No RTS Thread

...

RIP Bullfrog

Dafuq you want another supreme commander for? Look at how 2 turned out. Do you actually think that they will somehow out-do FA? The game is just at its apex. Stop dreaming and keep playing the current gems.

Suppcom 3 is plannetary annihilation
They copied so much it's hard to not acknowledge it. And it also sucks horrendously.

Wargaming.net owns GPG now, and the studio is entirely capable of making another Supreme Commander, they just don't.

I am genuinely curious as to what the fuck is going on? Did the developers lose their touch? Or did they just stopped giving a fuck and wanted money? Or is it the case that they can never out-do their earlier works?

Kill yourself nigger.

Well PA was a kikescammer game that backers paid 90$ to initially play.
Can't tell about other modern titles.

At least older titles still have active communities.

I've been playing a lot of heptacraft lately. It's a starcraft 2 mod that tries to be more like brood wars design. There are seven factions
Starting base has more minerals and most teams have a defensive ability to prevent cheesing, though it won't stop well-controlled harass or early pressure. For example, Dominion can activate a temporary planetary fortress on their Command Center.

There's a discord with some active users and players of all skill levels, and the occasional tournament.

Was there ever a setting more ideal for an RTS game than Vietnam?

GOOD. Supcom 2 was worse than fa and every fucking time the third game in a trilogy is the most casual garbage of the lot.
Forged alliance forever is still getting updates and has a bunch of active players. Plus new game modes with heaps of new units being added for the new content to keep people interested.
Also i've put a copy up on the share thread that works with faf so if you haven't played it already and maybe want to do supcom with Holla Forums like we did AoE2 then go get it.

Also Cybran a shit but their commander a qt

What could have been.

...

tbf AoE3 wasnt a bad game, its just wasnt an AoE game
Its a case of developers trying new things on old franchises, it always backfires
Like take HoMM4 for example
At least it wasnt as bad as franchises that try switching Genres

I like to think Aoe 5 was starwars galactic battlegrounds

...

...

If anything they'd do Campaigns of all the wars that transpired during those times.

It's for the best user.

Also how would Holla Forums make an RTS game?

We would add City Shipments and export

with skeletons

There are no amount of skeletons too many

ignore the something awful
pls
i dont have the original
or a better resolution
I did but it got deleted
by my skeleton

Can't. Too many different ideas on what makes a good RTS. But if I had to be general

Why the resource population cap?
Doesn't it just prevent skellies from having massive armies?
Also why only two different resources?

I prefer historical RTS, but I don't like AoE 2, I've really tried to get into it, but it's just a snoozefest.

Pop cap is to encourage unit composition rather than just building a fuckoff hueg army and winning. That being said, if you want to take the TA/SupCom approach of 'basically no reasonable cap', then be my guest. Like I said, too many different opinions. Alternatively, it could just be an upgrade for necros to make basic skellies cost no food cap. There's lots of solutions.

Also, what is the GOAT RTS? Is it command and conquer 2? I've never played CnC before, should I start with CnC 1?

What is this, Heroes of Annihilated Empires?
Unlimited skelly is unlimited, the only thing that is better is a Man with a machine gun that can shoot across the map

Start with Red Alert 2, its the superior one of the franchise
I would say its their best game

Thanks.

Red Alert 2 is widely considered GOAT, but its really down to what you're after. C&C games are pretty good for their story, but for competitive games they're pretty poor. It's just a tank fight with little variation in the metagames.
Starcraft and Brood War are all round really good, from story to competitive to custom maps, and Warcraft is alright, just a lot lighter on RTS. If you want something that's easy to get into and fun to play, try Dawn of War, preferably Dark Crusade or Soulstorm.

photon man?
Infinite skellies have to be balanced around infinite skellies, so you'd either have to gimp the skellies, gimp the resource generation, have ways to counter it in each team or in some other way cap the potential to late game.

This came out and it seems pretty neat, has anyone played it?

What should I play if I want to play a really good singleplayer RTS? I only remember playing Stronghold and Swarm Assault, and liking Stronghold a lot.

Here is question that bothers me a lot. How many units do you want per faction ?
I will directly say that less than 4 factions doesn't please me at all.
But how many units ? Zerg in starcraft have 8-9 base units with at best +6 situational units. But you are stuck with a base of 10 units.
Some games can have too many, others like DoW can let you modify each squad, but how many do you want as a minimum ?

Especially when talking undead and skeletons most games tend to go for zombies rather than skellies. Heroes 3 had a good variety, 7 with an extra 7 versions. I know it's a TPS but it did undead well.
Warcraft went for ghouls, gargoyles, obsidian statues, bugs like fiends.
I think there is a huge variety of stuff you can put in an undead skeleton themed army that most games do not do.

Only some of the tabletop games like warmahordes seem to try to get them right and they still fuck it up at one point.
They start well with knights and ghosts.
And then some bullshit pops up like body horror grotesque shit or happy pirate ghosts, which I find incredibly stupid or s&m guys or technological abominations with bloated bellies and etc.
Like the necromancer just studied bio-engineering along with biology and biochemistry, pulled his sleeves up and made a frankenstein workshop, because learning magic alone is for pussies.

Last pic is what I am talking about.

