RTS thoughts
Moderator: maddog986
RE: RTS thoughts
like or not rts is the future of wargame and combat simulation. TB games are an anachronism from pre-pc times when the only way to simulate the flow of combat was turns and hexes. You have to concede that hexes and turns have no place in a real (or pseudo-real) time as represented a computer-simulated environment.
one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter - Ronald Reagan
RE: RTS thoughts
ORIGINAL: Rat Race
like or not rts is the future of wargame and combat simulation. TB games are an anachronism from pre-pc times when the only way to simulate the flow of combat was turns and hexes. You have to concede that hexes and turns have no place in a real (or pseudo-real) time as represented a computer-simulated environment.
CMX2 is due out in 2006 and im pretty sure we can include that title as a future wargame, and it will be TB.
I am totally unaware of any tactical wargame in development that is a RTS that will be anything but eye canndy. The only hope wargame/RTS had was War Time Command [8|], and we are all well aware of that mess.
Im putting my money on TB in the future
RE: RTS thoughts
ORIGINAL: Rat Race
like or not rts is the future of wargame and combat simulation. TB games are an anachronism from pre-pc times when the only way to simulate the flow of combat was turns and hexes. You have to concede that hexes and turns have no place in a real (or pseudo-real) time as represented a computer-simulated environment.
Not that simple.
I prefer the structured gameplay of turn based and WEGO. RTS can simulate in a more realsitic fashion BUT the games are stuck in a bad rut. They ruin the main thing they have over turn based and thats realism. The games are usually arcade in nature and whilst fun do not really tax the brains nor show any real tactical bent. Also no matter how good an RTS game might be I'd always prefer the slower style of turn based. SO many decisions usually ned to be mad ehwilst playing a wargame that turn based is the only way to manage it. In real life no commander has such total control of his forces as RTS games have. They issue the general orders and then leave the rest upto their subordinate commanders oand so on and so forth. Turn based gives you time to manage the whole battle. EVen the tavtical level doesn't work well at RTS on awhole. Again even at Comapny COmmander level the C/O doesnt baby sit every squad under his command he gives the plan then lets teh various platoon commanders to follow it then it goes down to the squad/section leader. Most wargame demands that you fill several roles and though it can work in turn based it can't in RTS.
The only RTS game to do this well is HTTR. To behoenst your not going to get an influx of this style. The RTS aspect has put many people of buying it who would actually enjoy the game. So anyone who sets out on this route is running a financial risk.
RE: RTS thoughts
Personally, I am more a fan of continuous time (CT) games.
What is it that TB games provide that is so enjoyable?
The arguments for TB seem to be:
What do each of the above provide at a psychological level? Absolute control (insofar as your ability to command goes)? Realistic frameworks to think out and execute a strategy? The opportunity to live in a history-defining moment and to make the difference one way or the other?
What is it that TB games provide that is so enjoyable?
The arguments for TB seem to be:
- Leisurely pace, with the ability to start and stop the game
- Deep game system, with enough details and rules to make it realistic
- Realistic outcomes (severe penalties for ahistorical and/or gamey tactics)
- Historical units and tactics
- The ability to control every aspect of the battle
- Interesting engagements
- A range of possible strategies and tactics
What do each of the above provide at a psychological level? Absolute control (insofar as your ability to command goes)? Realistic frameworks to think out and execute a strategy? The opportunity to live in a history-defining moment and to make the difference one way or the other?
RE: RTS thoughts
The arguments for TB seem to be:
- Leisurely pace, with the ability to start and stop the game
- Deep game system, with enough details and rules to make it realistic
- Realistic outcomes (severe penalties for ahistorical and/or gamey tactics)
- Historical units and tactics
- The ability to control every aspect of the battle
- Interesting engagements
- A range of possible strategies and tactics
I'd say #1 is important compared to the mad rush that most 'RTS' games turn into. There's no reason why the others can't be part of a 'CT' game - but the 'RTS' model right now is, as stated, arcadey. And a good TB game won't give you total control - minatures games, which are TB, have e.g. moral and orders type models which restrict absolute control in historical fashion.
To me it's more that the TB games have got a reputation for being more cerebreal, so their audience tends to end up that way because it's a self fulfilling thing. Just like the tendency of RTS games to put 'fun' above 'realism' means that the 'realism' crowd turn up their nose at ANY 'RTS' - so no-one sees any need to make a realistic RTS anyway, as there's no demand for one....
