The Future of RTS • Hacker News Board

Re: The Future of RTS

#161

Post by nyhc99 » Sun, Dec 27, 2020, 1:16 PM UTC

Pxtl wrote: post #45

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…

Honestly, RTS games are already so bogged down in complexity that I wouldn't want to see one adding logistics unless it decided to claw back other gameplay features.

I agree, but doing so would make an interesting game. A war that's being fought by 2 evenly matched AIs, and your job is to handle the logistics on your side to give it the edge?

Re: The Future of RTS

#162

Post by maccam94 » Sun, Dec 27, 2020, 1:18 PM UTC

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.

I've found that it engages the same parts of my brain as writing software, and I only have a limited amount of time each day that I'm able to focus on either activity. So to some degree it is self-balancing, but it's also possible to lose 4-6 hours while playing it if you get in the zone.

Re: The Future of RTS

#163

Post by birdyrooster » Sun, Dec 27, 2020, 1:20 PM UTC

I tried to play SC2 for the first time in years last night and the servers were erroring with Global Timeout and everyone in chat was complaining so I logged out and might not try again.

Re: The Future of RTS

#164

Post by shoulderfake » Sun, Dec 27, 2020, 1:21 PM UTC

I clicked just to see what the op would say about warcraft 3 and the very first point is a clear indication of inadequate understanding of the game at elite level of play. Spacing is important and in fact a big part of the game but not in a Starcrafty kind of way. Different maps allow for different tactics around map control based on race and ability to creep and gain map control. Its not about holding a high ground as a strategy, its more about holding a high ground for a certain type of army composition and while trying to expand for example.

And on the subsequent points ,again op just fails completely to understand the game at a higher level or simply has not seen any high level tournament in the last 2 years. Warcraft 3 is a masterful piece and the reason its not popular is it is fucking hard to be even decent at it online. Micro is more important than macro and thats a big deterrent for anyone thats a causal player.

Re: The Future of RTS

#165

Post by scotty79 » Sun, Dec 27, 2020, 1:28 PM UTC

orthoxerox wrote: post #91

TwoBit wrote: 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.

For me the fun of RTS is slowly discovering new units and their application.

After I know the full tech tech tree RTS games become fairly boring to me.

Re: The Future of RTS

#166

Post by scotty79 » Sun, Dec 27, 2020, 1:41 PM UTC

erulabs wrote: post #78

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 excel…

> Clash Royale

A game called Castle Burn was also very good take on RTS on mobile. Unfortunately defunct now.

Re: The Future of RTS

#167

Post by scotty79 » Sun, Dec 27, 2020, 1:43 PM UTC

VRay wrote: post #81

erulabs wrote: post #78

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 excel…

Yeah, and if you ever have trouble winning, you just drop $500 on the game and you'll be good for a nice victory streak plus you don't have to worry about losing to someone who just started playing, since they'll have to grind out dozens (hundreds?) of hours to be on a level playing field with you

Whatever you pay (even 0$), you'll end up with 50% winrate sooner or later.

I never paid anything for this game and had a lot of fun for years.

You get opponent that's either good with bad cards or good with bad cards. But you have 50% probability to win with either.

You are only winning as you climb to your level of opponents.

It's quite brilliant way to ensure players are appropriately challenged.

Re: The Future of RTS

#168

Post by 3131s » Sun, Dec 27, 2020, 1:47 PM UTC

baby wrote: post #124

TwoBit wrote: 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’m sorry but the whole points of RTS is competition. It’s like complaining that we’re talking about tweaks to make chess more competitive.

Nah, I've always been terrible at RTS games but I'm still obsessed with them.

I'm also pretty far into creating a generative RTS and it's turning out well. Maybe you'll like it too!

Re: The Future of RTS

#169

Post by yvdriess » Sun, Dec 27, 2020, 1:49 PM UTC

6510 wrote: post #71

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 wh…

There is a saying from game designers (e.g. Zachtronics) that the UI always has to have some element of frustration to it. The most elegant easy to use interface to a game is a 'push this button to win' button. This might be one of the reasons why you still have the physical interfaces design surviving in video games, while we don't see that in desktop UIs anymore (outside some niche software).

That being said, SC2 goes out of its way to make it frustrating. They intentionally design such frustrating UI elements into the game to act as skill differentiators. For instance, a Zerg player needs to click every N-seconds on each of his queens to spawn eggs or risk getting behind. That makes SC2 overall one of the most /execution-/oriented esports, where the perfect execution of a good strategy is the largest differentiator in skill. In contrast, dota2 is a very strategy/game-sense oriented game, where the top players are not necessarily mechanically the best.

Re: The Future of RTS

#170

Post by neogodless » Sun, Dec 27, 2020, 1:54 PM UTC

birdyrooster wrote: post #163

I tried to play SC2 for the first time in years last night and the servers were erroring with Global Timeout and everyone in chat was complaining so I logged out and might not try again.

We play casually very often, and this happened the other night, and was the only time I've seen it. So it's not a good way to judge the (current state of the) game. The uptime is actually quite good, and you happened to log in at unlucky time!