The future of RTS games - Page 49

On May 30 2014 23:26 Falling wrote:

That's a shame that you don't have the map. No-one seems to anymore

But, I also kinda wonder what was your time period of playing. Because 2009-2014 on iccup, it would seem to me that ums are in the minority and it has always been super easy to get a 1v1 game running at my level. It's only in this last year that the server population has gone down that certain times of day are more difficult.

Never saw Aeon in that time. I would have pegged BGH and Fastest Possible as the easy games to get started with a significant number of people.

On May 30 2014 22:40 CYFAWS wrote:
imma fix this. working on a fucking huge project that will allow for casuals to play quite effectively with <30 apm, while pros can easily micromanage for greater efficiency, and it seems to be working quite well, without the bw vs sc2 issue: bws clunky controls forces more interesting dynamics and higher apm. it's also quite possible it will work for casual play on tablets. it also has a melee mode which is more sc2esque and a campaign mode which is somewhat of a mix between sc2 and huge slow turnbased strategy games. imagine sc2 with 50k pop, where you dont need to micromanage your units and buildings unless you really want to. space civilization war sim. gonna fuck the gaming world up and put RTS back where it belongs, with its boots on every other genre's face.

On May 31 2014 00:39 DoubleReed wrote:
I don't think most people knew about iccup. Or at least I didn't until like 2005 or something.

On May 31 2014 00:39 DoubleReed wrote:
I don't think most people knew about iccup. Or at least I didn't until like 2005 or something.

On May 30 2014 23:47 Thieving Magpie wrote:


I played in 2000-2006

BGH, fastest, comp stomps, day at school, and even Risk, Diplomancy, LOTR, etc... We're all more popular than aeon I strife. And yet aeon was still easier to start than a 1v1 fight on LT.

On May 31 2014 01:49 Mindcrime wrote:


I played in the same time period and had zero problems finding 1v1s even in public games.

On May 31 2014 02:48 Falling wrote:
I find it doubtful about the primacy of Aeon simply due to accessibility after the fact. It's very easy to find variants on Fastest, BGH, I can easily find Diplomacy maps, and I have a Risk map on my computer as well as several rpg's. I'm not sure how something that popular disappeared off of all the BW ums databases.

If anything, Thieving's experience suggests that the future of RTS's ought to focus their multiplayer menu around casual, custom maps. Make a great game that plays well competitively 1v1, easy auto-matching, ranked ladder, but put custom games front and centre with a strong system that shows open games looking for more players. But not necessarily that mobas dominated bw back in the day. Custom maps dominated, but that's the strength of an RTS system- the creativity of ums map makers. It's basically like having your own mod community which keeps the game fresh long after it was released.

On May 31 2014 01:33 Falling wrote:

Did iccup even exist back then? I thought there were some other servers that people played on.

On May 31 2014 03:30 Strela wrote:

You could also try some of the many arcade games that in sc2?

On May 31 2014 03:33 Thieving Magpie wrote:


3 different races, with 3 different matchups, with each matchup having multiple different ways to play it optimally. Then there's cheesing, testing new builds, inventing new timings, etc...

An RTS is only as boring as you make it.

On May 31 2014 03:37 Excludos wrote:


No, its boring. Yeah theres a couple of different things you can do, but mostly it comes down to practicing certain builds and how to execute them. Sometimes you get great games which is back and fourth, goes into lategame, and ends up as a game of the minds and skills. But for the most part its a grind.

In dota, you'll end up playing a lot of games before you loop around to a game thats exactly alike as another oen you played. This due to the enormous size of the heropool and the even bigger amount of ways to combine them. No one plays "one hero" like you play one race in sc2. Jumping from one race to the next is really difficult if you've gotten somewhat decent at the game. Jumping from one hero to another is the norm in dota.

edit: Just to make sure you don't think I'm shitting on sc2 "just cause" I'm a mindless dota fanboy or something, I really want a good rts game that succeeds. But it needs something different than the now stagnant 3 race formula, or the even worse "1 race with different models and textures" that every other rts seems to have. Once I'm done with my exams I'm going to sit down and make an rts prototypegame myself. I'll probably fail, badly. But maybe I'll stumble upon some interesting ideas at least.

On May 31 2014 04:50 Thieving Magpie wrote:


I do greatly agree with you on this. I agree that despite there being a LOT of openings and midgames--the late game kind of ends up being the same. The midgame is always a slugfest or a turtle fest (just with different units, but the strats the same).

I had suggested earlier the idea of a kind of talent tree to allow you to differentiate your version of each race. Its a bit much to have as many races as a MOBA (especially when each race usually has 15-20 units with about 5-10 of them having unique spells) so trying the mass number of races is too much--but maybe something like a talent tree or a specialization branch (akin to Age of Mythology with the different major Gods with each major God in charge of 6 minor gods each with their own tech, units, and nuance)

Other variations if this idea is incomplete tech trees. Such as having to make the choice between only making Tanks or only making Thors, only making immortals or only making Colossus. It would allow for more overlap of roles and it would also force overall buffs to each unit as you'll only be able to access 1/2-2/3 of the unit choices per game allowing each match to play strangely differently from each other.

But yes, I do agree that we need more ways to make the races feel more, flexible, to the current crop of gamers.

On May 31 2014 03:37 Excludos wrote:


No, its boring. Yeah theres a couple of different things you can do, but mostly it comes down to practicing certain builds and how to execute them. Sometimes you get great games which is back and fourth, goes into lategame, and ends up as a game of the minds and skills. But for the most part its a grind.

In dota, you'll end up playing a lot of games before you loop around to a game thats exactly alike as another oen you played. This due to the enormous size of the heropool and the even bigger amount of ways to combine them. No one plays "one hero" like you play one race in sc2. Jumping from one race to the next is really difficult if you've gotten somewhat decent at the game. Jumping from one hero to another is the norm in dota.

edit: Just to make sure you don't think I'm shitting on sc2 "just cause" I'm a mindless dota fanboy or something, I really want a good rts game that succeeds. But it needs something different than the now stagnant 3 race formula, or the even worse "1 race with different models and textures" that every other rts seems to have. Once I'm done with my exams I'm going to sit down and make an rts prototypegame myself. I'll probably fail, badly. But maybe I'll stumble upon some interesting ideas at least.