What´s some good slow paced RTS? I like to spend my time inspecting the terrain and choosing the best position and curse of action rather than clickspamming my way to victory.
Also general RTS thread
>tfw you laid asleep last night mentally designing AoE IV and it's the best game ever
I can't be the only one with this level of autism
What innovations would /v/ like to see in RTS games?
In retrospect, after playing RA3 and CnC4 I enjoyed CnC3 and Kane's Wrath. I wasn't a fan of RA3 and I think its standalone expansion is the actual worst game in the series after the Facebook game Tib Alliances.
>RA3 and I think its standalone expansion is the actual worst game in the series
Yes it was basd and the units it introduced were ridiculously OP
The allies had that giant plane that had near the same range the big ships had, you could snipe any building without taking any risks, it was so stupid
I'm assuming you mean "massing units"
Uh...what exactly is wrong with that? And what is preventing you from scouting your opponent to PREVENT him from doing so? And how in the fuck are ALL OTHER RTS games not about "masification" when it's such an obvious fucking tactic to go for?
I'm really tired of this retarded claim. Idiots made the same claim for Total Annihilation and Supreme Commander, and it's really obvious that they're shitty at the game if they think that that's ALL the games are about. Your excuse is obvious, you only tried it and I'm assuming that means you didn't play it much. Simply massing units isn't going to win you a game against someone who's any good, especially if they're scouting (which they should be doing).
>I have nothing to say
See, I can do that extremely lazy bullshit too, faggot. How about actually countering my argument with a well thought out response? Oh wait, I'm on 4chan.
Nigga YOU have no idea what you're talking about. "All about masification"? Yeah, as if massing a huge army is really that easy against a good player. Yep, that's aaaallll you have to do to win games in PA, just keep building any unit you want and make lots of them. They're not gonna scout and counter you at all!
Why would you need to scout someone amasing units? It should be fairly obvious since he would have no map pressence
and then how would scouting counter it
You are basically spouting buzzwords
Try Empire Earth
You shall know the feeling of slow paced when you can only use 6 villagers on a resource node at the same time, can only mine 15 resources around every 30 seconds, and each resource node is worth 300000 of that particular resource.
>clickspamming way to victory
Yeah, sorry but you're going to get assblasted by anyone who has optimized builds in any RTS, you might as well play turn based strat games.
AoEII is my GOAT for RTS though, its not as speed based as starcraft
>9 days left
Can't wait to play this masterpiece again online.
>mfw all those epochs in Empire Earth
I love that shit.
You can build moneymaking buildings so you never run out of cash.
Also the challenges of Zero Hour are good fun. Then install the Shockwave mod for the improved challenges and new generals
>ensemble is dead
>westwood is dead
>blizzard has fallen
>relic is dead
Total War isn't what you want but it has usfel shit like
>having time to enjoy a battle without worrying about managing villagers and building another mud hut
>penalties for withdrawing troops that are in melee combat
Sorry, fuckface, I'm not the only person who thinks you're retarded. Just admit you're making a stupid criticism about PA already.
Cmon guys, Stronghold is fucking GOAT
>having time to enjoy a battle without worrying about managing villagers and building another mud hut
but the combination of building and fighting are what makes RTS games fun
maybe not having to do it exactly when you're fighting but doing both in the same gameworld
>play GB:CC again
What the fuck is happening with the colors ?
Why is the sea red on my minimap ?
Why is the desert tile full of green dots ?
>dat atmosphere in Myth games
Fuck I want more of that. Even Myth 3, which shifted the perspective and was overall an inferior sequel, had more of that sweet "humanity is fucked, there is no way out" atmosphere.
what the fuck did you do to my beautiful game
you need a patch, AoE2 and all the other old direct x games made back in the early 2000s/ late 1990s' had this issue. There's also a widescreen patch as well, and while were on the subject voobly and games ranger both let you play multiplayer
>C&C3 has no redeeming quality
>RA3 is okay gameplay wise
How can you say that of C&C3, I'd agree with you if you were talking about C&C4. (and even that one is still playable, it just shouldn't have been named "C&C4")
How exactly is RA3 better than C&C3, the only thing that is drastically different in RA3 is the way you build/train in each factions.
