Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Future of RTS

docs.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 275 posts

Re: The Future of RTS

#71

Post by 6510 »

FrozenVoid wrote: post #60

The author talks of APM requirement as benign challenge; the RTS decline is caused by RSI, because once the player gets to high-level play - speed of execution becomes dominant and players injure their muscles to win. Turn-based games are thriving because the cost-of-interaction is much less and APM is irrelevamt

I really hate the intentional crap UI to make actions more challenging. (sc2) Soldiers and creatures running into their death because they didn't get an attack command. Creating control groups and adding units manually. Producing units manually in as weird as possible ways. Those things just draw attention away from engagements of which you will simply have fewer at a time and they are won by catching the opponent while off guard, not by your distraction but by build in ones. :/

Re: The Future of RTS

#72

Post by Guthur »

One RTS that i actually really like, to the point i actually made a couple of maps for was World In Conflict.

It somewhat surprises me that it died off so much with no sequel or replication of the format, I thought it was a decent team RTS with a reasonable amount of variety though maybe not enough. It also a baseless RTS and had not resource gathering component, iirc, and so could be argued it's more of a Real Time Tactics game.

Re: The Future of RTS

#73

Post by Razengan »

I'd love an RTS that lets you command hundreds of units but instead of controlling them directly like puppets, you set lists of priorities with something like a visual programming UI and let AI carry them out.

Besides the hard limit on the number of units in StarCraft and other RTSes, there's also a "soft" limit on how much shit an average player can keep track of or care about.

Re: The Future of RTS

#74

Post by pmoriarty »

_1100 wrote: post #66
jiggawatts wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What mods do you recommend for Factorio?

If you haven’t launched a rocket in the base version, then I strongly recommend no mods, while avoiding any videos or premade blueprints. Then go watch videos and do it again, but much faster. Then if you’re still playing, you obviously have time to kill so go play Industrial Revolution 2, space exploration, and bobs mods on their own for a whole new experience.

"Industrial Revolution 2, space exploration, and bobs mods"

Just so people know what they'll be getting in to with these mods: they add a ton of content and make the game much, much longer... which is great, if that's what you want.

But maybe you prefer more combat, or less combat.. or something that's focused on giving you some particular technology or technologies, or a dozen other ways to approach the game.

Also, many of my own favorite mods don't actually add much if any content at all, but are utility mods, which make certain parts of the game more manageable or more flexible... like train management mods.

Re: The Future of RTS

#75

Post by albertgoeswoof »

Guthur wrote: post #72

One RTS that i actually really like, to the point i actually made a couple of maps for was World In Conflict. It somewhat surprises me that it died off so much with no sequel or replication of the format, I thought it was a decent team RTS with a reasonable amount of variety though maybe not enough. It also a baseless RTS and had not resource gathering component, iirc, and so could be argued it's more of a Real Time…

World in conflict was awesome, I couldn’t remember the name of it until your comment, thanks!

Was there a multiplayer or longer / more replayable part? Perhaps that is the reason for the lack of long term success

Re: The Future of RTS

#76

Post by Guthur »

albertgoeswoof wrote: post #75
Guthur wrote: post #72

One RTS that i actually really like, to the point i actually made a couple of maps for was World In Conflict. It somewhat surprises me that it died off so much with no sequel or replication of the format, I thought it was a decent team RTS with a reasonable amount of variety though maybe not enough. It also a baseless RTS and had not resource gathering component, iirc, and so could be argued it's more of a Real Time…

World in conflict was awesome, I couldn’t remember the name of it until your comment, thanks! Was there a multiplayer or longer / more replayable part? Perhaps that is the reason for the lack of long term success

There was MP, players selected classes like armour, infantry, support, air and then battled over a map in a team.

The environment destruction was amazing for the time, you could call in carpet bombing, napalm and even tactical nukes and it left the map as a warzone.

Re: The Future of RTS

#77

Post by unixhero »

pmoriarty wrote: post #12
gamegoblin wrote: post #4

Something that isn't significantly touched on here that most RTSes neglect is physical logistics. That is, actually getting resources from the point of collection to the point of consumption. In most RTSes, once you collect resources they essentially go into a magic resource counter in the cloud. You can collect wood on one side of the map, and instantly create a building with that on the other side of the map. I wou…

"I would be really interested in playing an RTS that focused much less heavily on variety of combat, and much more heavily on variety of logistics." You've basically just described Factorio , which is all about logistics. I strongly encourage you to give it a try, not only because of this, but because it is one of the greatest games ever made -- especially when played with mods, which make it 100 times better than th…

This might seem silly, but even as a grown man, Factorio scares me. It seems line it could be a trigger to fall into a deep chasm of aspberger like focus for weeks.

Re: The Future of RTS

#78

Post by erulabs »

I love seeing the Starcraft folks come out of the HN community! Have loved Starcraft and sc2 and still watch the major tournaments - but I’m always curious that the most popular RTS of all time is so ignored by “PC RTS” players: Clash Royale / Clash of Clans. The future of RTS games to me lays in increasing accessibility. I’ve been playing Starcraft for decades and my hands and lack of time keeps me from really excelling like I used to as a kid - which is why a game or two of Clash Royale goes pretty far to scratch the 1v1 RTS itch.

Re: The Future of RTS

#79

Post by jbay808 »

Macha wrote: post #25
Glyptodon wrote: post #14

Are there any games that have players controling different slices in the same space, like one player controls economy, another player controls production/R&D, and a 3rd player controls tactical?

So a few RTS games (StarCraft 2, Steel Division 2 come to mind) allow multiple players to share control of the same units/resources so you could artificially divide up responsibilities. You need to go far away from RTS to a game like Artemis: Spaceship Bridge Simulator to find a game where players are dealing with distinct gameplay to a common goal in a shared space however

Age of Empires 2 lets you do this as well.

Re: The Future of RTS

#80

Post by m463 »

unixhero wrote: post #77
pmoriarty wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I would be really interested in playing an RTS that focused much less heavily on variety of combat, and much more heavily on variety of logistics." You've basically just described Factorio , which is all about logistics. I strongly encourage you to give it a try, not only because of this, but because it is one of the greatest games ever made -- especially when played with mods, which make it 100 times better than th…

This might seem silly, but even as a grown man, Factorio scares me. It seems line it could be a trigger to fall into a deep chasm of aspberger like focus for weeks.

This is a valid concern. I'm glad that when I launched a rocket, and upgrades became n->∞ that I unwound from the game.
Post reply on HN