't throwing good money after bad. DoW 3 was built on some pretty fucking shit ideas (or experimental, never been done ideas if we're being polite) and hopefully they'll learn from all this and make some good games instead. They've got the AoE 4 contract so that might be interesting, though I fear it'll be windows 10 exclusive like AoE:DE is, because microsoft are cunts and don't like sharing. Why is a Windows 10 exclusive a problem? Microsoft store exclusive might be problematic but most people game on Windows and any version except 10 is soon without support, forcing migration to it or a non Microsoft OS anyway. | ||
jpg06051992
United States580 Posts
| ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
On February 10 2018 01:47 jpg06051992 wrote: Played the game at my friends house, how did Relic manage to make a game so many years later that is so markedly inferior to it's predecessor? DOW2 was better then this game by a mile, their development team made some very questionable choices going forward. It's what happens when you try to satisfy too many people. They wanted to reach the DoW1 community with their basebuilding and army size, the Sc2/esports community with terrible damage, the moba community with their heroes and the DoW2 community with their resource system and multipronged harass. But the DoW1 community hates terrible damage and isn't very multiplayer-heavy, the dow2 community hates terrible damage, heroes and basebuilding, the Sc2 community hates the heroes and towers and the moba community hates the nonstop action, snowballs and ladder grind. That way they satisfy nobody. On February 09 2018 04:13 Plansix wrote: I didn’t say it was a problem. It said it was pointless and didn’t do anything of substance. But they spent a lot of time developing those buildings and animating them, only to have them do nothing worth remembering. The rest I agree with. That game didn’t really know what it wanted to be. I liked the base building. Utility structures and production facilities created strong points on the map. Contesting them going up felt important early on and I liked that. I don't really think production time was the major problem, outside of their mappool the game didn't feel rushed to me. I think it was more about basic game design, understanding that players need low action phases, that heroes while being a massive comeback factor can also be a massive frustration factor and that towers didn't add anything to the game because superior eco wins 99% of the games with the mappool they released. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
Manit0u
Poland17046 Posts
On February 09 2018 02:01 Plansix wrote: That is a bummer, but I can’t really blame them. DoW 2 survived off a strong single player, unique design and neat use of the Company of Heroes reinforcement system. But this is the 5 game they have made using a similar system and people are bored with it. And seriously, RTS games need to learn that their maps need to be compelling play spaces. It is more important to have nuanced environments to play than to have these over-tooled units with 14 special abilities. DoW 2 survived not because of strong single player but because of its multi player and ability to be modded. Hell, people are playing it all the time up to this day. DoW/CoH system doesn't get boring for its fans (it never did bore me and I'd love to see more games using that). DoW 2 looks great even today. Maps are really cool and there's nothing really wrong with it. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
Archeon
3235 Posts
I know 3 people who played DoW2 but none of them started playing PvP. And most positive comments I read about DoW2 outside of dedicated PvP pages like this one mention that the singleplayer for DoW2 was great. The majority of the European strategy community after all is a PvE community. | ||
| ||
World Team League
2024 Summer: Round 1 - Day 2
Elazer vs MaxPaxLIVE!
SKillous vs Spirit
Wayne vs Reynor
Krystianer vs ShoWTimE
Cham vs TriGGeR
[ Submit Event ] |
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Calm 36523 Dota 2hero 2194 Horang2 1644 Bisu 1137 BeSt 310 Light 256 Last 238 ZerO 223 Hyuk 192 Snow 151 [ Show more ] Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games Organizations
StarCraft 2 • StrangeGG 41 StarCraft: Brood War• Kozan • Poblha • Migwel • Laughngamez YouTube • LaughNgamez Trovo • IndyKCrew • intothetv • Gussbus • aXEnki League of Legends Other Games |
ESL Pro Tour
BSL
Zhanhun vs DragOn
Dewalt vs Sziky
CSO Cup
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
ESL Pro Tour
World Team League
ESL Pro Tour
BSL
Gypsy vs Bonyth
Mihu vs XiaoShuai
ESL Open Cup
[ Show More ] ESL Open Cup
ESL Open Cup
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Pro Tour
Online Event
|
|