Why are people here such Negative Nancies?

>>2410900
It’s a /v/ thing. It’s bad on Twitter, but even worse here

>No, we are not going to research or develop UI solutions to reduce APM
>I don't care that Populous 3 had a convient ledger, where you could select 1,5, 50 or all members of a unit type and even choose to only take the ones, who are busy / not buy/ in a house!
>you will for now and to the rest of time ALWAYS have to manually click units or drag a window over them! this is how it has been and will always be
>a UI window with desired worker distribution? are you mental? So you want to open a window and assign 10 workers to wood, 5 to gold and 5 to oil and have workers automatically pick up these jobs FOR YOU??? is this even an RTS anymore?
I have utter contempt for all RTS developers, who are creating a game after Starcraft 2. Even the indie developers are creating a cynical Starcraft 2 copy, because they want MUH ESPORTS. Only a singular player or rather influencer type is being appealed to in these games. They don't even give a fuck about campaigns anymore.

File: file.png (2.6 MB)

>>2410900
I actually quite like many games, and am excited for, for example, Dust Front, which avoids this specific trope in favor of landscapes which actually sell the idea of its setting

>game is balanced for 7 nerds that play it 20 hours a day
>game balance for normal people is routinely raped and all fun aspects removed because le heckin competitive scene (that will die in a few months)

>>2410834
Basebuilding.

>>2410932
This, although personally its the lack of evolution of genre for me. Manually selecting units was a limitation back in the day, yes. Lack of individual AI was also a limitation, even though some games already had AI controlled battlegroups.
Now though there is no excuse for all the shitty micro.

>>2410932
isn't Tempest Rising exactly what you want? A primarily single player campaign focused RTS

File: 1748945586356575.png (422.9 KB)

>unit roster is locked, and is gradually unlocked every mission, which serves as the tutorial for the latest unit
>>2410900
you have to go back

>>2411790
I'm having a hard time putting into words how retarded this opinion is.

>>2410834
Let me guess you're a city kid?

File: 1721629782201587.jpg (102.4 KB)

>>2411899
Difficulty of verbalization is a sign of a lacking mind.

It is trite. That gameplay philosophy creates a linear framework, in which you are not overcoming a strategic problem, you are following a manual. It is far more interesting to have a problem, and being given a complete toolset, with the freedom to experiment on how you can overcome the problem. Gameplay becomes more emergent, less restrictive, and more replayable. You don't get that with these linear progressively unlocking missions.

>>2412230
You sound like a lonely autist who'd rather solve puzzles than beat up other players. Tell me the one singular game you've played that inspired this opinion so I can laugh at how it's not Starcraft 2, Warcraft 3, Red Alert 2, or Dawn of War.

>>2410834
>rock-paper-scissors combat is enforced by making units do 0.001x damage to their counter matchups

File: 1607628763474.jpg (37.5 KB)

>Objective: [Hero unit] must survive
>they aren't much stronger than your regular units so the optimal strategy is to just have them sit in a corner for the entire mission

>>2412325
THIS

>>2412325
If you don't do this you end up with mass voidray

>>2410834
The biggest trope rts has is its single player content is still using the same westwood formula of linear campaign and bot skirmish. Linear campaign leads to player being bogged down and use crutches on their least fav mission and force themselves to forget about playing again.
Even the most simple rpg and 4x enjoys rich strategy on campaign level and scratch the same itch if the combat involves deploying groups of units on combat map and orders them to move.

>>2410834
>this strategy game takes place in the FAR FUTURE
>>weapons are just modern guns, maybe in slightly futuristic plastic shapes

File: 1762281635400892.jpg (40.1 KB)

>>2412314
I made up that opinion myself.

>>2413663
Well, it makes sense until you come up with something that can stop bullets. Then you either revert to melee like Dune, have some utility weapon to shut down shields, or shoot red/green bullets like StarWars.

>>2413657
Based, and a better articulated version of this >>2411790 anons problem.
By the time you reach the end of the campaign and get all the tools, it's the final or penultimate mission.
The argument for this shit setup is:
>That's because the campaign is just a tutorial for the real game: competitive multiplayer!!
But this is retarded because playing campaign doesn't "teach" you how to play the game at all. RTS campaigns never represent a competitive multiplayer match. Usually they teach you how to use a unit in a way that is only applicable against a bot, and campaign missions typically use an alternate AI from skirmish matches which intentionally does not rebuild or commit it's full forces to ensure the player will win.

>>2413733
How does "you have to clear out a bunch of zerglings, have some hellions" not teach you to build hellions against zerglings? What benefit is achieved if this were instead "you have to clear out a bunch of zerglings, have everything you can possibly build"?

>>2410834
I hate ultraspecific multiplicative damage effects
>unit does 33 damage across the board
>but only does 6 damage to worker units
Also, I hate it when there's no kind of clarifier to unit types/armor classes. Like I bet you didn't know DoW1 had seperate
Medium Heavy Infantry and High Heavy Infantry classes within the Heavy Infantry category? Or Age2/3's shock infantry class, versus light or heavy infantry: just show what class a unit is in addition to what it's good against

Also, why has no RTS added a "select all wounded units from group" button to the UI

>>2413733
>But this is retarded because playing campaign doesn't "teach" you how to play the game at all
Also putting this aside, threating the singleplayer campaign like some shitty tutorial and pretty much making these games multiplayer only compslop is what caused the dogshit genre to die.

>>2412230
I've never seen a game that lets you use all the toys all the time and doesn't turn dull after a few scenarios. You're going to be using virtually the same army composition every time and you know the enemy will always be the same, too. That's restrictive in its own way.
You know what is fun? A non-linear campaign or campaign map that gives you unlocks for completing scenarios that you can then use in other scenarios. That's rewarding, satisfying, replayable, and even challenging if you try a non-standard route.

