| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Garrl
Scotland1975 Posts
So I've been playing this a bit since it went on early access today - although it's a bit rough around the edges, it has a lot of potential. It's an RTS with a focus on 2v2/coop, *heavily* inspired by WC3 (hero unit that levels, upkeep, creeping, etc). Anyone else interested? | ||
|
Amarok
Australia2003 Posts
| ||
|
_Spartak_
Turkey442 Posts
I have played around 100 games during beta and have been enjoying it a lot. It is rough around the edges but the core mechanics are enjoyable. Definitely something every fan of Blizzard type RTS games should keep an eye on. What are the gameplay/design components that give it a "focus on 2v2"? One overt mechanic is the role system. At the start of each game, both players pick a role (tank, damage or support). Each role provides bonuses to certain units. For example, a player who picks tank will have slightly stronger melee units. You can further increase this role buff 3 more times through upgrades. This system means you have to pick complimentary roles with your teammate to have a strong unit composition. Other than that, since the game is designed exclusively for 2v2 (you can technically do 1v1 matches in custom games but matchmaking is only for 2v2), all design and balance decisions are made for a good 2v2 experience. Map design, heroes, rate of resource gathering etc. all work in 2v2 and would have to all change to make 1v1 viable. | ||
|
Bacillus
Finland2026 Posts
I guess RTS games are a bit different kind of beast than most genres in terms of scalability and all that though. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7111 Posts
| ||
|
_Spartak_
Turkey442 Posts
https://www.twitch.tv/wardiii/ | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26341 Posts
| ||
|
Slydie
1931 Posts
| ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7111 Posts
On November 10 2019 23:49 Slydie wrote: The graphics look like they are from 2008... But props for making the concept happen! RTS is the last genre where I would complain about graphics TBH. And honestly, in pretty much every somewhat competitive game I play I optimize graphics to the best settings for competition, meaning most stuff is disabled or very low anyway... I don't want visual clutter and don't see what's going on because of that | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26341 Posts
On November 11 2019 19:54 Harris1st wrote: RTS is the last genre where I would complain about graphics TBH. And honestly, in pretty much every somewhat competitive game I play I optimize graphics to the best settings for competition, meaning most stuff is disabled or very low anyway... I don't want visual clutter and don't see what's going on because of that Yeah, SC2 is one of the few games that my ancient hodgepodge of a rig can run at max settings and I still play it with most of the settings pretty low. Maybe I’m just old and don’t play as many games these days anyway, as graphics got more and more pseudo-realistic I got worse and worse at figuring out what the hell is going on. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7111 Posts
On November 10 2019 01:59 _Spartak_ wrote: Wardiii is hosting a tournament with some SC2 players if anyone is interested to see how the game plays: https://www.twitch.tv/wardiii/ Thanks for that. Will look into the vods when I'm home today  | ||
|
blunderfulguy
United States1415 Posts
Since I started seeing people play it, I've wondered why only SC2 players seem to be playing and not War3 players with how similar it is to the latter. Sure, SC2 is more popular overall, but I feel like the target audience isn't/shouldn't be the SC2 crowd unless they're going after the casual and co-op SC2 audience. Watching a couple of games during the beta, there was a lot missing and I got bored very quickly and wanted to get into a new RTS like I always do, I just couldn't get into it though. Now, watching a minute of the full game, it already looks a lot better overall which is great to see. Going for a 2v2-focused multiplayer with the roles seems like an odd decision to me, and matchmaking for 2v2 only seems like a flatout bad decision for a new RTS (maybe I'm just a little burned from Dropzone and other small team/co-op RTS/tactics games that died way too quickly, idk). A lot of it still feels like "a big mod for War3 with some extra gimmicks tacked on" to me, I hate to say. I hope the campaign is decent, but from what I've seen so far, it again reminds me of War3 and some Dota 2 custom maps from years ago in its gameplay, and of Dota 2 short films in its cutscenes. I was hoping to see some interesting, unique spins on the classic RTS campaign, taking notes from other RTS and building off other Daedalic games like Shadow Tactics (which I think wasn't actually made by them, only published) and Silence, or adding