RTS PC games coming in 2016 ?

Blitzkrieg III Kappa

Wrong. First of all RTS games are defined as a strategy game that progresses in real time rather than turns. That is all. The basebuilding and resource gathering mechanics are the norm, but not qualifiers. RTS games with base building and resource gathering (eg. CoH and Starcraft) are not RTT games because they have those features, but RTT games like Total War and Wargame are still RTS games minus typical but unrequired elements of the genre. Second, your very post contradicts itself. If group B is a subcategory of group A, by definition it is A. What you're saying is essentially "Mustangs are Fords, but they are not Fords" which is the most unintellectual thing I've seen on this site in a long time.

The problem and misunderstanding here lies in the definition of strategy or strategy game as it is the term used in the definition of RTS. If you belive that tactics is subcategory of strategy, then RTTs are subgategory of RTSes. But there has to be a limit somewhere, there is also strategy involved in many multiplayer FPSes and in MOBAs, does it mean they are RTSes too?

The belief that RTS must contain resource management and unit building comes from the fact that out of two typical parts of RTS gameplay: micro and macro, macro is the one that involves strategy, thus making the whole game a strategy game that progresses in real time.

Still waiting for AoE 4....

Same. Although Cossacks 3 might scratch that itch.

Also, Blitzkrieg 3 is slated for release Q1 2017.

Call to arms

Call to arms

I wouldnt call a mod a game.

Just like every other men of war games, beating a dead horse for more money with zero effort.

#just505gamesthings

The problem and misunderstanding here lies in the definition of strategy or strategy game as it is the term used in the definition of RTS. If you belive that tactics is subcategory of strategy, then RTTs are subgategory of RTSes. But there has to be a limit somewhere, there is also strategy involved in many multiplayer FPSes and in MOBAs, does it mean they are RTSes too?

The belief that RTS must contain resource management and unit building comes from the fact that out of two typical parts of RTS gameplay: micro and macro, macro is the one that involves strategy, thus making the whole game a strategy game that progresses in real time.

When you ask about an RTS you infer it's gonna be it's "classic" game format, with involves micro/macro aspects in the form of unit combat, resources, tech/building on real time.
If you want the whole spectrum you'll talk about the strategy genre.

People are here just to argue with each other. If you ask for RTS on COH2 Lobby, you expect for someone asking for a game with similar mechanics. If you did this on "other games section" or say, Total war hammer or MOW forums, it might be logical that people gave example of RTT as well. Context matters.

Show Spoiler

ON: it's sad but i don't see the returning of the ol golden days of RTS to happen any time soon.

I really hope Relic could be his year-2006 version, much innovative and much efficient.

Not some lazy XXXX who need 37 days for a hotfix

The genre is dead. It takes good design chops to create a diverse meta and also a fun game.

MOBA's get around it with insane variety and metagaming.

RTS's today fail hard. SC2 is the gold standard and it had errors of rampant imbalance that David Kim refused to fix for 6 months to a year. Things like Brood Lord Infestor and Blink All Ins.

LOTV is better but SC2 lost way too much momentum because of it. Blizzard's other games subsidize SC2 esports. As a game it is played but probably their least popular PC property.

And COH2 is a distant 2nd but the only other RTS game in town and it's a pretty mediocree game too. On a technical leve, Response times are bad and the engine is poorly optimized. Balance is wonky as well. There's been too many incidents like the american mortar where they buffed it for no reason (and this time they had a long beta!) and left it that way for weeks or months.

RTS can be fun single player but for multiplayer, you need a design lead that is tweaking and open betas to test ideas.

I think RTS development and design is simply too hard to get right. DOW is much more popular than COH and that's because it is closer to a MOBA than an RTS.

Has someone tried Total War Arena?

Has someone tried Total War Arena?

Its really specific game.
Hybrid of MOBA and RTT, not belonging to either genre.

With all the remakes happening in the console market I want a C&C Generals and G:Zero Hour to be "HD" refeshed and then balanced, (stronger tanks and much weaker and shorter range Quad Cannon).

I would play the shit out of that.

http://www.openra.net/

https://play0ad.com/

Can't count on anything better until DoW3 really

Cool. No Generals though.

Hey what about Planetary Annihilation, any good?

Cossacks 3; 20.09

I have to say RTS is generally going by the wayside. Which is unfortunate because it has and probably always will by my favorite way to game.

I think there's a few things that contributed to the steady decay of RTS:

Phone games - A.D.D. generation gets their gaming fix through all the quick playing games on your phone. No need for a high-end gaming rig, which brings me to my next point.

Technology escalation - RTS has often been one of the most demanding/least optimized gaming vehicles and I think it turns a lot of people off. You could just go get a whole console and a couple of games for the price of a cutting edge graphics card that lasts 2-3 years before you have to upgrade again. Seems like every time a new RTS is released the graphics emphasis is way overblown.