RE: RTS thoughts
Thanks for your thoughts MadScott. EYSA isn't one that many mention, but that is RTS (CT) and that offers a level a realism way above the C&C clones. Interestingly, downloaded the demo again and there's an option to have the game automatically pause every 60 seconds. It's a blend of both worlds I guess... much more like CM...

In the above, an FJ MG42 team wiped out my AB engineers, but you can see through the smoke I dropped, that a large flanking force is about to force them to withdraw.

In the above, an FJ MG42 team wiped out my AB engineers, but you can see through the smoke I dropped, that a large flanking force is about to force them to withdraw.
- Attachments
-
- EYSA.gif (154.29 KiB) Viewed 168 times
-
- EYSA.gif (154.29 KiB) Viewed 168 times
RE: RTS thoughts
Try a mad rush on a CM title and see what happens
No chit Sherlock, the CM series is the best out there for providing the more realistic aspect of warfare. Instead of "grunt" rushes to victory, although I'm sure somewhere in ancient history there were a few historical "grunt" rushes, but, wasn't widely accepted as the strategy and tactics of choice.

I like the Kohan series of RTS since it doesn't employ the thousands or 100's of units on the map battle system. It uses "groups up to 8 men in a group and only 20 groups total at a time on the map. The speed is just right for me and I don't feel I'm rushing around the map to play a clickfest of a game. Although one can get caught up in the battles just watching them play out and forget to continue to build up infrastructure (I'm guilty of this a lot lol). Also it takes a considerable amount of time to even get 20 groups onto the map, I'd say 7-10 groups being the norm as the middle game gets underway. And I think just about anyone can handle 7 to 10 groups of units fairly easily with this time system they use.
The battle speed is just right so that if you are attacked from a grunt rush you have enough time (not forever but sufficient I think) to deploy a reinforcement group to save the day. It is soooooooo much different from the likes of Age of Emires or Dawn of Empires or Rise of Nations etc. etc. that are for sure nothing more than kiddie clickfests.
There's no micromanagement of wood, iron, gold, saltpeter lol, etc. etc. either. You want wood, you build a wood mine and that's that, you don't have to build any peasants to go chop it and bring it to your city hall. Same with the other three resources, iron, gold and mana. Just one click (if you can afford it) and in a few seconds you have increased resources. I think it's the best streamlined RTS out there that doesn't have the feel of a clickfest and I'm a pretty strong critic of RTS games. I hate em all mostly. hehe
For the most part I will stick to "organized" turn based games or the wego system. I'm not even a fan of simultanious movement because it causes too much griping online about "lag" allowing players an advantage (with high speed connections) with simultanious movement to the point you have to give a 15 second delay "notice" to the player you are attacking. lol Now that is rediculous in warfare games. It's no wonder that simultanious movement games online are not popular. But, then again turn based games online aren't very popular either, the time consumption of these monster games like HOMM, Civilization series, Age of Wonders, just to name a few, keeps the population pretty low. But, the advantage of these games; PBEM is very popular in most turn based or wego games.
Long live turn based and wego games and down with RTS kiddiefied clickfests.

WE/I WANT 1:1 or something even 1:2 death animations in the KOIOS PANZER COMMAND SERIES don't forget Erik!
and Floating Paratroopers We grew up with Minor, Marginal and Decisive victories why rock the boat with Marginal, Decisive and Legendary?

RE: RTS thoughts
Try Act of War
A lot of people like to crap on it cause it plays like generals, but its 10 times better.
Most of the people crying about rushes in that game consist of morons fighting morons who dont know anything else to do.
My buddy and I played online for a long time and we tryed out all those "rush" tactics, and using the us army I was ALWAYS able to stop an overwelming tank rush with proper armor tactics.
I would use a line of m1a2's flanked by bradlys and backed up with paladins and mrls for ground combat, I also had snipers and infantry mixed in there for support in addition to backing up that division with apaches in the air and f15s and a10s on call.
He could send 3x the number of units at me and Id bust him up every time just because of the coverage of fire, also, I would have repair choppers on call, and medi helocopters taking away the wounded and flying in new recruits, it was just like a real war, hell in the city part of the map I had a black hawk down(literly) loaded with delta force!! rather expensive infantry, what started with 5 guys trying to get to cover and be rescued ended up in a10 strikes, more blackhawks comming in with backup, f15s flying over head and eventually b2s and a damn nuclear strike before it was all sorted out!.
I love the game, its so much fun, I think it does the most relistic urban combat ever!, that army, while kicking ass in the open, can be taken apart piece of piece in urban combat, you have shield units running down allys hitting you and fleeing befor your turrents come around, you have infantry in the buildins sniping you every damn block, its intense!!
