[QUOTE=Nikita;52148929]Most RTS games have the One True Strategy that guarantees a victory-or-tie, and once mp players figure out what it is they all start using it. In that way you don't really have a choice in how to play, and being forced to either follow a script or lose kind of takes out the "strategy" and just leaves a "real-time game".[/QUOTE]
This is hilariously inaccurate for any half-decent RTS.
The biggest mistake C&C4 made was scrapping MCVs for mobile bases. Base building was one of the things that made C&C so great in the first place. Carefully choosing where you put your structures and setting up defenses accordingly is a big part of the "Strategy" part of an RTS, and sacking that for a mappy pappy mobile base system eliminated a lot of the fun and charm the previous games had.
[QUOTE=Nikita;52148929]Most RTS games have the One True Strategy that guarantees a victory-or-tie, and once mp players figure out what it is they all start using it. In that way you don't really have a choice in how to play, and being forced to either follow a script or lose kind of takes out the "strategy" and just leaves a "real-time game".[/QUOTE]
Got any examples?
[QUOTE=Nikita;52148929]Most RTS games have the One True Strategy that guarantees a victory-or-tie, and once mp players figure out what it is they all start using it. In that way you don't really have a choice in how to play, and being forced to either follow a script or lose kind of takes out the "strategy" and just leaves a "real-time game".[/QUOTE]
i believe you're mistaking what a "meta" is. being able to predict your oponent's development is akin to be able to foreshadow your oponent's next move in a chess game. in that regard, any RTS game, if played nough by enough people will develop said meta continuosly to develop itself beyond said meta, to a point were you stop to foreshadow and take risks and develop a strategy to defeat whatever your enemy throws at you.
it is why watching RTS matches was fun back in the day. it was not only about speedruning
[QUOTE=Mysterious;52149044]The biggest mistake C&C4 made was scrapping MCVs for mobile bases. Base building was one of the things that made C&C so great in the first place. Carefully choosing where you put your structures and setting up defenses accordingly is a big part of the "Strategy" part of an RTS, and sacking that for a mappy pappy mobile base system eliminated a lot of the fun and charm the previous games had.[/QUOTE]
I disagree, having had my friend convince me to play a fair bit of it in Coop a while back, that was far from my biggest problem with it. The Homeworld/Deserts of Kharak games are a great example of mobile bases making for a compelling game when done right
What I hated the most in CNC4 is the lack of a resource system and how as a result any problem the campaign throws at you can be solved by just sending an infinite number of rapidly built combined arms blobs towards enemy positions. In skirmishes with my friends, it quickly boiled down to stalemates where a couple crawlers would send swarms of units at each other but progress would be very slow and repetitive since you never have to worry about wasting units, or defending your resources, so you can constantly keep a trickle of units going to the same place. This wasn't helped by how 80% of the units are locked out without grinding for hours to level up your profile.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
