Base building is why I love Warzone 2100. In that game, you keep your base from mission1 and throughout several missions after that have the task and opportunity to build out the base further. Even when the mission takes you to another map, it is done with transport airship loading up at your original base, which you can still instruct to build more units to send reenforcements to the mission map. If I was to make an RTS, it most definitely would have that feature.

@skorpion7132

9 ай бұрын

Warzone 2100 was always a delight to play. I love you keep evolving your base, forces and everything from mission 1 all the way to the final mission.

I think something to be said about the MCV mechanic in C&C is that it provides a lot in terms of opportunity cost management, as well as some interesting micro. You only have one building queue, which means that, let's say if you want to build a power plant, not only are you spending the money on doing so, you're also delaying anything else you could be building. I think that makes the concept of build order very interesting in classic C&C, since, even though you usually start out with a lot of money, there's going to be a big difference between someone who gets a war factory after one ref, and someone who goes for the second ref first. Also, the ability to deploy fully functioning buildings on the map instantly makes for a more interesting use of base defenses, as you're able to keep one built in your queue, and place it in response to an attack (this comes at the cost of not being able to use that queue). A lot of pro RA2 players implement this a lot. Another thing about the MCV is that it's a very clear target. Since players can't rebuild it unless they have tier three tech, losing the MCV can quite often cripple you permanently. However, attacking the MCV may potentially lose you the victory in the short term, as bases can still function without one, which leads to the strategy that many players use to essentially sacrifice their MCV while they ramp up production. Again, it comes down to opportunity costs.

@StarlasAiko

2 жыл бұрын

I am trying to plot out an RTS game and hopefully create it one day. I will definitely use MCVs, but also a Construction Plant. Player can build MCVs but after building one construction it needs to be sent back to Construction Plant to pick up the next pre-fab building to deploy it. There is no magically 3D printing whatever you happen to need. You have to build the construct you want in the Construction Plant, load it onto an MCV, transport it to where you want it built, build it and drive the MCV back to the Construction Yard to pick up the next pre-fab. One has to balance the freedom of having several MCVs and Construction Plants at cost of the scarce resources or use the resources for other things at the cost of having a slower construction rate. This makes it more similar to, I believe it was Dune2000, where one builds a generic MCV that gets consumed in the construction process. But with the cost of making MCVs and them not being single use, it moves it a bit back towards the concept of the C&C MCV but hinges the ability to build more structures on two points, the construction uinit and the pre-fab plant. Moving into a new map along the campaign, it is not outside the realistic if the starting loadout consists of only one MCV with a Construction Plant pre-fab loaded plus an escort of maybe five Tanks and one or two Resource Harvesters.

Adjacency is a good system. It is basically a more involved way of upgrading structures. The question is not wether to do it, but if and when. For example circling a MEX with 4 factories gives a crucial early game advantage in unit broduction to help a rush, but costs you 9 mass/tick eventually. Sorrounding a shield with pgens is an undisputable advantage but it takes resources and time that might be better served building tacmissile defence or pd.

@UnknownSquid

Жыл бұрын

Are you talking about SupCom 2 here? Because I've never seen anyone surround a Mex with factories. Far as I'm aware that doesn't even do anything.

@LukeAps

Жыл бұрын

Well said.

Great video! I hope you do more of these and keep digging in to RTS.

Rise of Nations has very meaningful base placement... no single other RTS has the city and territory mechanic. City placement is absolutely critical. Placement of cities and securing wood that can be defended is a must. Furthermore in RON you also need to place the buildings in the right places so archers and heavy infantry can defend from behind the library market and temple (with a castle, entrenched troops and spies behind for the ultimate defence)

@benjaminazariah2773

3 жыл бұрын

i know it is kinda off topic but does anybody know a good site to watch newly released series online ?

@benjaminazariah2773

3 жыл бұрын

@Stefan Ronnie thanks, signed up and it seems like a nice service :) Appreciate it!

