|
OctaMurk posted:bring back world in conflict, the best pvp rts that ever was or will be Facts.
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 19:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:41 |
|
|
OctaMurk posted:bring back world in conflict, the best pvp rts that ever was or will be I loved it in the beta and then when I actually bought the game everyone was savage and I got worked. Dug Steel Division's multiplayer, actually, should have stuck with that longer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 19:59
|
|
|
Bring back Bungie's Myth series.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 20:00
|
|
|
OctaMurk posted:bring back world in conflict, the best pvp rts that ever was or will be Hell yes, War Crimes: the game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 20:06
|
|
|
OctaMurk posted:bring back world in conflict, the best pvp rts that ever was or will be Yeah for real do this. I guess you can kind of think of Eugen's stuff as like, the evolution of World in Conflict in a way. But I get owned by the Easy AI in Eugen games therefore they don't count.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 20:07
|
|
|
Deakul posted:How is this anyways? I have it but I was sort of put off by the number of different resources you had to manage for it being an RTS. I have dyscalculia(dyslexia but for numbers) And ressource management can be tricky for me in most RTS games. Thankfully the ressource managing in Cossacks is what i would call macro rather than micro. Mines and wood never run out, so once you got your industry set up, its only a question of keeping the mines topped up with upgrades and additional peasants, and it will chug along in the background while you focus on fighting!
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 20:15
|
|
|
DarkAvenger211 posted:With AOE4 I feel like the game just wants me to babysit my Town Center and smash a series of hotkeys every 20 seconds to make a villager, and maybe smash some more hotkeys to queue up more units. But what I actually want to do is smash some armies together and build some castle walls over vital points. I can do all of that, but my ADHD brain just drops stuff like forgetting to queue up villagers and now I'm behind on econ, or forgot to queue reinforcements so now I have nothing to fight this counter attack, etc. Rise of Nations has a neat system where you can toggle infinite queue on your buildings. All resources are also inexhaustible so you don't need to move your gatherers around as the game goes on. Far less busywork. Unfortunately the Steam edition did nothing to fix the netcode. I've never been able to complete a multiplayer game. Edit: OctaMurk posted:bring back world in conflict, the best pvp rts that ever was or will be https://www.gog.com/en/game/world_in_conflict_complete_edition 75% off as I post this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 20:16
|
|
|
DaysBefore posted:Yeah for real do this. I guess you can kind of think of Eugen's stuff as like, the evolution of World in Conflict in a way. But I get owned by the Easy AI in Eugen games therefore they don't count. Eugen's offerings (in my experience) have a severe lack of off-map support of the kind which in WiC let you napalm forests, drop biological shells on garrisoned apartment blocks, daisy cutter the artillery they left stationary, in short: Deakul posted:Hell yes, War Crimes: the game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 20:18
|
|
|
toasterwarrior posted:This may come off confrontational but I think the idea that "APM trumping good strategy is bad game design" is honestly laughable and reactionary AF. It really does feel to me like a lot of people are convinced they're better players than they actually are just because they know strats and counters and are only limited by their physical speed and ability. Execution of your ideas matter and should matter, and whatever sins a game has in that respect emerges less from bad gameplay and more from insufficient accommodation from the UI. There's this common thing of lower ranked players thinking, "I'm great at the knowledge and strategy, I just can't click fast enough" and it's basically never true. First off, the limiting factor on effective APM (real actions, not clickspam) tends to be how quickly you make decisions, not literally how fast your pointer finger can click a button on the mouse, or how fast your wrists are. Stronger players are better at keeping track of game state and making approximately correct decisions really fast, that's a huge part of why they're able to hit higher APM and have better mechanics. The APM, the clicks and keystrokes, are the end result of the decision making process, it's not some purely physical element divorced from the mental part of the game. I remember watching a friend cheese his way up the SC2 ladder, and seeing the reactions to scouting info get progressively stronger the higher he went. E.g. people in diamond would drop a bunker when they sniffed out a baneling bust, meanwhile people in mid-high masters were dropping three bunkers + a few other buildings for multiple layers of wall. For myself, when I'm stomping into a fellow protoss' natural with a 4gate all-in, it's very noticeable that the higher MMR players react both more quickly and more correctly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 20:53
|
|
|
OctaMurk posted:bring back
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 20:55
|
|
|
the worst part of playing age of empires is how the first 5-15 minutes is basically just single player but if you single player better than the other guy you get an advantage when the real pvp starts so you need to be really really good at build orders before you're allowed to compete, and executing build orders is incredibly dull
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 21:25
|
|
|