And, you can call in b2s to level the white house, I mean come on! what more do you want lol.
Not to mention, unlike generals, there is no super uber anything, everything from infantry to nuclear missiles has a counter.
A lot of people like to crap on it cause it plays like generals, but its 10 times better.
Most of the people crying about rushes in that game consist of morons fighting morons who dont know anything else to do.
My buddy and I played online for a long time and we tryed out all those "rush" tactics, and using the us army I was ALWAYS able to stop an overwelming tank rush with proper armor tactics.
I would use a line of m1a2's flanked by bradlys and backed up with paladins and mrls for ground combat, I also had snipers and infantry mixed in there for support in addition to backing up that division with apaches in the air and f15s and a10s on call.
He could send 3x the number of units at me and Id bust him up every time just because of the coverage of fire, also, I would have repair choppers on call, and medi helocopters taking away the wounded and flying in new recruits, it was just like a real war, hell in the city part of the map I had a black hawk down(literly) loaded with delta force!! rather expensive infantry, what started with 5 guys trying to get to cover and be rescued ended up in a10 strikes, more blackhawks comming in with backup, f15s flying over head and eventually b2s and a damn nuclear strike before it was all sorted out!.
I love the game, its so much fun, I think it does the most relistic urban combat ever!, that army, while kicking ass in the open, can be taken apart piece of piece in urban combat, you have shield units running down allys hitting you and fleeing befor your turrents come around, you have infantry in the buildins sniping you every damn block, its intense!!
And, you can call in b2s to level the white house, I mean come on! what more do you want lol.
Not to mention, unlike generals, there is no super uber anything, everything from infantry to nuclear missiles has a counter.
Jason Blaz
Way to much to list here!
Way to much to list here!
RE: RTS thoughts
The only RTS game to do this well is HTTR.
What is HTTR?
I glanced at Act of War a few times. Maybe I should take a closer look.
RE: RTS thoughts
Never mind, answered my own question. When I think RTS, I'm thinking C&C and that ilk. I know Highway has recd. rave reviews but I never looked at it that closely.
There are times when I'm in the mood to just "blow stuff up" in purty lookin' games and at that those times games like Codename Panzers, Sudden Strike, etc. are OK. The bottom line is they usually bore me after a while. But they are easier to fire up and play than turn based games so I'll always have one or 2 around.
There are times when I'm in the mood to just "blow stuff up" in purty lookin' games and at that those times games like Codename Panzers, Sudden Strike, etc. are OK. The bottom line is they usually bore me after a while. But they are easier to fire up and play than turn based games so I'll always have one or 2 around.
RE: RTS thoughts
ORIGINAL: Bossy573
The only RTS game to do this well is HTTR.
What is HTTR?
I glanced at Act of War a few times. Maybe I should take a closer look.
httr=highway to the reich... a matrix game.

RE: RTS thoughts
There are times when I'm in the mood to just "blow stuff up" in purty lookin' games and at that those times
Yes, I agree with you. But I also believe that it must work the same with strictly RTS players. Most younger than myself, for sure!
They get tired of shoot em,up bang bang.

I found this aspect intriging when I first began. I've never served in the military but playing the turn based game I sure learned a lot about artillery placement , types of weapons, battle tactics, world history. ect.
Playing a good turn based wargame will leave you more intelectually satisfied. And gives you a sense of history/battle while having played an enjoyable game.
I think the command rooms (at least what I saw in war movies) had maps and little pieces to identify troops/ships ect. They were/are moved around to show the development of the war.
I guess what I'm looking for most times in a game is Intellectual satisfaction/fun as opposed an emotionalhigh/fun.
Rts games(as described by many above) it seems to me are trying to get you to experiece the emotional feeling a soldier has on the battlefield. That to me will always fail.
You can not capture the emotions a soldier feels out there in battle with friends he has been with for two or more years. Whereas you can experience the battle on an intellectual level more easily with more personal satisfaction.
Well,these are some of my thoughts on this matter. Maybe not yet so developed. But some of us like to dabble in the philosophy of things.
It is a good thread, though! I agree with Wodin, there are many who come into these Forums ( only playing Rts games) who would like to hear what others think about the turn based game. And from here actually give one a try.
Just bought HTTr have to see what the game system feel is that you have been talking about. I'm open minded
RE: RTS thoughts
ORIGINAL: DamoclesX
Try Act of War
A lot of people like to crap on it cause it plays like generals, but its 10 times better.
Most of the people crying about rushes in that game consist of morons fighting morons who dont know anything else to do.