@stefanronnie6047

3 жыл бұрын

@Benjamin Azariah Glad I could help =)

The statement on the engineers in Supreme Commander around 6:25 is a horrible fuckup in this video. The engineers are tremendously important. They can capture enemy units, structures, and yes this includes enemy mass fabricators and engineers, which gives you access to enemy tech. More importantly, engineers can reclaim, both from nature and from wreckages, which is a massive economic advantage. Heck in the video you can see the tiny white sparks on the map, which shows the engineers working on auto-reclaim. Engineers are also important to heal units during battle, to repair and assist the Commander (ACU), and to build turrets (point defenses) in the middle of the battlefield for map control. If you are any decent Supreme Commander player, you will have at least one factory sending engineers to the battlefield. Just the reclaiming earns back their cost and they provide a necessary speed boost to production.

Would love to hear your opinions on how the Stronghold series attempts to tie much of this in with an increase in complexity.

@henrycoslick7456

4 жыл бұрын

same, mandalore gaming did one that I think deserves a rebuttal

@GeneralsGentlemen

3 жыл бұрын

I have never played Stronghold games. I probably should.

your casting language is excellent and clear!

that P4 kill was sick

Ingredients that a good RTS needs to my mind: - Good and elaborate basebuilding with a proper technology tree: CnC generals for instance has a WAY too small techtree making it less fun to transit through the different stages of technology. Warzone 2100 being on the opposite side of that spectrum has a HUGE techtree. Ideal is to find a good balance in between which I believe to be approximately twice a Starcraft II or CnC Kane's Wrath amount of available tech (building wise) - Elaborate and controllable economy: Red Alert 3 is a very terrible example of what NOT to do because the system in that game leaves NOTHING for you to have to keep up and control. CnC games in general are a bit boring because there's only one resource, but so long as you're looking at something like CnC 3 (minable fields) at least you have a good amount of control in how many and what harvesters to use. - Decently designed unit roles: Again Red Alert 3 has a good example of what not to do when you want fixed unit types. The allied faction in RA3 uses an incredible amount of overlap and redundant units. There are two spectrums here: the fixed-unit styles that are employed by games like Starcraft II, CnC game or you can do a Warzone 2100 or Earth-series approach where you must first design your units through blueprint parts. For Warzone 2100 with its huge techtree this is a particulairly satisfying system. Another thing which Warzone does thats very cool is an increased emphasyis on artillery-type weaponry along with various systems to effectively counteract such weapons. - When factions are involved: make them unique and elaborate. I could go on with more points, but I'm leaving it here for the moment.

@josephbrandenburg4373

8 ай бұрын

I'm curious about how you liked Age of Empires 2 (the definitive edition, I guess)

this is gold for game design

New subscriber here. Good analysis. Incomplete but good. Please more videos like this

I've never seen that game at 5:49, 8 Bit Armies, looks cool!

I didn't understand a word cuz i didn't listen and just watched through monitor entire video. Best channel for procrastination. 10\10 Would watch again

SupComs adjacency has tradeoff implications your not thinking about. In energy terms, a single bomber is able to decimate early game ecos that are stuck together for these benifits. Its risk vs reward as well as a bonus to any form of artillery. Mass wise, it allows your opponent to reliably predict artillery targets without much fore knowledge. I would not call the techlabs from SC2 somehow superior concept. They are fundamentally different systems.

Great video General, also you should check out a blast from the past called Dark Reign 2, it was such a unique game, i played a ton of back in the day over LAN games.

I like strategy games that me build walls and allow for complex defences so I can build an impregnable fortress

The article was great, the video is even better!

Supreme Commander ксати до сих пор жива и играют в нее через клиент FAF. Причем онлайн достигает 1400 человек. Присоединяйтесь к faforever

RA3 does base building the best imo. Each faction having its own way of building bases and expanding adds a layer of uniqueness to combat because it changes the way players fight each other. The only downside is probably that the game pretty much tells you where to put ore refineries which is limiting. Refinery placement in KW is extremely important, like if you are fighting Nod and their one clicks.

Why not adjacency bonus for structures. Like you build a barracks near a naval yard instead of regular grunts it produces marines and naval seals, near a air field paratroopers and air calvery, factory motorize and mechanize infantry. Near HQ officers and Commandos. I believe in generals china gain a production of units when the Same structures are near by making rapid production easy but prime targets for bombers and artillery.