DarkAvenger211 posted:That being said, I much prefer the style of games where you can leave a lot of boring management stuff like keeping queues running in the background and auto producing your workers and armies and where queuing stuff up doesn't immediately take your resources like Supreme commander and many other games I saw mentioned earlier. I like focusing on commanding armies effectively and choosing good locations for new bases that will help with my overall grand strategy. Take early game in SC2 vs CoH1 for example. In SC2, "how greedy is your build" is a big decision with huge variety. Some players will make literally zero workers from the start, just going straight into 12 pool and sending lings over to attack, while other players will make very little other than workers for the first few minutes and will have to either defend with minimal army or hope their opponent doesn't exploit their weakness. These are radically different openings that cause the game to play out very differently. E.g. if someone's playing very greedy, that gives you both an opening and incentive to attack. Meanwhile, because CoH's economy exists out on the field as capturable points, "make more guys" and "get more economy" are essentially the same thing. You can't sacrifice army to get a stronger economy, you need to immediately produce lots of guys in order to get any economy. Thus, that entire dimension of decisionmaking is mostly gone (Of course there's still some economic management and differences in CoH, it's just drastically reduced). Now, CoH instead has a lot of tactical depth, and compared to SC2 you're engaged in fights near-constantly, it almost seems like it never lets up. Which isn't a bad thing, and CoH is quite a good game, but it's also very different, which I guess is my point. Minimizing base building loses depth, and you can replace that depth with other mechanics elsewhere, but then you get a very different game, it's not simply "the original game without the boring parts". tl;dr play Company of Heroes because it sounds like what you want, it has minimal base management and lots of army maneuvering and some building forward defenses.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 21:42
|
|
|
COH2 (and to a lesser extent DOW2) was the only RTS I spent any notable amount of time playing PVP, looking forward to COH3 even if I wish it wasn't stock-standard WW2 again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 21:45
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Base building is part of the point for some people, but it also adds a lot of strategic depth that can make fights and decisions more interesting. Oh for sure, Company of Heroes is one of my favorite games. CoH2 is still relatively active too. I also enjoy base building, just not base management. Choosing when and where to pop down buildings is fun to me, it's needing to go back and babysit them later that isn't. Setting up static defenses typically doesn't require more attention after they're built, but production buildings add more overhead for me to manage and I just don't enjoy that, I wish it managed itself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 21:53
|
|
|
DarkAvenger211 posted:Oh for sure, Company of Heroes is one of my favorite games. CoH2 is still relatively active too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 22:01
|
|
|
I hope we get the Soviets again in CoH. They were very fun to play.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 22:03
|
|
|
i want a game that's a helm's deep simulator where every x interval of time there's a huge AI horde that attacks your fortress. in the time between attacks you're building up the fortress, but also there's another player with their own fortress and you're trying to sabotage their fortress with secret ninjas while also setting up patrols and managing your fort to prevent them from sabotaging you the true challenge is not defeating the orc horde with an impregnable fortress but scrambling up a makeshift defense because some jackass rigged one of your walls to collapse or poisoned your archers' food
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 22:16
|
|
|
Cicero posted:I mostly agree. i don't think i'm good at all i just like games where your APM can't massively affect the actual individual duels between units because i find precise unit movement to game the opponent's unit AI tedious. APM is always going to make a difference in base-building and yeah you're going to be able to micro a squad of heavy-hitters or a huge artillery piece or whatever even in TA-style gameplay but you cannot micro every tank to shave out tiny advantages, which i feel removes a part of the genre that doesn't fit neatly in with the rest of it and is better off gone. that doesn't mean APM should never mean anything
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 22:21
|
|
|
i always liked how in PA you could go the micro heavy bot opening and APM your heart out or you could open tanks instead for fewer, more deliberate movement decisions with units that will clown on bots in a straight up fight but can't do all the same micro shenanigans i also liked setting bot factories to put out cheap units set to auto-patrol the entire planet so for a mild econ drain i can make my opponent have to constantly be setting up defenses and have any holes get auto-exploited for no attention drain on my part. this was the definition of cancerous but also pretty funny
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 22:35
|
|
|
World in Conflict was amazing. I just had to pay attention to my little group of guys and that is it. I don't want the unit production just the tactical bits. A game like that could only really work in modern combat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 22:36
|
|
|