My buddy and I played online for a long time and we tryed out all those "rush" tactics, and using the us army I was ALWAYS able to stop an overwelming tank rush with proper armor tactics.
I would use a line of m1a2's flanked by bradlys and backed up with paladins and mrls for ground combat, I also had snipers and infantry mixed in there for support in addition to backing up that division with apaches in the air and f15s and a10s on call.
He could send 3x the number of units at me and Id bust him up every time just because of the coverage of fire, also, I would have repair choppers on call, and medi helocopters taking away the wounded and flying in new recruits, it was just like a real war, hell in the city part of the map I had a black hawk down(literly) loaded with delta force!! rather expensive infantry, what started with 5 guys trying to get to cover and be rescued ended up in a10 strikes, more blackhawks comming in with backup, f15s flying over head and eventually b2s and a damn nuclear strike before it was all sorted out!.
I love the game, its so much fun, I think it does the most relistic urban combat ever!, that army, while kicking ass in the open, can be taken apart piece of piece in urban combat, you have shield units running down allys hitting you and fleeing befor your turrents come around, you have infantry in the buildins sniping you every damn block, its intense!!
And, you can call in b2s to level the white house, I mean come on! what more do you want lol.
Not to mention, unlike generals, there is no super uber anything, everything from infantry to nuclear missiles has a counter.
Whats the LOS like in the game?
Also are weapon loads/trajectory/ armour penetration modelled reasonably well?
Are Infantry cannon fodder or can a squad of men survive awhile and actually do some damage or are they supermen?
Can you gve ordes to squads i.e set up ambush similar to the way you could with CC and CM?
Is there loads of micro management?
Is each soldier or even squads morale modelled?
DO men recover in the same way as in say Blitz and Sudden Striek or are they either wounded or dead similar to CC?
I presume the Nuclear Strike ended the game due to the scale of it?
I'm not trying to knock it as I haven't played it but these issues and other similar ones I have real problems with in most RTS games.
I imagine the game is fun and a good blast if you are good at the RTS mechanics. Apart from CC I'm useless at them. I'm OK at very small scenarios but after that I find them a chore.
Great to watch though.
RE: RTS thoughts
ORIGINAL: Zap
Rts games(as described by many above) it seems to me are trying to get you to experiece the emotional feeling a soldier has on the battlefield. That to me will always fail.
True, but then again (thankfully) no one's life is on the line. Its all for fun.
RTS games do have one advantage and that is they simulate events as they happen. Men on the battlefield don't have a "pause" option and as such, a well done RTS can offer a very different (and just as satisfying) intellectual challange from an operational and strategic level turn based game.
For me, it all depends what kind of mood I'm in, what kind of time I have and whether I'm just dog-tired from a day at work or wide awake and sharp. Both forms have their merits and both can be fun as hell.
One thing is plain to me. Wargames - strategy games are going through a type of Renaissance which is very welcome indeed.
RE: RTS thoughts
Whats the LOS like in the game?
Also are weapon loads/trajectory/ armour penetration modelled reasonably well?
Are Infantry cannon fodder or can a squad of men survive awhile and actually do some damage or are they supermen?
Can you gve ordes to squads i.e set up ambush similar to the way you could with CC and CM?
Is there loads of micro management?
Is each soldier or even squads morale modelled?
DO men recover in the same way as in say Blitz and Sudden Striek or are they either wounded or dead similar to CC?
I presume the Nuclear Strike ended the game due to the scale of it?
I'm not trying to knock it as I haven't played it but these issues and other similar ones I have real problems with in most RTS games.
I imagine the game is fun and a good blast if you are good at the RTS mechanics. Apart from CC I'm useless at them. I'm OK at very small scenarios but after that I find them a chore.
Great to watch though.
Line of site seems to work decently, you can see around buildings and stuff unless you have somebody there.
Weapons seem right, infantry cant damage tanks with their guns, bigger guns like the m1a2 will chew through lightly skinned units.
Infantry is VERY deadly and very usefull in this game, pretty much the first rts they are in, in the urban enviros, they can shread an armor coloum if you setup an ambush right, same with any regions with cover, in the flat open with no cover they are fodder.
Ya you can ambush, you can tell them to hide in bushs and trees and what not and they will got into ambush mode
Not really much micro managment, you get many through oil rigs, banks in the cities, or capturing prisoners(who you can torcher for information lol)
No moral I can tell of
They are wounded or dead, its different, wounded soldiers can be healed on the stop by medical choppers, or flown back to base to be healed there at the hostpital if iits to hostial, but it works differently for each faction, task force talon has nano suits that can heal them in the field.
