Too much RT, not enough S.

Dexter Omega · 2005-10-27T06:36:21

This post is split into two sections, each one divided into a common statement, a selection of text, and a question. It’s a bit long, and my first post, so please forgive me if it’s a little rough. Good reading. ------------------------- "If you want to get good at RTS games, you should really learn all of the hotkeys." It is my belief (and I'm sure others share this belief) that RTS games are a little too much twitch and not quite enough tactics. Too much of the player's time is spent either with a ridiculous amount of micromanaging, or having to handle half a dozen different things. The result is a very clear cut "skill level" that relies more on knowing which buttons to press and manual dexterity than well thought out planning and strategic management. It could just be my opinion, but I don't think this is a particularly good thing. I think it may be a good idea to free up the player’s brain a little bit. A real commander shouldn’t have to worry about each and every unit’s position and tasks, and neither should the player. The player should be able to play the game with a level of involvement that they chose, not a vastly unnecessary array of incredibly tedious tasks which would normally handled by officers two levels below him. He CAN control everything, but he doesn’t HAVE to control everything. Would a high level of automation in a RTS be a good thing, or a bad thing? (Obviously, the player would be able to choose what is and isn’t automated.) And now, the second matter. ------------------------- "If you want to get good at RTS games, one of the most vital things is speed." The rush is the bane of newbies. A player will get overrun by a small strike force at the beginning of the game, and they’ll be more or less screwed over. This is highly enjoyable for the winner, for they get the great feeling of victory for very little effort. This is also a very bad thing for the newbie, because they never get a chance to be "strategic" until they learn to be lightning fast with their opening routine. And even when they do, speed of creation is usually a more important thing than anything else. Ask any RTS player what one of their best games was. You’ll usually get a response describing a game with a lot of involving combat. Usually a long game. From what I can tell, the majority of RTS players fit into three basic categories, in a sense; Players who like to build, players who like to fight, and players who like to win. Now obviously there’s more to players than that, and everybody likes to win, but you’ll usually find players who prefer to build, prefer to fight, or prefer to win, and don’t care how they have to go about it. Here’s my concept; Leave the "Real Time" part out of base construction. Give the player a base creation mode. They’re given a set amount of resources, and all the time in the world they want to create a solid "Home Base" fortification, complete with a barracks, a solid HQ, walls, tanks, aircraft, defensive turrets, and anti-air installments. Include an "Auto-create base" function for people who don't want to have to mess around, and you’ve got the best of both worlds. The builders are happy, because they have all the time in the world to build their defenses up. The fighters are happy, because they can jump straight into good combat. The people who like to win probably don’t care either way. Everybody’s happy. Of course, there are obvious problems which require balance; you shouldn’t be able to create nothing but 500 units and a small shack for a base, and you can’t make 500 feet of solid brick walls as the only thing between the enemy and certain death. But otherwise, it’s a solution which fixes the problems of rush tactics, and satisfies the majority. Would the pre-built base concept be a good base for a RTS, as opposed to the current "worker and home base" routine? ------------------------- Now I’m sure that both the idea of high level automation and a pre-built base aren’t new ones. The question is, are they ultimately beneficial to add as core game concepts? Any input is greatly appreciated. Thank you for reading. Edit 1: Fixed a couple of grammatical errors. Edit 2: I've made a couple of comments which help clarify the issues discussed here; it might be easier to understand the concepts if those are read before posting. [Edited by - Dexter Omega on October 19, 2005 1:35:49 AM]

Game Design and Theory Game Design

Started by Dexter Omega October 18, 2005 11:05 AM

54 comments, last by NIm 19 years, 3 months ago

Too much RT, not enough S.

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Too much RT, not enough S.

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Reticulating splines