How old/slow are you willing to play?
How much story do you want?
Do you want just skirmish battles, or peripheral gameplay features like a world map?
There's a fair few options

These always look cool, but then actually playing the thing proves either difficult or limiting.

Old doesn't bother me that much.
I don't mind story, especially if it's extra cheesy.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you talking about the Total War approach where there's more than just fights happening? Again I don't mind either approach. I will say I am looking for something similar to the Total War games but preferably with a bit more depth or at least better AI.

If ground only
3-4 combat units, 1 big unit, 2 casters, 1 artillery.
With flying/sea, bump up everything by 1 except for casters.

I'd play Dawn of War: Dark Crusade or Soulstorm (preferably Dark Crusade). You don't need vanilla Dawn of War or Winter Assault to play Dark Crusade. It's not quite as in depth as Total War, but its a good bridging gap. Soulstorm is an acceptable second choice. It has more units, but the gameplay just isn't quite as fulfilling.

Opinions on Red Alert 3? I know that it was not a good Re Alert game by any means and the humor is not exactly everyone's cup of tea, but I found the gameplay likeable enough, and I had some genuine fun with the Commander's Challenge in Uprising.

Alright.

I suppose it's safe to assume every C&C game is worth playing, right?

At 3 things get really messy.

If you didn't play Red Alert 2 and like goofy humour, you might be confused as to why the game isn't widely liked at first glance. Everything is there, Allies, Soviets, Japan all fighting. The game has mandatory co-op missions (all of them) which isn't as bad as it sounds as you're paired up with an AI you can tell to guard certain points and do a lot of leg work (or just do it all yourself). Or you can get a friend and actually have fun.
But under the surface the game starts to smell of EA. The 'goofy' humour is safe and relies on star power, the story sometimes just loses all sense and the gameplay is unpolished. The expansion was also a cash grab if not for the challenge mode.
I'd give it a try if you haven't played RA2 much.

All of them are worth a try, if only to see how they grew and changed over time.

In how far is the gameplay unpolished? I mean, there's some stuff like the Japanese not having anti-air infantry until Uprising (which had its own score of balance problems, but never was intended to be balanced, given that they intentionally left out the MP mode), but I felt there was attention to the detail - i.e., Bullfrogs not being able to unload their passengers by normal means after they have entered to counter the relatively powerful airdrop they provided.

No smart targeting for unit abilities, hope you wanted to fire all your cruiser missiles at once! Especially frustrating with the mode-switch units. Balance is all over the place and doesn't seem to get much better come uprising.
Some campaign missions just have general 'they didn't test this' to them. The Pearl Harbour mission is weirdly hard. In one mission I found that the map wouldn't open up until I did a certain thing, but the Soviet AI would continue trying to build the same power plant over and over, allowing me to just kill it endlessly and get full veterency on all my units.
The mission with the giant walker robot is pointlessly easy.
Actually, now that I think about it, these are all Empire levels, which was the worst campaign by far.

Challenge mode was pretty good though.

Imho the lack of smart targeting at least for cruiser missiles was intentional as they were hilarious powerful - you could turn an entire fleet into sitting ducks for a more than reasonable time. Being able to just a-move them would have made them overpowered, and they already were the strongest special ability in the game, imho.

Agree on the campaign mode though, especially the difficulty spikes. Pearl Harbor was one thing, and then there was another in that one mission where they turn Mount Rushmore into killer lazers, while the president's car is made of cardboard.

...

...

If I remember, the Mt. Rushmore mission had some sort of trick to easy-win it. I think it was super power reliant, so if you just managed to take that out, the base was a sitting duck with no air defense.

Well, you could snipe the powerplants with Vindicator bombers, but they had anti-air all over the place.

Still the easiest route given that the lasers would kill your ground units, but I wouldn't call it an easy trick, not with the timer in mind.

where rmthe are these reaction images from. they are all over the place

Some avatarfag. Fucking annoying as shit.

Coordinate with ally/build two airports. That's how I think I did it.

Artist's name is Shangguan Feiying, some Chinese fellow.

Can we talk about RTT games, as well?

no

Am I the only one who prefers Ruse over Wargame? I mean sure realistic Cold War warfare is fun, but not as fun as rusing the shit out of enemy players like a master ruseman and trap card activations.

The president's limo is rather sturdy, it's only when you freeze it that it becomes cardboard, and you pretty much have to freeze it to get a decent amount of time. And then he sends fighters to take out your cryo copters, which explode over the limo, fall down, and break it. Shame you don't get cryo legionnaires until the expansion.

Looks like something similar to Battlezone 1 and 2 and that played fine.

sage for double post.

well pa devs are a different group. as for supreme commander 2 the only one willing to publish their game demanded drastic change. for some reason the first supcom was considered a failure

All of them. There is absolutely nothing wrong with Flavor units.

Anyone wanna play galactic battlegrounds on voobly? we can play against the hard ai if you want. I know some folks don't like 1v1

Ruse is far superior

...

I'm hosting right naow
games called "Nerds" pass is: meme

well nobody wanted to play.
pm "Fiancheetos" on voobly if anyone sees this and wants to play

Not really, there were a few anons who mentioned in detail why RUSE was the superior game. Mainly cause it was one of these RTS games that were yes easy to get into but very hard to master and you could pull off some very nice tricks and mindfuckery if you knew how. In otherwords it was a Tzeentch Tier RTS game.