I feel like PC strategy games rely too much on doing stuff hiding from your opponent. Structure, army and technology building in the fog of war.
Many strategy board games let you know at all moments what your opponent has deployed and it doesn't make them shallow.
Fog of war by default serves two purposes:
- add guess work. Give that PC RTS rely mostly on rock-paper-scissor mechanics, that means taking chances and hope for the best, or spread the unit specialization to make a jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none army
- add action work to decrease the guess work through micro scouting
All in all, I don't think it is beneficial to strategy. I think games where by default you could see everything and where you could occasionally occlude information from your opponents with some sort of fog would be much interesting.
>mention that shitty game
have some agent orange while you wait
RTS games have fog of war to represent the real-life fact that your troops cannot see through mountains or 500 miles away. Strategy board games have no fog of war because they are board games where it's impossible to hide what your opponent is doing. A RTS game without fog of war would be just plain stupid because they're already trying to be little simulations with one or two concessions for the sake of playability.
God tier shit here. Too bad ut runs like complete shit on modern systems and no HD releases were made. The sequel is... Interesting. Love the era-dependent resources, special units and the more realistic units and mechs, but the building limit, heroes, shitty mid-2000's lighting effects and small as fuck territories sucked ass. The third one is just a blind, lazy cash in on a niche title that, big fucking shocker, didn't work.
EE2 had some good ideas, but just like EE3 it was overall a smaller game compared to the original with not enough to replace all that was removed. I still prefer EE1.
My fucking nigga. Bought it off gog and that game is still fucking fun as hell.
I fucking love PA. I really don't get why it get's shit on so much but I haven't really played TA or SUPCOM that much. Even with Uber being twats PA is still blows every current RTS out of the water, specially fucking SC2.
>Not the best RON game.
>play rise of nations
>expect every faction to be the same minus some unique units
>turns out that every faction has some bonuses that heavily impact the gameplay and unique visuals
they don't make them like that no more.
No, I don't want to remember.
Well, RoL is a bit different than RoN, but certainly not worse.
I really liked the setting + asymmetrical Races with different ressource/options available.
Also, for it's time it looked very good graphically, as everything (at least the Vinci und Cuotl) was friggin filled with detail
If you like slow pace then Sins of a Solar Empire might be for you.
>tfw play a nonstop game against a friend for 10 hours straight before taking a break for a day and continuing for another 8 before finally winning
How is it not slow paced? everything takes 50 hours to die and once defenses are up the whole game turns into an stalement unless you are advent and have the siege frigates that hit several buildings at once?
If you play vasari you don't even have siege frigates, you have to turtle until you can get several superweapons
Algerian Archers masterrace. Not hitting for days but firing 200 arrows per minute
Also, 200 AA produced by each Barracks per minute.
Without peace-time, those fuckers steam-rolled your base (as they're cheap as hell and can attack buildings)
I tried Homeworld.
I damn waited after every level until I had mined down to the last piece of mineral, then built ships.
Somehow I can barely keep up with the enemy. A mission begins and it´s a fucking swarm.
I have never made it past meeting that one big ship that suddenly teleports in front of you at the beginning of a mission, gives you some new technology and disappears when enemies come close.
Then suddenly four or five of those fucking big combat ships teleport around my mothership and start destroying everything, while at the same time an endless swarm of little ships comes from the enemy base.
I´ve tried everything. Massing up on small quick ships to distract and shit. All dead.
Massing up on the heaviest I got. All dead.
Massing up the ships of the track beams and focusing on capturing enemy ships. Still all dead.
Mixing all of the above and savescumming heavily, placing those ships that can capture enemies with tractor beams exactly behind where the strong enemies will teleport so I can catch them right as they show up and prevent them to cause any damage while the small ones distract the enemy swarm before I can send in reinforcements. All dead.
What am I missing? I feel like it doesn´t matter what I try, I just can´t win because numbers.
Any tips? Am I missing something basic?
what bugs me most in Empire Earth is lack of speed adjustements (digging that iron takes ages...), and very limited camera height.