cool twists like what Iratus did for Darkest Dungeon clones. So far, I'm not seeing a whole lot of that. It's only $20, which seems like a good price for what you get (to me, an extravagant War3/Dota 2 custom campaign and multiplayer maps). Other than regular RTS patching and map updates, I don't know what they plan on doing down the road but they seem to have bigger plans than just that (but probably still very reasonable for that team). If the 2v2 thing works out for them, hopefully they can do something like add new co-op content or new heroes. If it doesn't work out, I hope it's still successful enough that a really small team and the community can update it and keep it moving forward together, maybe rework 1v1 content and matchmaking and ladder and whatnot. And get some War3 people (modders, casual fans, casters, and hardcore/pro players) to get in on everything, maybe it's just me but that feels like a big miss. Now that the full game is out and more people are getting more time with it, casted games should (fingers crossed) be more interesting and (hopefully) the multiplayer will be easier to get into for all types of players. + Show Spoiler + I sincerely hope this doesn't die in a week like every other RTS that has come out in idek how many years. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26341 Posts
On November 11 2019 23:38 blunderfulguy wrote: My sleep deprived impressions, for whatever they're worth: Since I started seeing people play it, I've wondered why only SC2 players seem to be playing and not War3 players with how similar it is to the latter. Sure, SC2 is more popular overall, but I feel like the target audience isn't/shouldn't be the SC2 crowd unless they're going after the casual and co-op SC2 audience. Watching a couple of games during the beta, there was a lot missing and I got bored very quickly and wanted to get into a new RTS like I always do, I just couldn't get into it though. Now, watching a minute of the full game, it already looks a lot better overall which is great to see. Going for a 2v2-focused multiplayer with the roles seems like an odd decision to me, and matchmaking for 2v2 only seems like a flatout bad decision for a new RTS (maybe I'm just a little burned from Dropzone and other small team/co-op RTS/tactics games that died way too quickly, idk). A lot of it still feels like "a big mod for War3 with some extra gimmicks tacked on" to me, I hate to say. I hope the campaign is decent, but from what I've seen so far, it again reminds me of War3 and some Dota 2 custom maps from years ago in its gameplay, and of Dota 2 short films in its cutscenes. I was hoping to see some interesting, unique spins on the classic RTS campaign, taking notes from other RTS and building off other Daedalic games like Shadow Tactics (which I think wasn't actually made by them, only published) and Silence, or adding cool twists like what Iratus did for Darkest Dungeon clones. So far, I'm not seeing a whole lot of that. It's only $20, which seems like a good price for what you get (to me, an extravagant War3/Dota 2 custom campaign and multiplayer maps). Other than regular RTS patching and map updates, I don't know what they plan on doing down the road but they seem to have bigger plans than just that (but probably still very reasonable for that team). If the 2v2 thing works out for them, hopefully they can do something like add new co-op content or new heroes. If it doesn't work out, I hope it's still successful enough that a really small team and the community can update it and keep it moving forward together, maybe rework 1v1 content and matchmaking and ladder and whatnot. And get some War3 people (modders, casual fans, casters, and hardcore/pro players) to get in on everything, maybe it's just me but that feels like a big miss. Now that the full game is out and more people are getting more time with it, casted games should (fingers crossed) be more interesting and (hopefully) the multiplayer will be easier to get into for all types of players. + Show Spoiler + I sincerely hope this doesn't die in a week like every other RTS that has come out in idek how many years. Lack of 1v1 is crazy if you ask me. Entirely building the game’s balance and gimmick around 2v2 is a cool idea though. Even if the game’s main mode is 2v2, you have to have it IMO, especially in this genre. A lot of modern RTS players are holdouts from the golden age of RTS games, skews a bit older and many older gamers have more things occupying their time. I posted this in my StarCraft group for local players here and a couple of fellows expressed some interest in getting it potentially, but I know that those people do not have the same work schedule as me so the chances of us playing simultaneously will be slim. In my days when I sucked at WC3 due to lacking mechanical knowledge etc, I’d still queue 1v1s just to kill downtime when my friends weren’t yet online | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7111 Posts