Is there a more useless unit in the entire game? Most units I can justify in some way, but this one seems utterly pointless.

V is Haah Waaw

This list is reading pretty much like every blizzard RTS in existence, with the exception of some of the last few points.

Nealy all of that is giving me cancer, like holy fuck m8. What said is pretty much true. That said the only thing that comes to mind as far as mechanics go is that I just want a bloody unit / faction that relies on harvesting and scavenging their own losses to replenish resources - mostly because I had an idea in mind one time for primitive mechs powered by very rudimentary crushers, pulleys, and the like alongside magic crystal bullshit that needed to be mopped up and constantly re-used due to its scarcity.

Also AOE2, whose up for a few games.

If you want an RTS with elements of scavenging, give Outforce a try. The primary resource is metal, harvested from metal fields. Most destroyed shit leaves behind wrecks which can also be recycled.

Oh, and you can build tug ships and tug buildings around. And explosions can push ships and buildings away, breaking up neat formations.

Noice, I'll give it a look later tonight, thanks m8.

I'd play some AoE after I'm done with my dinner so give me about 20 minutes if you're up for it.

Take yer' time m8

Oh I plan on it.

No problem friendo

What are some good conversion mods for games?

Okay, I'm good.

Rooms up mate, RTS Faggot Extravaganza as per usual.

Gee Gee m8. You really should of abused fishing, it's why I managed to get so far ahead. Those fucking fish are ridiculous for food, like 6 of them were more than enough to constantly keep me up.

Tell me if/when you'd want to play another

What's wrong with Blizzard RTS?
Also, what RTS are you referring to instead? Half of it applies to SupCom, Warlords Battlecry, Dawn of War, C&C.

The only RTS I know of that don't fit this mold is like, Rise of Nations and Age of Empires, where they have the same tech tree, but get custom units or can't access some aspects of it to make the differences, but many of them still have polarizing passives and their unique units give them a strong identity.

Their shit, mostly. Broodwars was always boring as shit and WC3, while charming, would of been a flash in the pan if not for the editor itself. Blizzard can't make RTS games worth a shit as far as I'm concerned but in their defense, I was spoiled by Red Alert 2.

Still up for another game m8? Just got some free time

I disagree? There was a lot of depth in the game even at the first unit of each team, the way they built structures and teched up etc. It also had a great and challenging campaign with a solid story.

Yeah I can go again.

Rooms up, same name as before mate. Also as a general idea Millitia are only good in the Dark Age to rush shit, you're better off making spear-men for anything else until you get an upgrade.

I think I was trying to get things out quick and didn't want to stop making dudes to upgrade.

Ye' just not worth it with Militia honestly, waste of Food if anything.

Guess that goes to show turtling gets you killed.

Without any Onigirs it sure does, those halbediers would of probably rekt my shit

I went for a couple of ballistae instead, I think it would have went far better had some damn trebuchets. Or more longbows.

Oh yeah, I have no idea why you didn't spam Longbow men. Those fuckers can wreck shit so ridiculously hard.

I only had the 1 castle, so that's all I had time to make.

So the developer of one of the most successful schoolchildren-milker MMOs is, in you opinion, capable of making a worthy successor to SupCom?

How is that MOO game they've apparently released, by the way?

Do you prefer your RTSs to have individual campaigns for each faction, or a single campaign where every faction is showcased and playable at times?

One for each or more. Something where you get to switch due to story reasons and/or get a mixed bunch in the same mission is welcome too.

Individual Campaigns for each faction, even better if you actually have a Map / Globe system incorporated as well instead of just cutscenes and whatnot.

Also AOE2 nigs, whose up for a few games.

Every faction. The campaign should teach you the basic skills and knowledge of each faction to prepare you for skirmish play.

Why don't games use that tab where you can command all your troops from anymore?

It was so comfy to use.

fuck off america

no one gives a shit that your politicans sacrificed an entire generation of men to become traumatized in a LARP wargame of theirs

your fault, because you still worship the military and your empire

I just started replaying SC1 and Brood War.

Same. Took about 20 minutes to beat every mission except Norad II defence. That shit bogged me down for 1:20. I mean, I've never been great and I'm tired, but damn. The Transplanar (wat? there are planes in SC setting?) Signal Transmitter bullshit can wait until tomorrow.

Do you mean in the first Terran campaign?

I'm keen, but absolutely shit. Might be a couple of hours before I can get back to a decent computer though.

No worries mate, take yer' time.

Yes.

All I had to do is just build 3-4 groups of marines, maybe switch 6-10 for firebats, and steamroll both Zerg bases. Would've taken 35-40 minutes, tops. But I had to build fucking wraiths and try to remember how to micro in this game. I hate micro so much.

I've seen only communists and socialists say that.
In any case, why are you upset? Are you perhaps a charlie?

A campaign like RoN's Conquer the World campaigns. Non-linear and able to be replayed from any faction. Cold War was the best one.

Since hotpockets killed my thread, is Rome 2 still shit? Should I even bother or should I just play Rome 1?

ask gsg you fucking faggot

No

leave him alone, asshole

RTS Died with SC2.