Other than that idea of making Age of Empires clone that goes from stone age to mecha age was brilliant
You're missing that the game tries to give you a "challenge" by increasing the opposition to match your current fleet. If you maximize what you've got entering each level you will get your ass handed to you.
If you want to win with a mega-fleet you'll need to be cheesy: leave salvage ships hanging around where those beam frigates appear. The non-buildable beam ships are insanely powerful and should be stolen at every opportunity.
Friendly reminder that RTT>RTS.
GIF related, a tipical RTT battle:
Player A set up a good defensive position, no enemy tank could get into a position to spot the AT gun before it was too late, he even left 2 soldiers in a cover nearby to serve as security in case enemy infantry got close, only things he might have done better is position the AT gun a little to the rear or in better concealed position.
Player B did everything wrong, he sent infantry running in the middle of the street, infantry should only move in short rushes from cover to cover, he also moved the tank forward without properly scouting that alley, he should have sent some infantry moving stealthily through the buildings to discover and flank any ambush.
The audience/players feels dumb because they can't understand what's going on and hate the game.
In an average RTS match, the winning player looked up the currently best build order or macro on the internet and was able to click orders at a faster rate than the losing player, the battle was already decided 5 minutes in, the last 45 minutes were just the 2 players going through the motions till the winning player massed a huge enough blob to rush the enemy base.
The audience/players don't really get what happened, but they are happy because they got to see a huge robot army and colourful explosions.
Definitely not. Still a great game if you have the patience to get in. Read the quick guide article on the wiki.
Didn´t know that. Then again, I was playing the first one. Don´t want to get with the second until I´m done with the first.
How do you do it, then? Destroy everything, then create it all again at the start of the next mission?
Apparently it wasn't very well received at release, but from time to time I enjoy blowing through a game of Star Wars Rebellion. It's pretty awesome being able blow up Rebel planets with a Death Star, or running around blowing shit up with super star destroyers
>dat feel when no one remembers Codename: Panzers
>you can literally do the same in RTSs
That is not true because that you can't focus on the battle because you have to babysit resource units and manage the base, also the combat mechanics of the average RTS don't lead well to complex engagements.
Well, that's the cheesiest method. You should still grab all the resources each level, but don't build up a mega-fleet. Don't be afraid to scrap old ships to build stuff that is more useful for your current scenario.
The game generally matches your fleet size for the slugfest missions, so it's going to come down to outmaneuvering the AI and having a composition that counters the AI fleet.
Some missions your fleet is completely meaningless; it's not always about having the most lasers pointing at the enemy.
Supreme Commander is pretty good. Not sure if it's "slow-paced", as time is an important factor in gameplay. There is definitely a learning curve, but after you learn the basics it can be a real comfy game.
And if you are wondering, most games are determined by strategy, not APM.
I remember this, it was pretty okay all things considered. Cutscenes were hilarious though.
Friendly reminder that this unit made C&C3 that much more awesome.
I feel you OP.
I loved RON, but hated the fact I had to clickspam by way up ages for better units.
Id rather take my time and build my empire. Ron would have been a perfect empire building game
Yeah, there are catapults, only they´re called onagers. Either one of the later versions (castle age or so) has flaming ammo, or you can give it to them with an uprade, and this alows them to destroy trees and clear a path if you force them to attack ground.
>There will never ever be an actual sequel to Rise of Nations
>pick up grey goo full price
>figure I might as well go for it, if nothing else, the money might show there's still interest in the genre
>the style is mostly pretty great, with heavy campaign elements and briefings
>the characters are all boring
>the setting is boring
>the units are all stupid looking
I tried really hard to have fun with it, and the maps are at least really pretty to look at
but I can't get invested in it at all, it feels like some kind of wannabe Avatar bullshit, with the poor aliens getting assfucked by humanity and the grey goo
could play past the 3rd or 4th level, so I don't know if it changes
fucking EA and blizzard and assfaggots shitting up the genre
Battle for the Middle-Earth 2
AoE2 (discovered it like two days ago)
That's about it, all other RTSs are shit
I was a master level SC2 player and my heart rate when meeting a player of equal skill was higher than I've ever experienced in my life. No physical activity has raised my heart rate to that level, not even being in fights against people who I new were dangerous and they outnumbered me.