Interesting thoughts, thanks for sharing.

I'm so craving for a good RTS like Supereme Commander 2

I love to build my base neatly like an npc xD

0:07 RIP CnC 4 ;)

@TM-hg4lv

5 жыл бұрын

What is cnc ?

@Randompie3456

5 жыл бұрын

command and conquer

Can someone help me find the game about ancient china? I forgot the name but I think its Sangguo? Something like that

@Chamaeleonidae

Жыл бұрын

Fate of the dragon

I try to make an rts game mixed with horror, you have any suggestions for such a mix?

@sidlukkassen9687

2 жыл бұрын

I would love to know more about this!

@myriad9597

Жыл бұрын

I guess look at homeworld cataclysm/emergence.

@Razgriz_01

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, Homeworld Cataclysm (or Emergance, thanks copyright/trademark bs) Will be your closest for a horror RTS.

@dj_koen1265

5 күн бұрын

An rts horror game would seem almost impossible to make work If someone does attempt it i would suggest something like a isometric resident evil style game where you control multiple characters at once

Not being on mobile ?

1:53 what is the name of the game?

@ilax3071

4 жыл бұрын

It literally shows it... One of my fav rts for sure

There's a certain developer I'm thinking of who could learn a lot from this video *cough*Eugen*cough*... excuse me, I think I have a cold.

@Ivan-td7kb

4 жыл бұрын

And that's why they abandon base building entirely and created the wargame series

How can such good content just have 8000 views...

Very nice video

base boarding

Technically dawn of war is a real time tactics not strategy.

I expected opinionated bullshit when coming here, but I have to say, it's quite well thought out and insightful. However still an opinion. 10:26 I wonder where you draw the line with vulnerability for these builders. It makes sense for them to not be immortal to create opportunities for the opponents, but making them too vulnerable, slow or unable to escape can also lead to a very frustrating experience. Starcraft 2 with it's famous "worker harass creates the only cool moments in the game" is in my opinion a prime example of going over the top. The opportunity becomes a necessity and shoehorns game play into focusing only one thing. Ashes of Singularity is another such case, the workers are extremely slow, take a long time to build, but are onehit and aren't shielded by other units.

@skorpion7132

9 ай бұрын

The SC2 worker harass is also a copout here, that is litterally something "devised" by the top players who obsess about otherwise mundane or even rediculous things. SCII harvest/economy control is actually one of the best in the specific direction it went in. It still provides ample control over your income generation while having a rather frail unit being responsible for it. The unit can exist in abundance due to them being the "small and easily built" type, yet still have a limiting factor in that their production structure isnt easily duplicated. the RA2 Warminers and CnC3 GDI miners are arguably worse given their durability, availability of a weapon and capability of crushing small units. However, both SCII and CnC3 or RA2 have a very well designed economic structure. RA3, CnC4 are the actually bad examples of what not to do, because vulnerability of the 'harvester' alone is not enough to consider, you also have to incorporate how that works in tandem with the complete economic system. Which is again why RA3 doesn't work yet RA2 does, even though they share an equal style of harvester type.

I'm gonna be one of those hard conservatives on this and say if it doesn't have base building to a meaningful and creative degree then I've already lost a good portion of interest. An ideal RTS for me would have engaging base building mechanics, a way to send out your 'flak' units, and a very high complexity of micro-style units. I want to be able to send large forces out _WHILE_ sending behind enemy lines a heavy drop craft filled to the brim with elite units. Then I wanna send missile strikes somewhere else.

Base building is alright if the built up bases actually look like something that could exist in the real world. Farming within walls never happened in the real world. And farms are rarely perfect squares. Not all houses castles and baracks look alike. The only base structure that i found believable was Frostpunk.

@josephbrandenburg4373

8 ай бұрын

I think the Stronghold games had great base building. And they aren't RTS, but the Impressions city-builders, Pharaoh, Caesar 3 and the like, I think they have some of the very best base building. I think it was Empire Rise if the Middle Kingdom that they did last, and it is still unsurpassed. Good stuff.