Poost RTS

I only ever got 1 friend to play tzar with and he bailed on me pretty fast. It's not mechanically great but it's pretty fun.

dubs of truth

SC2 was ridiculously irrelevant to the rts scene.
To the point where it lived in it's own little e-sports world.

that sounds about right

Whoever told you chucklefucks that loyalists can combat galactic colossi is a tool.
My colossus annihilated a group of 30 several games ago and leveled while at it.

They patched it alot since it came out but it's still inherently flawed because of the engine.
Just play Rome 1, or pirate 2 to see what you think.

Rome 1 is still superior, if you have an autistic need for better graphics attila/charlemagne is decent

Where the sprites at?

What game, if you don't mind me asking. And is it any fun?

UGHH

Nevermind. Knights of Honor. Will give it a look.

Wait, were ore mines in RA exhaustible in the first place? I feel like they are, just not 100% sure. Damn, it was at least 15 years since I've played the game.

Since FA or FAF GC were buffed so that now anything that's not an ACU (and possibly sACU), a structure or another experimental is going to get dragged into its hands and instagibbed.

After you mined out the initial resources they only regenerated slowly but infinitely around the nodes, mines, tiberium spores, whatever was applicable.

Post your dankest replay.

...

I don't have the one where the same guy spends minutes using cannon towers and an elf mage hero to kill someone's peasants.

Good to know I remember at least some things right. I was not sure if ore "drills" appeared in RA or RA2.

RA2 stuff, they are the same as the ore mines from RA in that they just spread ore resources directly around itself in small quantities over time.

...

No.

I bet most people once tried to git gud in starcraft by watching and emulating day9 and watching pro streams.

I even learned a custom created hotkey layout.
Keyboard tilted slightly and being positioned way to the left. Small finger on j, ring on i, middle on o, point finger on p, so I can use my thumb for ctrl and shift.

I think most people started that process, but like everything in life, only a minority ever finish what they started.

I think sc2 died off when people just didn't want to bother anymore gettin gud.

the house on the right reminds mof aoe2

Does anyone else still remember their most epic game? I wish I saved it.
With wc3 I trained frost wyrms. My entire base and every worker was killed.

So what did I do? I won the game with my remaining frost wyrms. That was so epic man.

I also in sc2 once rebuilt my entire base somewhere (involuntarily ofc) and still won barely.

Feels bad man.

Eh, I think it will like what happened with fighting games where they died off for the most part circa the release of 3rd strike till SF 4. I think there just needs to a game that breaks it open again.

Black and White 2 should have had a map editor and a freeplay mode as well as multiplayer.

Or at least a functional AI.

did anyone playing black and white 2 ever lose? I tested it and I know for a fact it's not possible in the first viking mission, because the dude will never capture your first cit

I'm plsyinh through Divinity: Dragon Commander right now and loving it.

I brought it years ago but I had hardware problems, I brought a new laptop recently though and it runs just fine on that.

more important:

what decisions did you make and who is your waifu?

I haven't got to the waifu yet, but I'm really tempted to go for skelly waifu.

If the game was re released now, I would hope that they would have a THICC shortstack imp waifu.

Getting gud doesn't mean shit for RTS if the game isn't fun.
I can be on and off SC2 every few months and it just doesn't compare to broodwar.

I never played broodwar so I can't talk with you there.

I bet many people were annoyed by having to egg their hatcheries or equivalent of other races.

I think that and other things was what made sc2 less fun for noobs.

We used to spam hatcheries like crazy to bypass the slow larva spawn. Now if you expand fast you wouldn't even bother or get 1 extra.
They went warcraft 3 on the game design.
Dropship ? 2 active abilities as opposed to 0
Deadly psyonic storms ? Nah we need more deathballs so it just tickles
Casters are lategame and specific niche units ? Nah fuck that, here's some early shit.
Moving units with poor pathfinding efficiently ? Nah gimme the deathballs.
4 builder slow progression ?
FUCK YOU HERE ARE 12 BUILDERS! GO FAST OR LOSE
Moderate movement speed? Nah push it to the limit!

What you think made the game have more depth, instead encumbered the clear design of broodwar.
My friends who taught me competitive broodwar went into SC2 with HUGE expectations. And ended up dropping it within a few days.

Some units are like a joke. Have you seen the movement speed of swarm hosts ? They got me to gold with braindead builds.
A guy tried to chase me with ultralisks and I kited him for 2 swarm host spawns across the map to my base and around my base until the ultras died. The thing is ridiculous.
The rest was spawning swarm from safe distance away from below a ramp.

This game is another animal completely. But do not for a moment think that extra abilities on units make you hardcore or something. That shit in particular scared away the core audience of broodwar.

doesn't supreme commander have special pathfinding where if you set 2 giant groups of units to collide, they just walk right through in fromation?

so that means it's good? :D

It was not good for the older players. It was good for you newer players.

Excuse me, I played Warcraft 3 since forever.

The starcraft crowd was never really fond of the warcraft crowd.

Is it wrong to have a fetish about getting a starcraft fanatic to suck me off?

I want them to have my fully erect penis in their mouth and push them down into my pelvis.

Well yes. Even not being a starcraft fanatic I can tell homosexuality is for low-lives.

I never used male pronouns.

Looks like your inner homosexuality is interpreting statements for you. You are a gay.