Conquest is fun, big maps and challenge, Starcraft on space, but still fun.
man, I love/hate supcom
everything about it is great, I had a blast playing it
it always really, really bothered me though, that there literally were no deaths per game, except for when you kill the giant avatar robot thing of the other team's
it doesn't feel like a real war unless soldiers are willing to lay down their lives for your cause
robots just fighting robots is just a really evolved form of pretend
I just want a remake with fully updated 3D graphics at this point.
I want this for any good RTS game
>there might never be another game as on-topic and hilarious as C&C Generals was
I can't believe they managed to get suicide bombers and hijackers into the game
>the little portrait of the hijacker was some dude in a turban waving a box-cutter around
>China's big thing was hackers and hacking
>Generals predicted the Sony hacks and all that other hacking shit
Act of Aggression looks like it might come close, but it doesn't seem to have a true "terrorist" side
>Free AK47s for EVERYONE!
Eh, it's a spiritual sequel to Act of War so instead of terrorists they have a Militaires-Sans-Frontieres type international mercenary league using a mix of slavshit and euroshit.
>That is not true because that you can't focus on the battle because you have to babysit resource units and manage the base
>you can't focus on the battle because you have to do other things
You can't focus because you suck shit, sorry man. I kind of suck too, I'll admit, but that doesn't mean the more complex game genre is somehow worse, it's just harder to play well.
yeah that was my impression
I don't mind it if it's cool, and honestly the previews of building construction/resource gathering look great
I miss the simple charm and comedy of the C&C games, though I think that era is gone forever
my understanding is that it plays like a usual RTS
was just reading a RPS article about how each faction uses different vehicles to gather resources (trucks, choppers, etc.) and that AoA is meant to fill the gap left by C&C Generals 2
article (I don't feel like pastebin and it's RPS so whatever):
Haven't played an rts since booting this up on my 286.
Did I miss anything?
I started playing Company of Heroes
singleplayera few days ago and I'm playing it really slowly, inspecting terrain, doing preparatory mortar shelling before attacking, building sandbags and fortifying my positions.
Am I playing this game wrong?
I got a chance and pirated Company of Heroes, and I have to say I love it. Now before I go ahead and get it on steam. Which other definitive versions is worth getting? Do they all play relatively the same or what?
I have about 40 dollars im willing to use on a 3ds game. What should I get?
Red Alert 3 is GOAT. If anyone tells you its shit, it's because they are casuals and got hella rekt and then look to blame the aesthetics and the live action cutscenses. I have never seen anyone who haters RA3 give a valid reason as why that has anything to do with gameplay. Only real problem was the online infrastructure was shit.
>Mfw RTT killed RTS
>mfw /v/ doesn't know the difference
>mfw /v/ likes RTT more than RTS
>mfw /v/ whines about RTS being dead
>mfw /v/ killed RTS
nothing killed this rts
>Everytime WW1 is mentioned in any /v/ thread ever we get these two posts respectively
You fags are way too predictable
>more complex game genre
Complexity doesn't always translate into depth, having to follow a build order is just a chore that you must do while trying to play the game.
Name a RTS with complex Line of sight and stealth mechanics, cover system, damage model.
>having to follow a build order is just a chore that you must do while trying to play the game.
Nobody has to follow a build order you moron, it's just that in multiplayer games where you do not begin with intel on your enemy there exist certain optimal starting maneuvers which might as well be planned out in advance to maximize effectiveness, no matter if you're going for the rocket launcher in quake or going for a scout rush in AoE 2.
RTS tend to encourage blobbing, rigid build orders and stale gameplay because they don't have a combat system complex enough to reward good maneuvering, use of terrain and unit positioning.
I'll give you that one, but it is because it moved away from a classic RTS style to being more like a RTT.
that is a straight up RTT
>RTS tend to encourage blobbing, rigid build orders and stale gameplay because they don't have a combat system complex enough to reward good maneuvering, use of terrain and unit positioning.
this rts disagrees with you
War Wind had, among many really cool ideas, a combat system where terrain mattered. Shame it was buggy and clunky.