>>2413800
Settlers 4 had "select wounded units"

File: You always have a choice.jpg (51.7 KB)

>>2410932
>I have utter contempt for all RTS developers
I'm making my own RTS with blackjack and hookers (more or less literally), and tackling the decision/action ratio to reduce busywork APM is quite high on the design list.
Drop all the examples/billion-dollar-idea you got about that and I will try to cram as many as I can in.
Populous/DungeonKeeper "grab the lazy imps" ledgers somehow escaped my mind despite how much I used them - I'm getting geriatric and probably forgot a ton of others neat ones.

>Inspired by starcraft!
>Has zero of any of the fun mechanics starcraft has.
>No creep, no morphing units, no sacrificing workers to summon buildings, no building ammo.
>at most has a seige tank unit, that's only for the human faction.

>>2415569
Endwar had this convenient thing that if you selected infantry and transports together and ordered them to go somewhere, the infantry would automatically board the transports, ride to the destination and dismount on site. Imagine if it worked in other games like AoE2: you select land units and ships and send them across with one click.

Melee infantry taking down structures faster than archer units.
AA units not being able to target ground targets, especially if they're just a couple of regular HMGs welded together onto a multi-planetary swivel mount.

>>2415569
Make the player units' AI on par with the enemy AI when it comes to self-preservation of idle / unattended units - i.e. have the workers either flee towards the home base if attacked or your nearest army blob, and in case of armed units let them automaticly fight back instead of just letting hostiles slaughter them without any attempt at retaliation just because you just forgot to order them to guard the location after setting up an elaborate waypoint path - as if you even could do it anyways since in most RTS games the 'Guard' command is key-activated so you can't issue it mid-planning so you have to wait for said units to stop moving to their target destination first.

>>2415955
>Melee infantry taking down structures faster than archer units.
Why?
Melee is inherently turbo-gimped, that's a relatively non-game-breaking "make-sense" upside to give them.

>>2412230
>>2411790
The campaign is meant to teach people how to play the actual game that's why it's giving each unit a situation in which it shines.

>>2411156
Her name is Company of Heroes 3. Whole multiplayer is balanced around the top 1% of players who are the biggest sweatlords on the internet.

>>2416032
They keep making changes for big team game modes nerfing stuff like SPGs or coastals which are barely viable in 1v1s so you're wrong.

>>2415985
Jesus fuck, the fact that in COH your AT guns get raped by tanks without retaliating just because the tank is not in their initial facing direction is so retarded it hurts.

>>2411156
Trivial to fix. Always was. I think I even saw a game or two implement the fix although I no longer remember the names.
I wanted to make my own game with the fix but now that slop is killing everything I might as well spill the spaghetti for archeologists to maybe dig up someday: different rulesets. One for campaign, one for normal PvP, one for ranked sweating. Can be as simple as not allowing some units or tech in sweatplay to keep the spergs pacified while the rest have fun toys to play with.

>>2412325
The true arch sin, and will remain with the genre until the last days of humanity.

>>2412802
Dune II was perfectly fine. Maybe nuBlizz design capabilities is the problem instead.

>>2415995
No, the tutorial is meant to teach that. The campaign can be used for that if your designers are good enough. If in doubt, make a tutorial.

>>2420072
>Dune II was perfectly fine.
Dune II had issues that dwarfed any problem related to unit balance, and iirc didn't even had a multiplayer mode (I had internet access only after I stopped playing it, maybe it did).
In any case no one really had the occasion to test if there was a local equivalent to mass voidray.

>>2420102
Which issues? No, it doesn't have MP.
I replayed it not too long ago and I could not just pick one type of unit and spam it to win. I know the game well enough to say none of it would work that way no matter how many interface or controls improvements you could add to it.

>>2410834
Are you talking about ZEPHON? Because even in ZEPHON there's usually some weird shit going on at every facet of the setting (i.e. the woods themselves might be fine but those freaky glowing cicadas might be passing through)

>>2412802
No you don't.

>>2411542
>the lack of evolution
What can be done that hasn't been done already? It feels we've seen everything that makes sense (unlike things that just don't).

(�/�c�9)%7nX"�)V�V�N��췫��dL�����k��e��Jnqa���|y�=S�$�T캽�gm}꧿���~Z�v4�ϐ\��9�_�GP������+iE�Q�6��ȷ��c��
^��^��p6�K`�2! �p�hݰh�.-�K�R�~���Gs��i��o'� � A�G*ݡ��7��ze�N��HXJ2X�4Z`Xҕ8��e�M���ajQO��r$u׬��W��n)����N-s⺹�w$VB��q��
�>���)�?,h�EWĴ�l�����nﺮ�1Sf�p���"nJ��_�ɰ
��c}��x�^�R;%z՗�P�6�3+�-D��H�̉�q����h4��~P�
f'D�*q��Ə}�§�H�����1 �M��w�|�L7C����*e~�&'�>�v���ƕh�ԆB���V]xݻ�i��MW��L`م}�]6Q�r��aF$�*�p��z�5Bq���˼�J

(�/�#�9)� �<12devs apie? Lolno.��x~2�D/M\]Yi���i��d��tЊ4��޲�ٱ6U

(�/�#�9)bM
�

(�/�c�9)���݃�����l{W��A�k�l*g����Q�p�D"�:v�O�m4
mc�O���cdd�
e��w�7T^u�[��~%���k����m7hmv��x���)ڒN���:�1O��)=���zvuM

(�/�#�9)k-
(<10 w
�&BI�
'��� �T#ڠY��ܜ]]v