Pretty sure you're the guy that made

no

Right.

youtube.com/watch?v=52gBkzu3Wh8

I actually disliked changes made in BW. I still prefer the original.

Medics not only allowed for bioballs, but they are also a very early third caster that can both remove parasites, ensnare, plague and possibly maelstrom (I usually played as Zerg so don't remember), and permanently blind any unit, something the other two factions can't reverse.

Dark Archons end up either useless or too powerful, although, to be fair, they are really high tech.

Lurkers are only good enough against Protoss, the other two can detect them too easily, especially Terrans.
While there is nothing inherently wrong with treating units as disposable and not expected to survive their first encounter if they deal enough damage, they rarely can. Yes, mineral drops, but Lurkers can't shoot up and Terrans can reveal them any time they like wherever they are. So, again, you only have realistic chances of inflicting enough damage on a Protoss.

Devourers are just useless.

To any anons who don't know I believe the reason SC2 killed the RTS scene was because of the always online garbage. Players experienced lag even in LAN parties just inches from each other because the game still had to communicate with Blizzard's servers. It was actually dropped temporarily from the e-sports scene. SC2 was a disaster from every angle.

On large maps where there are two main points of attack and heavy macro is ongoing lurkers become exceedingly useful. Just leaving a couple can intercept forces while your opponent is distracted elsewhere. That being said, why are lurkers good against the team with observers?

The instagib is what they're counting on right?
I mean its because loyalists have that EMP on death ability which makes them stunlock GCs
tbh I only play FA and not FAF
Basically the longer the GC isnt firing its Laser, the longer your troops are going to stay alive
Although you might want to micro a few to stand behind it if you can, GCs have god awful turning rates

There are more efficient things to do if your opponent is distracted.

Because getting Observers takes the most resources and second-most time among the factions. Only Zerg need slightly more time but then Overlords aren't cloaked and losing one is a much harsher hit (also supply + possibly transport).
Moreover, Zerg is going to get Spawning Pool and Lair anyway, they have many uses, while Protoss may not need anything from Robotics Facility.

Yeah, ideally you want to kite it while always staying outside its turret's turning arc, but in FAF (or maybe even base FA, don't remember) they've buffed its grabby hands targeting arc so much I'm not even sure it can't grab what's directly behind it.
The worst thing about FA(F) is how important veterancy became. Just having it in base SupCom was bad enough, but at least it required much more kills and gave much smaller bonuses. But now you can't even try to play smart in cases such as this, for example. Because even in base game you could just oversaturate it with cheap, fast throwaway units (ground scouts or even land air scouts in front of it) while using relatively high range of assault bots to your advantage. It wouldn't be instawin, of course, because an attentive player would just start targeting your bots manually, but you could try to occupy him on several other fronts and so on.

So, did anybody else like Brutal Legend? Even a little? I know it's console garbage by (((3.3 Man))), and the fire barons are stupidly overpowered, but the designs were cool, and the campaign was fun, even if it was cut short. If only the fire barons required a more upgraded stage.

I enjoyed it at the time but it really should have just been the Zelda clone everyone thought it was going to be, the RTS stuff was weak as hell. I don't remember what the fire barons were but I was a big fan of the low tier tainted coil units like the gimp chicks you could throw as exploding javelins and the pain boys.

I should really stop rewriting parts of sentences and instead just delete and write new ones.
What I meant to say is you already have at least one Overlord, and normally Zerg players will have many with least one at every even marginally important location, so detecting cloaked units is not a problem for Zerg either. However, Overlords are very much huntable and this is what every half-decent player is going to do and losing them is more painful than losing Observers.

I've seen Flash using them tvz. Brood War tvz.

Will Blizzard ever touch Warcraft IV? And if they ever do, will the fuck it up as bad as starcraft 2 and diablo 3, or do you perhaps think that making a Warcraft RTS is more up their alley?

I'm not saying Lurkers are unusable against Terran or Zerg. I'm saying they are only good against Protoss and otherwise might be okay as support for, say, a strategy relying on Hydralisks.

Worse.

It's not about what they can do but rather what they will do. There's no significant market for games like that anymore. The masses want LoL-style "strategy". It will be what Tiberium Twilight was to the C&C series.

There is a market. We're just waiting for a good game.

I wouldn't consider mainstream RTS an insignificant market, considering starcraft 2's millions of sales, but I certainly agree it's not as popular as AoS games. With Warcraft's name on it, I think they could guarantee quite a bit of sales.

I dread to think what the campaign is going to be like.

They are restricted to wow. Wow has kinda frozen warcraft. If you look at the most popular characters, they were all introduced from warcraft 3. The devs know and fully embraced this. That's why warlord of dreanor happened. That's why Guldan is still around. That's why Illidan is back, etc.

I am still salty about the Lich King not being properly finished off and not getting a cool end cinematic. Warcraft's 3 Illidan vs Arthas fight had the same visual quality as his death scene.

Btw can anyone tell me HOW THE FUCK Guldan is still alive and how Illidan ended up in a mana crystal?

Don't even bother trying to figure out what the fuck is happening with the lore in regards to WoW. I don't see Blizzard even attempting to try and integrate anything WoW established into Warcraft IV, either they'll just pick up where Warcraft 3 left off, or completely fuck off from those events and just establish new ones and never reference anything related to WoW ever again, probably by bringing in yet another race.