Starcraft encourages the usage of maneuvering, limited terrain feature and unit positioning though. Not on SupCom/TA or some kind of wargame rtt level, but more than most of the RTS out there. Certainly more than CoH1/2, Petroglyph games, GC1/2, AoE1/2/3 etc
Legit question, how does positioning influence the outcome? Doesn´t seem to be a game that adds any kind of bonus or whatever to a flanking like in Total War and stuff like that.
Also, better get SC or SC Forged Alliance?
>start playing SupCom for the first time
>on the 2nd (3rd?) UEF mission, the snow one
>building defensive fortifications in the large pass to the south east of spawn because the Cybran keep coming that way
>T2 PD, T2 AA, a good amount of T1 PD for smaller units, a labyrinth of walls, and overlapping shields
>cybran attack my defenses for the first time, their force is MUCH bigger than their previous attacks, and I'm giddy to see how my defenses work
>notice that my T2 PD isn't doing damge, nor are my T1 PD
>the shots are dissapearing half way to the oncoming units
>on closer inspection, I realize there's a hill there
>I soon learn about the cartographic map view
>I soon learn how every shot is actually a fully simulated particle, and only does damage if it actually hits an enemy
I lurk these threads from time to time but I wanted to ask is anyone up for playing some RTS games with each other?
I'm thinking maybe Dawn of War (Dark Crusade), Age of Empires 2, StarCraft Brood War, Warcraft 3 (or some custom games of it), Rome: Total War, or maybe a Command and Conquer game (I'm not sure how to get online to work since Westwood Online is gone, but we can try it with Hamachi.
AW FUK. First time seeing someone mention this game.
>dem vehicles and buildings
Adored this game. Still adore it, conceptually. Can't play it today without it crashing, though. Not that it holds up.
forged alliance with forged alliance forever
you can't hit enemies when obstructed by a hill or stuff. clever positioning let you reck your enemies while they can't hit you. and bonus for flanking and shit is not needed because killing the slow artillery is reward enough.
I expected some monkeylord walking all over you, but I guess better than nothing :^)
Does anyone still play Age of Empires III online here?
>thinking about buying supreme commander again, should i get 1 or 2? i heard 2 wasn't as good as 1
Supreme Commander 2 was a good game, but it's not a Supreme Commander game.
Also, does /v/ consider Sins of a Solar Empire a RTS game, a 4x, or a mix of both?
Well I wouldn't be a good 1v1 opponent anyway. There's actually people who still play Dark Crusade online, we can find some and maybe do a team match. I'm up for whatever, just chilling in my house alone with no work today browsing 4chan. As for whoever mentioned Supreme Commander, it looks pretty interesting, but I don't have it.
I think you misspelled Finn's revenge :^)
who's that? I just like the game and let's be honest: best rts out there.
you can get supcom for 2$
furthermore, if you buy a fa key you get regular supcom 4 free on steam
Go on fuccboi
And? Do you honesly consider AoE2 to use more positioning, terrain features and manouvering more than SC? SC is not so simple as many of people claim it to be. It's much more complex than the majority of mainstream RTS games, that barely have any backbone to sustain skirmish matches, let alone multiplayer leagues
As a rule of thumb, Gameranger is infinitely better than Hamachi for playing old games online.
The downside is that it´s not compatible with all games. There´s a list on the web with all the supported games, which are not few.
Also, I´ve played RoN with /v/. It was quite fun.
Can't blame them. SC is played at a level that is far beyond any other games that people who are ignorant about it will simply assume that clicking fast means not using any strategies.