1v1 just puts a lot of stress on you and most people don't want that. At least not for a casual experience | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17691 Posts
On November 13 2019 22:59 Harris1st wrote: Dunno. It's pretty modern to go for a team experience. Just watch all the shooters with main game balanced for 3v3 (Apex) or 5v5 (OW) 1v1 just puts a lot of stress on you and most people don't want that. At least not for a casual experience Any team game puts more stress on you if you're not playing as a cohesive team though. If you're good, you'll rage if paired with a noob. If noob, you'll rage about being raged at. 2v2 was my favorite mode in WC3 so I'll give this a try. Right now it feels a bit like a more casual version of WC3, which might not be the worst thing as I don't intend to play it competitively in any way shape or form. It doesn't look half bad, I just can't stand the unit shadows and some things like health bars, menus and ability effects could definitely use more polish. Will finish the campaign and see from there if I'm interested in taking it to the ladder. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7111 Posts
On November 15 2019 07:59 Manit0u wrote: Any team game puts more stress on you if you're not playing as a cohesive team though. If you're good, you'll rage if paired with a noob. If noob, you'll rage about being raged at. 2v2 was my favorite mode in WC3 so I'll give this a try. Right now it feels a bit like a more casual version of WC3, which might not be the worst thing as I don't intend to play it competitively in any way shape or form. It doesn't look half bad, I just can't stand the unit shadows and some things like health bars, menus and ability effects could definitely use more polish. Will finish the campaign and see from there if I'm interested in taking it to the ladder. Hmm.. difficult actually. What I meant was there is no "ladder anxiety" If you look at MOBA's and solo Q. After a game you immediately requeue because you always have the mindset of you were the better player in the last game and your team was trash. In 1v1 you can blame balance or some BS strategies but deep down you always know it's your own fault. From personal experience I can say if I play 2 hours of 1v1 in Starcraft I am physically and mentally exhausted, but I can play MOBA's for hours and hours. Some of that probably comes from Starcraft beeing a really taxing game but I would guess a lot is because of the different mindset | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26341 Posts
On November 15 2019 19:39 Harris1st wrote: Hmm.. difficult actually. What I meant was there is no "ladder anxiety" If you look at MOBA's and solo Q. After a game you immediately requeue because you always have the mindset of you were the better player in the last game and your team was trash. In 1v1 you can blame balance or some BS strategies but deep down you always know it's your own fault. From personal experience I can say if I play 2 hours of 1v1 in Starcraft I am physically and mentally exhausted, but I can play MOBA's for hours and hours. Some of that probably comes from Starcraft beeing a really taxing game but I would guess a lot is because of the different mindset Different strokes for different folks, I personally don’t play any team games because I find solo queuing too irritating and am out of sync schedule wise with a lot of my friends. If it’s not people being spectacularly unhelpful, terrible, abusive or just a lack of team coordination I find it draining playing team games. 1v1 games I don’t have to worry about anything but me, can play whenever and don’t have to bug friends or try to sync schedules and can just get on with it. Just based on gaming trends I think I’m in the minority on this and in other regards (such as achievements), where I think most are stupid and prefer to just play games with my own rules and challenges I come up with myself. In WC3 I did prefer 2v2 with my friend, equally I sucked at Blizz RTS then compared to post SC2, so I would like to play an even more 2v2 focused game similar to WC3 for sure. I’d just like the option for 1v1 queueing just to practice/kill downtime when friends aren’t online. | ||
|
Bacillus
Finland2026 Posts