But if they tried to integrate WoW's shitstorm of a story, it would be both hilarious and horrifying in the same moment.

What game is this?

...

I want to believe you, but take a look at this here list:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_real-time_strategy_video_games
What I like the most is the table at the top listing how many RTS games total were released each year. Then we can go lower and, say, see what came out in roughly the last two years.
I'm not saying that the genre is dead or even dying (might be true, might be wrong), but it's on its way to becoming a niche genre. If it isn't already a niche genre. Just look how much attention RTS threads get on video game boards, for example. And what kinds of games are discussed most.

Eh, I don't see it. SC2 is pretty much its own thing at this point. It is both muh franchise and a whole separate ecosystem. It has own subset of RTS terminology, even (granted it expands the basic one, but still).
They would definitely get more sales because of the brand, but it still gives zero staying power. If WC4 happens and it is pretty much just a visual update of WC3, then majority of non-SC2 potential userbase will complain about resource management and too many units. If it goes even further towards the roots, even SC2 crowd won't like it.

Both are terrible.

If you pick off where warcraft 3 left it you are restriced to what happens in wow, more or less.

Only way to do that is to make the conflicts much smaller. So instead of the scourge and demon invasion threatening an entire continent …. which somehow was turned down to "It's just a regional conflict". I mean in frozen throne you still had demons and undead plaguing the old continent.

holy fuck, I just remember the first blood elf missions. UBER COMFY

Don't get me started on them. They were all supposed to leave outland, but apparently there are still normal high elves around. And for some reason they hate each other, instead of working together. Oh and most bloodelves still totally live in silvermoon, at least the healthy part of town.

Even if they don't directly reference wow, which is kinda impossible, because you really kinda have to.

You would have to argue against the popularity of released HD editions of games. The genre isn't dead and dying because of a lack of interest, its dead and dying because of a lack of quality. RTS covers so many facets of enjoyment from management, counter play, tactics and hell, even campaign stories. RTS as a genre doesn't mesh with modern game philosophy. You can't dumb it down and get the same fundamental experience, you can't brown/bloom/grit the artstyle because teams and colours need to be distinct.

By which I mean I can easily see user A getting user B to play, say, Dawn of War if user B likes SC1 already - and I deliberately picked two games that deviate from the tried-and-true formula popularised by C&C. But I can't see the same happening if user B likes SC2 and user A is trying to get him to play TibSun, muh dated visuals notwithstanding.

Oh no, I would not. Visual updates don't bring anything new to the table. It means stagnation. No development, no growth.
And the rest of your post just supports my argument - the genre is either on the brink of becoming niche, or is already there. Especially this:

Fire Barons were the Ironheade fast cavalry. As a level two unit, they were cheap and powerful enough that %80 of the time, rushing your stage to the first upgrade and zerging the opponent's stage with as many fire barons as you could muster was a pretty good strategy.

I had someone shit on me for calling Total War an RTS. Which just means real time strategy.

Total War is one of the most popular strategy series currently and it has been a big name for quite a while now.

I think we shouldn't be so hung up on the starcraft formula, where these games just NEED to have ressource collection, unit recruitment and battles all abstracted into the same map.

We should be more creative about these things.

Like Warcraft 3 for example.

Modern game philosophy is terrible and pandering! It's the developers who are failing to deliver a game worth buying, not a lack of interest.

They and their families need to eat too. Ideally we should get small groups of enthusiasts making games again, but without advertising campaigns they're doomed to remain in obscurity even if their games are free.

I wouldn't call Total War an RTS personally. The way you play an RTS is different to a Total War game. It's 'the same' in the way that an RPG is an adventure game. Similar experience, but different gameplay and appeals.

If they want to reach success, they should try to make a fun game instead of a competitive game. Love of a game creates a desire to compete, not the other way around. I mean look at Warcraft 3. On most levels it looks like a disaster for an RTS. Lot's of RNG, low unit count, hero focus, yet its still played in tournaments to this day. People passionate about games will play them. But if the games are murky, dull, sluggish and all round don't leave the player with a feeling of struggle and triumph then you won't get buyers.

its ok after all the patches. It has some fundamental flaws that could not be fixed but you might have a little fun at points.

Sure, but that's just because RTS has come to represent more than just real time strategy.
It has defined itself to specific tropes.

I mean it's kind of unfair toward total war imo.
Same with Dark Messiah back in the day. No one wanted to accept that it's an rpg or fps and jewed that game out of becoming a top game of a genre.

Damn, now I want to play a Total War, where you not only have gold as a ressource, but also food, population and other things

TW definetly has RTS elements in it. I really can't see a solid argument for it not being a full RTS actually.

just remember that RTS just means real time strategy

...

Except in most RTS, you have an economic and exploration side to it that is simply lacking in TW.
You do have an economy to fund your army but it's exterior to the RTS part, happening in the world map.

This places TW closer to RTT or GSG than RTS.

Are you guys the same people who try to bully Dark Messiah out of the RPG genre?

It deserves to be listed on metacritic under the RPG section, not the FPS section.
You are mean bullies, you know that?