ninjewtsu posted:i also liked setting bot factories to put out cheap units set to auto-patrol the entire planet so for a mild econ drain i can make my opponent have to constantly be setting up defenses and have any holes get auto-exploited for no attention drain on my part. this was the definition of cancerous but also pretty funny That kind of thing is just playing an RTS, I don't see why it's "cancerous" at all. Player attention is explicitly a resource.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 22:42
|
|
|
it places a huge attention demand on my opponent for no attention on my part and not much economic cost. it just makes the game horrendously more obnoxious to play if it's used against you so that's basically what cancerous strats are - it actively makes the game less fun (but lets me win) good players could power through it ok and you can kinda counter it by just doing the same thing yourself but its introduction into a match exclusively lowers the quality of the game experience. hence, cancer. idk what cancerous play is if this is not the description for it. ninjewtsu fucked around with this message at 22:53 on Nov 2, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 22:50
|
|
|
It sounds like the issue is that the game mechanics support a form of auto-attacking but not auto-defending.Corbeau posted:That kind of thing is just playing an RTS, I don't see why it's "cancerous" at all. Player attention is explicitly a resource.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2022 23:08
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Sounds like you might like Immortal: Gates of Pyre. It falls into the Starcraftlike subgenre, but base management is drastically reduced. There's only a handful of workers on 'minerals' at each base and they auto-produce. No supply depots, supply is integrated into production buildings, there's a unified production command card so you can access all your production buildings simultaneously, and you can make as many units at the same time at a building as it has supply for. I've played the alpha a bit and I was spending a lot less time doing base management than Starcraft. I think it might also autoselect a worker for you too when you make a new building, but I can't remember for sure (I know Frost Giant suggested that they'd do this). Hey thanks this looks pretty sweet. I'll be looking forward to this one. Though the true test will be if it's able to hold a multiplayer playerbase for longer than a month after release. And seeing as this is the first time I'm even hearing about this it may not be a good sign. But who knows maybe it'll gain a following.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 02:49
|
|
|
I've been hankering for a good PC strategy game to waste the entire winter playing. Last ones I played were Civ 5 and Cities Skylines, both of which I put dozens (Cities) to hundreds (Civ) of hours into. I prefer something turn-based or with adjustable speed, and not too complex - something with a good amount of depth to it, but not requiring insane micromanagement to be successful. I have Civ 6 but it never really hooked me. Open to any genre / style - historic, sci-fi, 4x, city builder, etc. What's the best stuff out there? Edit: XCOM 2 also joined the hundred hour club, for what thats worth. Toebone fucked around with this message at 14:23 on Nov 3, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 14:20
|
|
|
Toebone posted:I've been hankering for a good PC strategy game to waste the entire winter playing. Last ones I played were Civ 5 and Cities Skylines, both of which I put dozens (Cities) to hundreds (Civ) of hours into. I prefer something turn-based or with adjustable speed, and not too complex - something with a good amount of depth to it, but not requiring insane micromanagement to be successful. I have Civ 6 but it never really hooked me. Open to any genre / style - historic, sci-fi, 4x, city builder, etc. What's the best stuff out there? I think Stellaris is perfect for you. I like to compare it to an idle game, because a lot of it is stacking bonuses and watching number go up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 14:49
|
|
|
Toebone posted:I've been hankering for a good PC strategy game to waste the entire winter playing. Last ones I played were Civ 5 and Cities Skylines, both of which I put dozens (Cities) to hundreds (Civ) of hours into. I prefer something turn-based or with adjustable speed, and not too complex - something with a good amount of depth to it, but not requiring insane micromanagement to be successful. I have Civ 6 but it never really hooked me. Open to any genre / style - historic, sci-fi, 4x, city builder, etc. What's the best stuff out there? The classics I go back to are: Age of Wonders III This is a Civilization / Heroes of Might and Magic inspired 4X game. You get hero-unit based campaigns over multiple explorable plot driven maps, light city building and turn based tactical combat that caps at about 18 units per side for big battles. Into the Breach A tactical combat game with short ~4 turn Giant Insects vs. Mech battles. Limited randomness, you always get to preview the insect moves, and have to figure how to counter them with yours. It's one of those easy-to-learn hard-to-master games. One campaign is around 2 hours, there's a lot of unlockables to give the game longlivety. Xenonauts A reimagining of classic X-Com. Probably the best take on high granularity time unit based tactical combat I've seen. Doesn't really give many useless options in terms of units and gear to field. Graphics are a bit drab, but everything else is good. If you'd like to fish for more recommendations, there's the Recommend me a game, again thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 15:05
|
|
|
Rimworld scratches my pausable combat+building itch
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 15:23
|
|
|