On November 15 2019 20:50 Wombat_NI wrote: Different strokes for different folks, I personally don’t play any team games because I find solo queuing too irritating and am out of sync schedule wise with a lot of my friends. If it’s not people being spectacularly unhelpful, terrible, abusive or just a lack of team coordination I find it draining playing team games. 1v1 games I don’t have to worry about anything but me, can play whenever and don’t have to bug friends or try to sync schedules and can just get on with it. Just based on gaming trends I think I’m in the minority on this and in other regards (such as achievements), where I think most are stupid and prefer to just play games with my own rules and challenges I come up with myself. In WC3 I did prefer 2v2 with my friend, equally I sucked at Blizz RTS then compared to post SC2, so I would like to play an even more 2v2 focused game similar to WC3 for sure. I’d just like the option for 1v1 queueing just to practice/kill downtime when friends aren’t online. Yeah, I'm quite similar on these things. I find team games more stressful in terms of responsibility and all that. I'd absolutely love to have an RTS that gives good 2v2 or 3v3 experience when I'm playing with a few chosen friends, but soloqueuing into team games is usually not pleasant at all. That being said, I think a good matchmaking system can alleviate a lot of the issues and maybe even the 2 player team cultivates better team culture than bigger teams. The thing I really want to avoid is being locked into a 50-minute game with people who don't speak any of my languages or start raging at first setback. A quick 10 minute teamup with an english speaking adult can be lots of fun even in random matchmaking. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17691 Posts
You can still play p2p with lobbies and such but all matchmaking, leaderboards and stats are gone. There will be no more development done for the game either (they even dropped work on improved pathfinding that they were going to introduce). Really sad. I thought this game had potential and needed maybe another year of dev time after launch to iron out all the issues and give it necessary polish to make it actually really good. | ||
|
tec27
United States3702 Posts
On February 11 2020 04:39 Manit0u wrote: Posting here in case people have missed the update. The team is basically abandoning this game since it hasn't sold as well as they were hoping for and they simply can't sustain it as a small studio. You can still play p2p with lobbies and such but all matchmaking, leaderboards and stats are gone. There will be no more development done for the game either (they even dropped work on improved pathfinding that they were going to introduce). Really sad. I thought this game had potential and needed maybe another year of dev time after launch to iron out all the issues and give it necessary polish to make it actually really good. Yeah, I bought it to support them initially but I really have no idea what they were thinking, I guess they were just trying a hail mary by releasing it early access? I played a couple skirmishes in it and was like "I'll wait for the pathing update they talked about, since it seems pretty janky now." Then they just... never released any significant update and decided the game had failed. Pretty absurd. The only thing I can really figure, from having seen the state of the game and what kind of bugs/problems they were encountering, is that their studio (despite being like 25+ people large) doesn't really have a lot of experienced programmers and most of the game was built using Unreal Engine built-ins and such, so when they ended up encountering problems that would require writing real code (e.g. pathfinding that wasn't just what Unreal Engine provided), they really had no recourse to actually solve the issues. Pretty dumb to invest 2 years into something to give it up this way, sigh. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7111 Posts
Shame really. Another RTS hope dead. Another developer dead. 3 month into early access abandoning the game? Seems like a strange choice. I read the concept and ideas in the game are pretty good, but very unfinished and a lot of people waited for it to be more polished. | ||
|
tec27
United States3702 Posts
On February 11 2020 15:11 Harris1st wrote: Wow totally missed that. Shame really. Another RTS hope dead. Another developer dead. 3 month into early access abandoning the game? Seems like a strange choice. I read the concept and ideas in the game are pretty good, but very unfinished and a lot of people waited for it to be more polished. 3 months is actually even longer than it was before it was really abandoned. In December they announced they were thinking about the future direction of the game and its development and would have more info in early January. They then delayed giving that announcement for quite a while (and seemingly didn't have anyone really working on it during that time) before announcing that it was effectively canceled. So really they were in early access for maybe 3-4 weeks at most, heh | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
The PondCast
WardiTV Team League
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
CranKy Ducklings
RSL Revival
WardiTV Team League
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
BSL
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