So is battle for middle earth RTT as well?
Their unit scale is basically Total War on small and they also have a conquest mode which is basically total war (especially if you commit yourself to not bulding anything with the builders once on the actual battle map).

what if we just say that RTT is a subcategory of RTS?

Seriously, Counter Strike and ASSFAGGOTS have strategic elements. Grand Strategy have strategy. They can all be played in the real time. They're not all RTS. It's not literal, no genre is, because you don't actually roleplay in Final Fantasy 1, but its still defining of the RPG genre because of the playstyle of the game; customizing characters, managing inventory, utilizing stats.

Having played Sins of a Solar Empire, I noticed an interesting gameplay mechanic that I'd like to see replicated in RTS games, but I dunno how it would be apreciated by everyone else.

In SOSE, you have a pop cap for your ships and another for your capital ships, with the possibility of expanding both by spending resources.
Your capital ship is intended to spearhead and command your troops and you usually form a squad with it and whatever else you have.
There are a few odd ships that don't fit this like the diplomacy ones but usually you'll make Strike Forces that consist of a Capital Ship and some escort.

Now what I wonder if it would actually be fun to play as is this.
Instead of controlling every unit individually, you instead produce Commanders of different types that have an individual unit cap.
Then you pick whatever units you want to follow them and they are produced automatically in whatever base that is capable of producing them and the Commander is nearby.

Different Commanders would have different abilities and maybe even different types of units they can lead and everytime you select a Commander, you can use any and all abilities their units have.

So for instance, you'd have a Military Commander that can take with him a very large amount of forces and lead your main army, a Support Commander that can take a smaller amount of troops and would probably focus on Archers or Mages, and a Scout\Stealth Commander that could take a very small amount of troops with him but they'd be faster and sneakier than usual.

I feel as if this would solve much of the autistic macro usually associated with RTS and leave it mostly to the Strategy instead of how well you can execute it instead.
However, there is KOHAN and KOHAN 2, games that theorically fit the bill in almost every aspect but ultimately, I found them to be very boring.
A very simplistic economy and research tree as well as small armies and nothing to do during a battle made the game seem way too braindead and simple to play, even if there was some underlying major strategic elements there.

Oranges and Apples, Dark Messiah fits the RPG genre more than the FPS since you may even not shoot anything at all.
However, it still fits the FPS genre quite well so both labels can be applied to it.
Dark Messiah is indeed an FPS RPG.

Meanwhile, TW is a GSG game with RTT elements, never really an RTS. You can even start a quick battle from the menu and avoid all the GSG elements.

No. There's a focus on economy as well, even if it's just one resource and pop cap, there's building and bases and other classical elements that TW simply doesn't have.
Even their Conquest Mode only changes the initial conditions of how the RTS part is played, much like the GSG part of TW changes the initial troops in every battle, however, you can still produce troops, upgrades and buildings during the RTS part of BFME, while in TW you can't get produce more troops, only get reinforcements.

If you want to nitpick, TW is a GSG with RTT elements, while BFME is a RTS with 4X elements in the Conquest mode.

Okay, you are a retarded baiter.
Here is why:

No. Strategy =/= Strategy game

If you plan on how to speedrun a game and calculate which paths to take and which parts of the game to skip for example, does not make it a strategy game. Same with decision whether to rush A or B first.

Strategy in a dota clone related sense, just means the strategical layer of the game. As opposed to the tactical and micro related parts of the game. It's a relative and generic term in that aspect.

You discredit your whole argument with making that retarded comparison in the first place.
It's just like Conervatives and gay marriage, hur dur if we allow gays to get married, that means slippery slope and you want people to marry animals or inanimate objects.

Also nice job at not replying to what I said about BFME.

Then why is it only listed as an FPS on metacritic? Keep in mind that's not me saying that, but metacritic.

The unfair endresult is only that creativity gets punished and my favourite game does not get the recognition it deserves.

What about an FPS A-RPG? Can we fit the A in there as well? :^)

Truly one of a kind.

but you shouldn't be able to, it's basically cheating and makes the entire mode pointless, because you can win everything

But it does have that. It's only done on another layer. Total War has a tactical RTS/RTT layer and a strategic grand strategy layer.

If Grand Strategy is the most strategic of Strategy Games and RTT the most tactical, then what is the in the middle of those two?

Yes, RTS. Total War is the baby of Grand Strategy and RTT, which means it's an RTS. :^)

It's kinda weird to say that though.

Anyway in the end I am all for allowing games to use multiple directly applicable genre terms, as long as it doesn't get ridiculous, because I have seen a few weird examples on steam.

I want to see more games like Total War instead of games who just copy paste the old Starcraft formula. That's why I like Supreme Commander, Warcraft 3 and Cossacks.
Or Black and White 2 or Dungeon Keeper 2 as well.

These games unfortunetly don't get made anymore. We get Godus and War for the Overworld instead.

That reminds me, let me start a WFTO thread.

Don't kid yourself user. RTS was already dead by the time SC2 came along.

Is this autism or trolling?
For a start, you see that little corner thing to the bottom left of your posting box? You can expand that and see how fucking awful your post looks before you submit it so you can turn it into paragraphs like someone with an education.