It's kinda like EE mixed with Civ. It's relatively basic, but can get kinda chaotic near the end
It's not really about the fame, it's about the current multiplayer leagues. It's okay to have an opinion on game on friendly skirmish, but that's rarely how people actually play the game. That's why early CnC games are shitty: majority of the maches are winnable by tank rushes
They do, it's called "2+ monkeylords"
If the UEF can build the Mavor, they've already won and are just running the victory lap
If the Aeon can build the Paragon, they've already won and just want to re-create Independence Day
If the Cybran can build 2 monkeylords in a still decidable game, they've pretty much scrapped the enemies plans entirely
Early Blizz maps weren't like that. It was the iCCup which standardized and balanced the map structure around near perfect mirroring. In fact SC1 wasn't balanced at all for nearly 2-3 years after the release
>What's the gimmick with RoN? It just looks like AoE3 with shit graphics
you dont know shit.
first of all, it goes from stone age to multra modern. which is really nice.
and second, the gameplay is super well thought out, super balanced, you can tell they reallly tested out to see the gameplay is fun...
unlike Empire earth in which they just started adding more and more shit, and in the end its super unbalanced, some units are totally useless and some are totally OP, then the end result looks super silly
>got childhood trauma from Empire Earth because the computer always wrecked my shit
>time to face my old demons
>three types of boats, all look the same and attack the same
>rock paper scissors system, the order is briefly indicated at the beginning then you have to remember it
>if the enemy has 5 boats the whole battle consists of boats chasing each other
And this is why Age of mythology is the superior game
I think cathis is just castrated in faf. however, building monkeylords is cheap as fuck. only - 150 mass and 45k health. that's not so much and can be achieved in early t3 stage.
>AoE3 and CoH do not have maneuvering, unit positioning, and terrain advantages
You should namedrop less titles next time, so that it becomes less obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about, especially to people who actually play video games.
>thinking WW1 was all trenches
Eastern Front had Blitzkrieg before it became a thing, with light cavalry rekting so hard, hussars with traditional lances made it back to counter them.
>can't stop thinking about your dream RTS
>can't stop feeling depressed knowing it doesn't exist
But, what difference does it make to charge against a moving army than to wait behind a mountain to surprise then from a flank if the units don´t get caught off guard or whatever? They´ll just shot the same way they´d shoot if you were in the front.
I guess there is something very basic here that I´m missing, but I really can´t grasp it. Probably explains why am I shit at this genre.
Your opinions is stupid, games are abstractions built with numbers, damage bonus to flanking or ambushing units for example can represent the advantadge of such maneuvers well depending on how it is integrated into the game.
It's because you don't know how to war.
In SupCom, all units have weapons traverse rates, turning rates, speed, etc..., and every projectile is a fully simulated particle.
AA takes time to turn to attack a new squadron, tanks take time to acquire a new target, artillery takes time to turn, and so forth
Distracting an enemy in a mountain pass with a smaller force while you sneak around means you can get the first shot off when you engage. especially in a game where once you get past T1, most units die in 1-3 hits by stuff at their level or above.
Plus, in combat that's already started, most units (and their players) will have reformed their armies with AA/Arty in the back, and direct fire units and shields in the front. Flanking around allows you to gimp their long range support and AA without retribution, as it takes time for the front line units to disengage and and re-engage the new force.
Remember, this is a game where the smallest maps worth playing are 10km by 10km, the scale is incredibly immense, and simply repositioning a dozen tanks along a front tanks takes 12 seconds for them to move and to turn and face the new enemy, unlike in Starcraft or Dawn of War where torque apparently doesn't exist, and units can turn at 300 RPM.
Same. Did a couple placement games to get master, and after the last placement i had to lay down on the couch with super high heart rate for the next 24 hours. I love the game, but the adrenaline is preventing me from playing
i was afraid some super idiot wont get the super obvious point. but you super proofed i was super right.
(still no opination on the super important amtter i enlightened you wiht,and youll probably insist on being inferior
Ah, ok. Yeah, then I get it. I´m relatively good at Cossacks.
I thought SC was more like Starcraft, where units just don´t give a fuck whether you´re in the front or behind.
Sounds pretty nice. I assume from your previous message that the multiplayer is still populated?
You don't need raw numbers to represent a bonus when you can, you know, actually design the game so that simply positioning better is it's own reward.
You don't need +10% attack when attacking from behind when attacking from behind already confers strategic advantages, the simplest of those being that AoE is less effective, and the enemy can't fight on both fronts at the same time (unless they're able to turn at 1,000 RpM like in starshit)
Plus economy is also immensely important. Units will flow from the factory to the gutter steadily in the end game, but if you manage to disable just a few Mextractors you could screw his build cycles royally. Likewise, it pays to invest in a strong, defensible economy.