Complexity - While shooters have gotten ADS/crouch/cover systems etc over the last 10 years and RPGS have gotten crafting(and a bunch of other stuff), it was all implemented more smoothly than all the new additions to RTS. RTS has gotten increasingly complicated, more difficult to balance, and less accessible.


I'm with a few others on here. I'd like to see AOE4, or just a really solid remake of AOE1. And unlike everyone else on here I'm not looking forward to DOW3 all that much. Looks like they've changed too much again and are continuing on the trend to add more super-weapons into the game, which is what killed DoW2 for me. I don't see why they couldn't have just done a re-vamp of DoW2 with a complete balance overhaul add the Tau and Necron as a first release and then add sisters of battle and dark eldar for 1st xpac, then add Mechanicus for a 2nd expansion. Then they'd have a really solid complete 40k experience.


If RTS is going to make a come back a developer out there needs to take it back to it's roots. Simpler combat with a very solid rock-paper-scissor balance system , satisfying base building, and a solid minimally buggy game engine. Graphics also need to be moderate with ways to scale it way up or way down (without the game looking awful). I'd also like to see a new RTS released that only starts with 2 factions. Each faction added makes the game exponentially more complicated to balance.

just my 2 cents

That looks terrible tbh.
Plus it looks exactly like Men of War.

I can't trust any game coming from russia.

What about this?

http://store.steampowered.com/app/274440/?snr=1_5_1100__1100

DoW3 will do alright on release but I don't see it doing much for the genre in the long run. RTS isn't a ded genre yet but it does appear to be in a downward spiral with lack of appealing titles leading to less interest in the genre, in turn leading to less financial incentive for development of new releases. Seems like most releases are either remakes/'HD editions' of classic titles or 2nd-tier titles that offer an interest gimmick but lack polish.

People hold up SC2 as the pinnacle of RTS, as if to argue that if that game can't succeed, no game ever will. That's just not true, SC2 is far from a perfect game. For all its simplicity it still has a steep learning curve and despite the shiny graphics it retains an ugly and extremely 'gamey' aesthetic. From a single player perspective it has become excessively campy and suffers from Blizzard's tendency to rehash the same themes and plot lines.

So I think there is still potential for a successful RTS if it can get that winning combination of accessibility, innovation, polish and marketing, although of course that's much easier said than done. For CoH3, that would mean focusing more on its strengths, learning from past mistakes instead of repeating them, driving sales through good marketing (ideally timed closely with the next big WW2 movie/TV series), then supporting the game through thoughtful patches and worthwhile DLC.

DoW3 will do alright on release but I don't see it doing much for the genre in the long run. RTS isn't a ded genre yet but it does appear to be in a downward spiral with lack of appealing titles leading to less interest in the genre, in turn leading to less financial incentive for development of new releases. Seems like most releases are either remakes/'HD editions' of classic titles or 2nd-tier titles that offer an interest gimmick but lack polish.

People hold up SC2 as the pinnacle of RTS, as if to argue that if that game can't succeed, no game ever will. That's just not true, SC2 is far from a perfect game. For all its simplicity it still has a steep learning curve and despite the shiny graphics it retains an ugly and extremely 'gamey' aesthetic. From a single player perspective it has become excessively campy and suffers from Blizzard's tendency to rehash the same themes and plot lines.

So I think there is still potential for a successful RTS if it can get that winning combination of accessibility, innovation, polish and marketing, although of course that's much easier said than done. For CoH3, that would mean focusing more on its strengths, learning from past mistakes instead of repeating them, driving sales through good marketing (ideally timed closely with the next big WW2 movie/TV series), then supporting the game through thoughtful patches and worthwhile DLC.

The thing about blizzard is that they are the kings of updating and adding new and meaningful content to their games. While some people might complain, the quality of their patching is miles ahead of whatever relic puts out.

Sure, relic is better than before at the frequency of patching (coh1 days) but their patches always feel 60%-80% done. There's always something missing, wrong or just plain old fucked up. It may seem like a worthy effort to you newer players but us older guys are pretty worn out by it.

The thing about blizzard is that they are the kings of updating and adding new and meaningful content to their games. While some people might complain, the quality of their patching is miles ahead of whatever relic puts out.

Sure, relic is better than before at the frequency of patching (coh1 days) but their patches always feel 60%-80% done. There's always something missing, wrong or just plain old fucked up. It may seem like a worthy effort to you newer players but us older guys are pretty worn out by it.

I agree, many RTS games (and games in general) are released in an unpolished state with the assumption that refinement will come post-release, but it's all too often that follow-through never really occurs. Without that most players will quit early and move onto the next big hype rather than getting invested in the series.