Are there any RTS games coming with great potential ?

I miss Kohan.

It was the only RTS game that I could play very quick games, but also giant day long games just by setting the map size larger.

The squad building mechanic and squad control was a great pre-cursor to CoH.

Also, MOBAs and RTSs can co-exist. The problem with RTS games isn't that MOBAs are taking over, it's that RTS developers have been foolishly focusing on the 1v1 game that everyone clamors for, but in reality, it's the team games that most people are interested in.

If Relic had focused more effort on making the team modes stand out with their own mechanics and pacing, and not a protruding vestigial limb off the base 1v1, CoH2 could have found more of a place in today's market.

You don't have to make CoH like MOBAs, but there is still something to learn from MOBAs, and that's that people like being part of a team, and love watching a team work together.

I sympathize entirely.

Funnily enough, alongside attempts to create RTS with macro scales (which imo many are amazingly innovative and progressive) its actually the old parallel line of turn-based strategy games which are shining as far as macro goes, in Grand Strategy.

Total War, EUIV and CKII. EVE also still takes the cake, as far as strategy goes, albeit in a sort of fps format.

We are a rare few who appreciate RTS and strategy. For whatever reason, it is so, nonetheless.

Thats well and fine, nor is it elitist. We just happen to enjoy something different than most.

But the problem, is that a as a niche, we become less attractive to investors and games producers.
Against that, our one saving grace though, is our fanaticism.
Undoetunately, we more often turn that against each other, rather than jointly supporting our own niche and its interests.

Edited to add:
Agree with Turtle. Most (of the few thatbRTS) enjoy co-op in the sense of teamplay, more than 1v1, when pitted against opponents.
Two factors to that:
1) People are intimidated by facing someone in confrontation. I practiced fencing for awhile, and i experience the same in 1v1. Its an opponent whos face you cant see, but you are intimately in contact with them in competition. Man against man... 1v1 is hard on you, personally. Its all your own fault. Many people skirt this enormously. Furthermore, losing sucks. Its very hard on the ego. Rare is the respectful gentleman winner who wont rub your face in it. And equally rare, a loser who doesnt take it personally. Which leads ro my second factor

2) In a team, you are not alone. You are supported, carried, whatever by someone else. Its funny how in team victory, most say "I won" (not we won) in pridepost, disregarding team, and when they lose, they blame teammate instead.Sort of ironic, eh? Difficult topic, but Im sure most of you know this to be more common than not. I dont blame anyone for it. I understand. Shared responsibility is easier than personal responsibility, and more convenient. Not only can you claim personal vidnicsrion when you win, but you can sideline personal failure by blaming others instead when you lose... Notable to that, in paradox, the best teams are the ones who do the exact opposite. Blame themselves for failure, and celebrate the team in victory. Something to think about there...

Such is this day and age, and as Turtle points out, and has often been commiserated here on coh2.org, a design perspective from 4v4 down, rather than 1v1 up, might be more representative and conducive to a games stuctural design in this modern age (whereas before, there simply where so few online players that 1v1 was more common), and also considering the change in people and their personal/societal comfort zones in terms of 1v1 scaring the hell out of them.

I miss Kohan.

It was the only RTS game that I could play very quick games, but also giant day long games just by setting the map size larger.

The squad building mechanic and squad control was a great pre-cursor to CoH.

Also, MOBAs and RTSs can co-exist. The problem with RTS games isn't that MOBAs are taking over, it's that RTS developers have been foolishly focusing on the 1v1 game that everyone clamors for, but in reality, it's the team games that most people are interested in.

If Relic had focused more effort on making the team modes stand out with their own mechanics and pacing, and not a protruding vestigial limb off the base 1v1, CoH2 could have found more of a place in today's market.

You don't have to make CoH like MOBAs, but there is still something to learn from MOBAs, and that's that people like being part of a team, and love watching a team work together.

Actually thats a great sight of it, and I have to agree, presonally, I play 2v2 99% of the time, because there I can still make a big difference on the outcome, but it opens up lots of options due to having a teammate who you can cooperate with.

I don't like 1v1 because you barely see the "whole game" in it (units, techs)



Anyhow, if only they realised that shitting on the community is like shitting on their own selves, they'd stop with this EA like trash & disrespect of customers.

Other than the regular process, permissions, etc, how expensive woult it be to keep up a team who just follows up and patches & balances the game from the huge incomes that came from the sales, alongside the development of the next title or an expansion, like for real?


I'm all for expansions, new factions (opposing fronts, WFA), because that way they still focus on the actual game, provide more content for it, and possibly fix the existing issues meanwhile. Why can't this one simple thing be kept up?


Or even so, fine, they destroyed Company of Heroes, its unplayable due to several reasons, so I, We've bought the 2nd title, but for god's sake, at least make it worth our time and money, and don't go into an endless cycle of garbage, I don't want to see Company of Heroes 7 in 5 years, just no, please.

Red Alert is now free to play

Or even so, fine, they destroyed Company of Heroes, its unplayable due to several reasons, so I, We've bought the 2nd title, but for god's sake, at least make it worth our time and money, and don't go into an endless cycle of garbage, I don't want to see Company of Heroes 7 in 5 years, just no, please.

...and another topic turning into Relic flame

...and another topic turning into Relic flame

Don't get me wrong, I'm not here to flame Relic, its just purely an opinion, if its taken as a "flame of Relic", its not my fault.

I'm thankful for the years I could've played the original title for, I'm thankful for Company of Heroes Online, and all the fun I've had there.

Empire at War is excellent in space battle, ground battles are just meh.