Toebone posted:I've been hankering for a good PC strategy game to waste the entire winter playing. Last ones I played were Civ 5 and Cities Skylines, both of which I put dozens (Cities) to hundreds (Civ) of hours into. I prefer something turn-based or with adjustable speed, and not too complex - something with a good amount of depth to it, but not requiring insane micromanagement to be successful. I have Civ 6 but it never really hooked me. Open to any genre / style - historic, sci-fi, 4x, city builder, etc. What's the best stuff out there? Old World. It's a 4x like Civ but the choices are meatier and the AI is significantly more fun. It understands the game better and can put up a reasonable fight. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3920273
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 15:36
|
|
|
LLSix posted:Old World. It's a 4x like Civ but the choices are meatier and the AI is significantly more fun. It understands the game better and can put up a reasonable fight.  Especially if you enjoyed Civ V I’d give this a look.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 15:38
|
|
|
Thanks! I'm downloading the Old World demo, and I think my wife's steam library has Stellaris in it so I'll check that out too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 15:59
|
|
|
Dancer posted:I think Stellaris is perfect for you. I like to compare it to an idle game, because a lot of it is stacking bonuses and watching number go up. I'd like to check out Stellaris but I've bounced off of every Paradox strategy game that I've tried so far.(CK, HoI, Vic, EU), specifically cause of how much they feel like spreadsheet sims more than actual games. How is it compared to something like, say, Sins of a Solar Empire, Master of Orion, or GalCiv? All of those were fairly easy for me to learn.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 16:23
|
|
|
Deakul posted:I'd like to check out Stellaris but I've bounced off of every Paradox strategy game that I've tried so far.(CK, HoI, Vic, EU), specifically cause of how much they feel like spreadsheet sims more than actual games. If you don't care for PDS games in general Stellaris is not going to be the one that changes that. It is one of the most spreadsheety of them all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 16:38
|
|
|
StoryTime posted:Age of Wonders III age of wonders 3 and planetfall are definitely the best strategy games i've played
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 16:52
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:yeah idk why total annihilation style gameplay never really caught on. i guess it's true that supcom was niche and planetary annihilation flopped, but i feel like supcom released in the shadow of wc3 custom map stuff that eventually spawned mobas, and planetary annihilation just wasn't a well conceived or executed project from the start as far as I could ever tell TA was absolutely amazing and the best part was how easy it was to mod and add stuff. The total rehaul stuff, or additions of things made the game so much fun to play. Map stuff was also amazing, and the ability to have three actual functional types of warfare was so different to other games. The actual balance of the multiple types of warfare is still something that games struggle with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 17:16
|
|
|
Deakul posted:I'd like to check out Stellaris but I've bounced off of every Paradox strategy game that I've tried so far.(CK, HoI, Vic, EU), specifically cause of how much they feel like spreadsheet sims more than actual games. In some ways it does feel similar enough to Sins that it might not be that bad to jump in. There's a lot more empire management compared to Sins, which was really just focused on fleet battles (the coolest part), including fiddling around with every planet's buildings and resource output and managing population (a tangible resource instead of a number). Pretty sure it's on Gamepass so if that's available to you I'd still say try it out, see what you feel.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 17:25
|
|
|
ZearothK posted:If you don't care for PDS games in general Stellaris is not going to be the one that changes that. It is one of the most spreadsheety of them all. in my experience it's the opposite because stellaris starts small without a shitton of systems to juggle straight away. Also the flavour of events, exploring, etc are cool and paradoxically feel way more small and direct compared to other games, even though in stellaris you're traversing the universe instead of a country or continent. Also, you can just let the AI manage a ton of your planets and do decently, and just fly around with your exploring vessels and make decisions on techs, non-terrestial buildings, diplomacy, civics, and war. Most importantly though: setting matters and imo it's the best modern space-empire building sim. Worst thing: the shitton of DLC's, like all paradox games. Thankfully you definitely won't miss em the first few times around.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 19:34
|
|
|
OctaMurk posted:bring back world in conflict, the best pvp rts that ever was or will be I was actually gonna say Ground Control. That games needs a remaster. Never played the sequel but the original GC was amazing. Also loved Sacrifice back in the day.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 19:39
|
|
|
chaosapiant posted:I was actually gonna say Ground Control. That games needs a remaster. Never played the sequel but the original GC was amazing. Also loved Sacrifice back in the day. GCII was okay, I preferred the first.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 19:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:41 |
|
|
chaosapiant posted:I was actually gonna say Ground Control. That games needs a remaster. Never played the sequel but the original GC was amazing. Also loved Sacrifice back in the day. Sacrifice is sorely in need of a remake with modern UIs and controls. It would be so good
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2022 20:14
|
|