Battle for Middle Earth contains the full gamut of resource gathering, base building, army management and strategic decision making. It's an RTS.
Meanwhile, in Total War, should you choose to, you can skip the entire tactical battle part of the game, which is by and far the core experience of a fucking RTS. And that's because in an RTS, a proper one, not your vague ass cherry-picking 'it's only RTS when I say so' literal interpretation of 'Real-Time Strategy', the gameplay mechanics of tactically controlling units are married perfectly and exactly to your unit production and resource acquisition. Mid-battle reinforcements cannot happen in a Total War game, and you cannot change your strategy once the battle has begun. You must wait until your tactical fight has ended by defeat of one of the sides and then try again. How this major impact on the experience of the gameplay slipped under your notice, I don't know, but I assume it has something to do with the massive obstruction in your skull that's pressing on your grey matter.

An RTS game is not an RTS game if you do not in some way react in real time to your opponents fucking strategy, and you do not do that in Total War games. You react tactically. Purely unit positioning. How do people not comprehend this basic principal?

Gee, I dunno. Maybe they can only put a single label per game? Or maybe because they are pleb tier? Or perhaps because despite the RPG elements, Dark Messiah still misses some that are considered crucial for the genre.

An RPG is something quite complex indeed as a term, there are many conventions associated with it and some of them, like greatly affecting the world around you, aren't really present in Dark Messiah except as an epilogue to the end.
Dark Messiah is also a very unique game with nearly no comparison or similar examples, it's quite hard to classify and most people woulf place it first in the FPS section because the RPG elements seem optional or something secondary.

This is the point where you should have stopped posting.
All the "strategy" of TW is on the GSG part of it that is turn based. Even Europa Universalis or Crusader Kings is more Real-Time than TW.
When you start a battle, either from the game or the menu, no RTS elements are present and the game becomes full RTT only.
And before that, if you're playing the campaign, you have a GSG game instead.
Please consider for a second that you're close to accept Endless Legend as an RTS game as well.

What the fuck? All 3 of those games are proper RTS ones with a real time economy to manage while controlling your army, they have nothing in common at all with Total War.

Besides the performance issues, what was wrong with that game? I greatly enjoyed it and considered it to be a really nice game.

Technically not true. I don't remenber if it was nearby armies or if you had too many units, but you can set an army for Reinforcements and after a while in the battle, they'll arrive on the edge of the map to reinforce yours.

However, it's something you decide before the battle even starts, so your point is correct.

Total War is an RTT, But RTTs are a sub-genre of RTS
Calling it an RTS isnt wrong, but it is frowned and looked down upon as their are better terms that can be used

Also Dark messiah is an ARPG, as most of the time its not about shooting and it fits RPG tropes more closely than FPSs
FPS and RPGs are too separate tropes, so unless you're really trying to specify a niche in gaming, your going to refer to the genre which is more correct. Referring to the one that is least related to the game is incorrect
also anyone who calls Dark messiah an FPS is a faggot

user please tell me about you opinion, i tried to buy it once but for some reason it didnt work because i lacked a CD key (i bought a physical copy and wasn't given one)
Which was weird as the people at the game store didnt have any either
Did anyone else have this problem?
Like did you have to put in a CD key for the GOG edition or something?

Anyway i returned it an asked about the CD key

Still was it a good game?

HERE WE GO

The more variety the better but most important of all is the ability to field 20k+ armies.

...

You're not the only one.

I even went through two pretty good campaigns centered around Burning Legion and Wraith of Lich-King. Just so I could understand the story more and how Kael'thas died and Sylvanas freed herself from the Lich King.

I pirated it because I'm a poorfag, bu legit wanted to give them my money.

It's a nice game ful of potential but some of it isn't really realized. It improves a lot in complexity over Dungeon Keeper 2 and has many more systems to learn and manage, like the Tavern, the rituals, the potions, the Creatures.
But some people dislike it graphically as it's not raw enough and it's also much easier with easy gold in most missions.
Personnaly I don't think that's valid criticism as the levels can still have their difficulty with other elements.

Pirate it first, give it a spin. If you like it, buy it.

This is a recipe for disaster. Take AI helpers in Dungeon Keeper, for example. Haven't tried them in a very long while, but I think similarly purposed helpers in Earth 2150 create more problems than they solve.
But the rest of what you are suggesting might be good.

Well, AI helpers usually have the problem that they make the units they think are usefull but don't take into account your particular needs or strategy.

But if you could customize a Squad and say for instance "this Commander is to lead 100 Infantry and 50 Archers", everytime he is near a base, that base will try to produce both Infantry and Archers until it hits 100/50 as requested and those units would automatically join that squad.

I had though about other mechanics like every base having a militia force that can't move out but defends it from attacks in case there's no army nearby and can be retrained for regular troops faster than usual.

Another cool thing this would allow is transports.
If you had trucks that can carry 25 units and you have 3 trucks on a squad of 75 troops, you could press a "Load Up" button on the squad to have everyone mount up and move at the speed of the trucks with a "Unload" button emptying the trucks and putting the units in formation.
Transport would then hang back and provide support if able.

Eh, but the actual gameplay was shit in that? First five or ten missions I played was just select all and attack move into enemy base. And then just wait for three minutes and you have won.

Same here, the RTS aspect of it was a bit poorly done

FUCKING GREENSKINS GET OFF MY LAWN

bump for best RTS

yfw THIS is RTS