Live data from Hacker News

The Future of RTS

docs.google.com

91–100 of 275 posts

Re: The Future of RTS

#91
post #88

It's sad to me that this author's only view of RTS is as an esport. If that's how it is then I'll be fine if there's never another RTS, and 95% of the public doesn't care about esports either.

I would love to play another RTS with a nice campaign. I don't care if my game is a poor esport. But no, everything must be an esport now, with ladders, seasons and whatever, unless it just can't.

Re: The Future of RTS

#92
If people want to look at what a good RTS on mobile could be, look at Command and Conquer Rivals. They team add a lot of good ideas IMHO, even though the game suffers from micro transactions (good luck to newcomers). In particular: * they have a soft population limit with a cooldown increasing with the number of units on the map. This make it harder to snowball, and make it easier to punish people spamming a unit. Also it keeps the number of units to micro manageable.

* economy is auto-ramping. You only chose the number of collector. I think this could use some balancing and more experimentations. But it changes the dynamic of the game over time from money being the limiting factor to pop cap. Even if the two players play very aggressively.

* Also the game is not about destroying opponent base (you cam still win this way) but about controlling some map zones. Controlling the "pads" charges a nuke missile, but the missile can flip hand 1 second before firing. This builds up a lot of intensity and makes timing very important in the gameplay. Knowing when you should stale the charging or fasten it, and how much you should pay for this is hard to master.

Re: The Future of RTS

#93
post #42

Whilst I certainly have huge respect for HuK, I feel that either his use of the categories in the article as perhaps a bit simplistic. Many of the points he mentions are really intertwined - most importantly balance vs variety: it's very hard to score highly on both. SC2 has 3 very distinct races (he gives it a 8.8 for variety), hence there are just 6 possible matchups. AoE 2 (DE) has 35 (he gives it a 3), making ove…

>AoE 2 (DE) has 35 (he gives it a 3), making over 600 possible 1v1 matchups. The 3 species in Starcraft are quite distinct in many key areas, whereas in Age of Kings and AOE3 (the only ones I've played) the differences between the factions were limited to a handful of units and buildings, but ultimately they all played pretty much the same.

> ultimately they all played pretty much the same

High level tournaments include civilization drafting before a best of N series of games. Occasionally, one player/team ends up with a civilization match up which gives them a clear advantage (because they successfully predicted their opponent's civilization pick - it the opponent had picked something else the advantage might swing the other way). Occasionally games are described as "civ win" when the advantage is large and wielded well.

Re: The Future of RTS

#94
post #46

Honestly, I think the RTS genre is too hidebound to the origins of the genre. Too focused on trees of units and factories that existed originally because of singleplayer campaigns and trickling out upgrades. I mean, the current monster of the genre - SC2 - can trace many of its gameplay mechanics and units back to a game that came out in 1994, which was of course primarily designed for single-player gaming. An RTS ba…

Slightly off-topic, but Zero-K still has some "teching", just in the form of creating a supply chain of energy to the huge cannons. However, it's messed up in that the mechanic is simply undiscoverable without a tutorial.

That's sort of ironic, as I've been missing higher tier units, as they were as close to a disruptable supply chain as it gets in TA: build factory -> make builder -> build factory 2 -> make tier 2 unit. Targeting builders or resources was a way to delay the coming of the next tier units. It also gave some predictability to the gameplay: not seeing tier 1 units meant tier 2 units were unlikely to come.

I agree with the complex mechanics, and I hate that there are so many factories, with so many units, many of them basically copies of each other. Same for defenses: do we really need 3 different anti-air towers? I much preferred the TA approach, where each unit was good at something different, and easily visually distinguishable too.

Re: The Future of RTS

#96
I’m working on one such modern RTS game: https://github.com/amethyst/shotcaller Note: We’re adding UI, input and playable units this month. Currently the game is just an non-interactive simulation.

It’s a MOBA-style game that is played 1v1, with the 5 “players” on each side controlled by autonomous bots. This design accommodates AI development as part of the sport, much like a F1 driver and their team of engineers and mechanics.

The game is written in Rust and will use WASM for scripting to accommodate a wide range of languages for both game modding and AI code. While it’s only 1v1 in its initial iteration, I agree that there’s immense value in cooperative and more micro-level play, so we do intend to incrementally move towards that as an alternative game mode.

I’d love to chat more with anyone interested in this particular design or RTS/MOBAs in general. You can find my email on my GitHub.

Re: The Future of RTS

#97

my hot take on RTS : I like the genre (or rather used to like, the last one I loved was SupCom) but I wish somebody would make an RTS with no/minimal macro. Controlling the builder/peons units is a chore at best and I would love to see it streamlined a lot. For example just ask for a building to be built instead of finding/assigning builders to the task and micromanaging what they will do next. Dungeon Keeper comes t…

https://globulation2.org might fit your bill except that it is Open-Source-crappy and dead. Its core idea is good though.

Re: The Future of RTS

#98
It makes me sad that Ruse, the 2009 title hasn't made it on the list. It had gone under a radar of many RTS players, but it was revolutionary in terms of APM: there were so few actions per minute that you could competitively play it on an xbox controller (which it had a great control scheme for). The challenge was always to out-fox and out-smart your opponent, and you didn't have to click fast to achieve it.

Unfortunately, the developer, Eugene Systems, didn't keep this in later games. The Wargame series are an excellent and very deep strategy games that further built on recon and other mechanics from Ruse, but it is, once again, a bit of a click-fest.

Still, I highly recommend both; Ruse is more on a casual side, and Wargame series if you want something more hardcore.

Post reply on HN