Agreed. Those huge battle ships with spots to attack like lasers guns etc. It was amazing.

Although ground battles were not that bad. Classic rock-paper-scissor mechanizm.

Maybe Disney will make something with Episode VII hype so let's sacrafice few banthas or something for new SW RTS. So many ideas... The best would be timeline around Clone War because of many factions and units.

Blitzkrieg 3

It's going to be huge flop. Tanks moving like race cars? Come on... Gameplay just sucks.

Guys, please. Just look at the "macro" of today. I can't help it, but tell you, the answer is -> ~Consoles~

Think about it.
...



Well, thats just my few cents, don't take this as some shitty conspiracy theory, its an opinion you either simpathize with or not

Well, I'm not a fan of these kinds of conspiracy theories, but what you say is right, not because of the world leaders want BLAH BLAH stuff (no offense, you have the right to think what you want) but because "Dumb" gamers will by anything you throw at them if you provide enough Hype! Look at CoD or BF series. I admit that they are kinda fun to play, but they are just repetitive games which make you move from pointA to pointB and kill the bad guys. If you want to become more than that, you go play online and play with some guys who are mentally 13 years old.

The other reason is, developing games for consoles is A LOT easier, pirating is very hard and so you sell what you make. Consoles are cheaper (PC MASTER RACE). IMO PC gaming is still alive because of Valve and steam. People easily get tired of games. I remember the times when we had like 2-3 single player games and had to spend all of time on them. Now people need shiny titles like CoD and BF.

On the other hand, we have F2P games. A lot of title-good and bad- are available. They are making good profit, games are easy to learn and even master, are free, do not need Hi-end PC etc.
In this market, RTS is the least favorite. The exception being SC2, which is doing well because of Hype and because it's a "Blizzard" product.

I don't get how so many people here are hating on MOBAS. I like to play traditional RTS games and I like to play Dota2 and Smite. I know many others who do too. Looking at the amount of different heroes, abilities, items and strategies existing in most MOBAS I think they are in fact quite complex. Both live from an active meta where more than a few standard builds or strategies are viable.

So true... Some people sound really butthurt and elitist. "Ohh I play a game with 20 units instead of one, I must be so much better."

I like Mobas, I like MMOs, I like Shooter, I like RTS games. And I especially love it when someone innovates and combines the greatest things about different genres to make even better games. (As which btw, I see "Mobas". For me they took the fun part from MMO PvP, and put it in a format that didn't rely on grind, but thats just me.)



I agree that a big thing is Coop play (or teamplay). I personally prefer PvP games, I want the competition. I don't like the Teamgame aspect of Mobas or CoH 4v4 because its harder for me to improve, to see what I did wrong, and to see what my enemy did right. But as someone already said, thats what most people want.
AND:
I don't blame them for that. For example, I know someone who doesn't even really like to play Videogames, but because all of his friends do it, he does too for the social aspect.
Also Time. People have different amounts of time in general, or what they dedicate to videogames.
I can't play the games I like with any of my friends because I invest more time, and it would make understandably no sense to play against me. Also, different people are good in different games, now which one do you play with your friends? As long as they are competitiv directly agaisnt each other, you are going to have a bad time.


What I want to say is: There are many people who play Games, but everyone for a different reason and you shouldn't blame them for that. I can totally undertstand why people in a different situation then me, want to play different genres.

I'd be nice if we could get an ACTUAL modern day RTS game is that too much too ask for?

I always had high hopes for Atari's Act of War series, but it went no where. To bad cause I liked my Choppers!

"Act of aggresion" perhaps. Middle of the year

i want to look foward to that game, but being made by the makers of wargame kind of puts my hopes down, plus there doesnt seem to be any mention of any kind of terrain or cover mechanics. Playing rts games that dont use terrain in their game mecahnics feel so outdated.

I'm surprised nobody has said homeworld yet...

i want to look foward to that game, but being made by the makers of wargame kind of puts my hopes down, plus there doesnt seem to be any mention of any kind of terrain or cover mechanics. Playing rts games that dont use terrain in their game mecahnics feel so outdated.

Indeed. We will see.

About micro, i just read
-infantry can hind in houses and building
-there a sigh of vision
-there are different elevations.
-planes, artillery, copter have to be supply in munition

I miss the old ones like Cossacks 1

Now that was a great RTS game.

Looking at the amount of different heroes, abilities, items and [...]

that's it. that's exactly what i hate! i dont want to learn and memorize hundreds of this stuff to play. many people do, because everyone can do that. its not hard to learn something by heart.

i have a mg which can suppress. i have grenades which i can throw in houses. i have tanks which are hard to get but can deal and take a lot of damage. to win, i have to combine them using the right positions and flank routes ALL OF MYSELF. for me thats a logical concept and i prefer strategies built around this.

MOBAS are just rock paper scissors with hundreds of different rocks papers and scissors. and they are easy because you control just one only single scissor and not a dozen of them.

Guys, please. Just look at the "macro" of today. I can't help it, but tell you, the answer is -> ~Consoles~

Now, one last question, or well, thought, when was the last time you guys have seen a really, really good game, with good gameplay, innovation and support?

Well if you're talking gaming in general I'd argue that the past 8 years have been better than everything that came before. It's certainly the time when I realized the medium is a true art form and not an idle pastime. Also it's pretty easy to just ignore the multiplatform (console) niche since you don't hear much about it unless you're already into that world.

Speaking exclusively RTS though, yeah it seems like the demand isn't there unless there's nostalgia involved (HD re-skins, or games like PA riding on the past success of TA).