When they are in a battle, they can eaither be killed, or injured to the point where they cant move, if thats the case they can be taken prisoner.
The nuclear strike is like a low yield tactical nuke, it takes out a city block or so, really low yeild, now, if it dropped into the middle of the base then ya, end of game lol.
You can build as many as you want, but its not like a true 50 kiloton strike that would clean the map.
Basically think cc except the infantry is good, more options for tactics, units that blow up instantly and combined arms that really work.
For example units will move in formation and all at the same speed and such.
Its not perfect, but its a lot better then generals.
Jason Blaz
Way to much to list here!
Way to much to list here!
RE: RTS thoughts
Thanks.
I find the only RTS game Ive played where the infantry works well is Close Combat2 - 5.
I find the only RTS game Ive played where the infantry works well is Close Combat2 - 5.
RE: RTS thoughts
ORIGINAL: wodin
Thanks.
I find the only RTS game Ive played where the infantry works well is Close Combat2 - 5.
I totally agree
This maybe due to the development of the game prior to the RTS cookie cutter boom. And to boot the developer set out making tactics at the tactical level as realistic as they could.
RE: RTS thoughts
I also concur - I had very high hopes for EYSA, but it gets to be too difficult to follow the action, give orders, AND manage the 3D camera all in real-time. It really is a ground breaking game, but its obvious that the game exceeds the capabilities of many potential fans. This hasn't gone un-noticed, I think. The demo I recently downloaded let you automatically insert pauses at predetermined intervals (e.g. 60 sec.) to let you get your bearings, check LOS, and give orders. I believe there is also a button that let's you switch to the old CC overhead 2-D view, which was manageable under almost all conditions.
RE: RTS thoughts
I think the only game I played of strategy that gives somewhat some emotional ties to the units within the game was the X-COM series. It just broke my heart when I lost that highly experienced commander to them darn aliens who just threw plasma grenades like they were candy. heh The fact that you could "name" all your soldiers also gave it some sentimental value, I would add my friends, and enemies names (these were my point peoples lol) and see who would survive.
WE/I WANT 1:1 or something even 1:2 death animations in the KOIOS PANZER COMMAND SERIES don't forget Erik!
and Floating Paratroopers We grew up with Minor, Marginal and Decisive victories why rock the boat with Marginal, Decisive and Legendary?

RE: RTS thoughts
I will maybe once, twice a year, play a multi game with friends (lan) of RTS. Its fun, just a good enjoyable time, kind of like watching Independance Day rather than Tora Tora Tora.
Personally prefer TB.
Game I am most looking forward to though is the WEGO 'Combined Arms: World War II (formerly Battlefields!)(CAWW2)'. There have been other WEGO games before I know Combat Mission (CM), can not explain why but just could not get into this. War In The Pacific (WITP) which I think is an absolutely brilliant game but have hardly played as this one takes humungous time factor, looking forward to playing seriously in the future when I can make proper time for it.
From reading the CAWW2 forums I think this is going to be superb. The Operational TB type game I love eg: (Battles in Normandy (BIN), Anglo-German War 39'-45' (AGW)on order, or in the old days Panzer General (PG), but with planning your attacks and both side carring out plans at the same time in WEGO system.
This game I think (and as not out yet I may be wrong) will be the most accessable WEGO type game so far, and may be a good middle ground for the RTS crowd to experience and learn what the TB fans enjoy so much, while taking TB system slightly towards realtime in terms of battles being resolved at same time.
Take a look at the Forum on this site under the coming soon and in development section, this could end up being a real little gem of a game.
Personally prefer TB.
Game I am most looking forward to though is the WEGO 'Combined Arms: World War II (formerly Battlefields!)(CAWW2)'. There have been other WEGO games before I know Combat Mission (CM), can not explain why but just could not get into this. War In The Pacific (WITP) which I think is an absolutely brilliant game but have hardly played as this one takes humungous time factor, looking forward to playing seriously in the future when I can make proper time for it.
From reading the CAWW2 forums I think this is going to be superb. The Operational TB type game I love eg: (Battles in Normandy (BIN), Anglo-German War 39'-45' (AGW)on order, or in the old days Panzer General (PG), but with planning your attacks and both side carring out plans at the same time in WEGO system.
This game I think (and as not out yet I may be wrong) will be the most accessable WEGO type game so far, and may be a good middle ground for the RTS crowd to experience and learn what the TB fans enjoy so much, while taking TB system slightly towards realtime in terms of battles being resolved at same time.
Take a look at the Forum on this site under the coming soon and in development section, this could end up being a real little gem of a game.