In games where attacks aren't just visual confirmations that your units are shooting, hiding behind a small ridge or firing downhill automatically confers benefits without having to fudge numbers.
Stop playing shit, casual games.
>tfw no medieval AoE game of your dreams with more realistic but still AoE-based mechanics
i'm talking like building a wedge of wall in front of stretches of wall so that cannons, which fire in a straight line, cannot directly fire on your important wall and the damage is reduced because the hits are perpendicular to the wall
i'm talking fire physics which spreads over ground and wooden buildings
i'm talking every form of siege engine devised and put into the game, from onagers to scorpions to trebuchets to small cannons to siege towers to ladders to great bombards to chinese rockets to mantlets to rams to fire siphons to primitive anti-troop grenades to petards to underminers
i'm talking non-existent pop caps and complex formations and AI
i'm talking day/night cycles and weather effects
i'm talking http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_fortification everything here being in game with their own applications
So much Starcraft hate in this thread from people who don't know shit. If you think clicking faster means you're gonna win, then you just shouldn't talk.
Like it or not, SC2 is the only thing keeping this dead genre relevant in any way.
>Does it work for multiplayer nicely, or better stick with good old Gold Edition?
RoN used gamespy for MP, up to you to decide if you want to use steam or find a simple LAN program and play it with friends.
I know. I mean whether it causes any kind of problem. Wouldn´t be the first time a Steam release of an old game fucks up all kind of things, starting with the multiplayer. Maybe Extended is not compatible with Gold for multiplayer or some shit like that.
The discussions are completely empty, so no info there.
example: ambush system in old Blitzkrieg.
You can set up unit in ambush mode, which means it will aim at detected enemy, but won't fire untill spotted. After spotted it will fire almost instantly, while ambushed unit needs to stop and aquire target.
Flank shots are great advantage because tanks have weaker side armor (rather expected), and ambushed units are often dead before they manage to reverse, or even turn turrets.
All this works, simply because units die so fast, they may as well not have health bars. If you make mistake, you lose units before you have time to react.
That remains the best fucking install process of all time. I sat through everything on my piece of shit computer, always on the edge of my seat for the next loading screen. Shit felt real.
>dat fuckin' intro movie, holy shit
Are there any rts games that have the posession mechanic from dungeon keeper, so you can take first person control of a unit?
Starcraft seems like the most competitive RTS out there, with undoubtedly the highest install base. I'm looking to get into SC2, but it seems pretty daunting.
How long would it take for a beginner like me to get okay at the game enough to have actual matches? Also, APM =/= spam clicking.
Isn't the whole "spam clicking" methodology to keep your APM high at a constant rate through the entire game so you can micro effectively once real shit goes down?
Also, WH40k Dawn of War II is pretty fun. Dead though.
I can't get on with coh exactly for those reasons though. It's some lame bastardization of realism under a horrible dice rolling game with a pretty interface. I'm not saying it needs to go full men of war, because even that has fairly good penetration mechanics, just there's nothing to do with the stress an armour plate would take, so if something can't penetrate a vehicle, it never will and won't cause wear on the armour.
But i agree with you otherwise. but it's more in the supcom direction with projectiles being simulated and then hitting somewhere weak/hard on a target, being able to spoof radar etc. Go too far and how do you explain how your base is pooping out a tank a second, nanomachines seem to been a boring answer these days.
Once you learn the basics, you're good.
Dont forget there are other players just like you who have absolutely no clue what they're doing, and you'll be matched against them when you join a game as a new player.
>Go too far and how do you explain how your base is pooping out a tank a second
SupCom is set in a post-scarcity society with nearly loss less mass-energy conversion (and nano machines). That's why super-lategame bases in SupCom are nothing more than a line of factories and massive sprawling networks of shields, reactors, and mass converters.
wouldn't crappy live action cutscenes be cheaper than some CGI bullshit?
you could hire some interns from an acting college, slap together some Ghostbusters/Aliens type of sci-fi gear or whatever and have at it
it sucks that studios these days don't have the imagination to turn random pieces of plastic into cool stage effects