Great video bud. I came because of a misclick. I stayed because of your excellent video. thanks!

I think you missed a great opportunity to talk about mobile bases, such as the British HQ trucks in CoH, Mobile factories in Supreme Commander and those large HQ vehicles in Homeworld for example. I think they also matter and are an important feature that a lot of strategy games forgo for some reason, I mean it adds strategic and tactical depth especially in games like CoH where the British HQ trucks are your only possible "base" building so to speak so deploying them aggressively can yield you a closer position to the front from where you can spawn, reinforce and retreat units to if needed but then again you're risking losing that entire thing if the enemy deploys artillery or flanks the position for example. The OKW HQ trucks from CoH2 is another good example but you sadly can't unpack them in the vanilla game like in CoH so to me personally there's more risk involved than reward compared to the CoH British system. I mean sure you have the medic and repair upgrades for them but mobility is what dictates most CoH matches so it matters more, especially when you risk losing the entire structure.

@GeneralsGentlemen

5 жыл бұрын

Sure, I think that's a whole topic for another video though. I certainly have some thoughts on the subject and it's an interesting mechanic (That I think is easy to mess up and end up being really cheesy and frustrating like in Coh), but this vid was already 11 minutes! Brevity is good for these kinds of vids.

dawn of war 2 got rid of base building, one of your favourite games, blehhhh

Is it just me or is anyone else really bothered by the incorrect pronunciation of "base-boolding"? However, I really do appreicate his almost immaculate pronunciation in general as all other words are crystal clear perfect.

cossacks?

I hate really mobile builders. If one of them manages to sneak past you in a game they can wipe out your base in a few minutes with you not being able to stop them if they are not noticed in that time. It feels really unbalanced to me

@sufferfr0mlag506

3 жыл бұрын

Which game are you refering too?

@josephwilkins238

3 жыл бұрын

@@sufferfr0mlag506 rusted warfare

@sufferfr0mlag506

3 жыл бұрын

@@josephwilkins238 mate i just turtle in that game and it always becones a stalemate Maybe because i play with AI

@ineednochannelyoutube5384

3 жыл бұрын

@@josephwilkins238 Rusted warfare is TA. If you are getring cheesed you didnt scout enough, which is easy to solve, just build detection structures.

I love rts genre there is something special about it I playd them all in last 20 years but there is only one that nails rts systems and give joy in singleplayer and its untachable and divine in multiplayer(starcraft is absolute garbage divided of joy for comparisson) BFME2

@ilax3071

4 жыл бұрын

Ah yes call one of th most popular s rts of all time "garbage divided of all joy" Such a edgy response, a man of culture you are.

AoE2 is the best RTS, great balance of base building and warfare

@dj_koen1265

5 күн бұрын

Nah, civs are too generic in aoe2 And the flow of the game feels heavily linear

@GeneralsGentlemen some people say it is an RTT game then with no base building. CnC4 largely did the same (but units were free and popcap cost/build time) Many units had solid design in CnC4. How is Ashes base building meaningful, when research is endless and you need more and more buildings to make research resource ? Reminds of supcom 2 research - after a point it became a waste.(that game failed in not having AoE anti aircraft, air could always steamroll) Those titans (using sins of solar empire terminology) utilized research to somewhat stop the research overblow. 0:28 Id say, quite similar to ashes, strange buildings with strange names but you need them in order to build another strangely sounding and looking unit. 0:31 only people into occultism that I know utilize word esoteric.(usually red flag, but I dont know what it means really, is it like transcendental or something ?) 0:40 No sandbox no creativity, just the need to pump some stuff out to make production work. Unless it is taxing, why not. placement in RoN was about having as much resources around in its influence radius. Together with XYZ amount of ages, youd need to run around the map as youd deplete everything. (action mode in Empires:Dawn of the Modern World - is on gog) not bad when you are forced into expansion, but bad when resources deplete too fast with no backups for long term replacement.(secondary economy like hackers in ccg etc, or AoE 3 factories, plantations, trade in aoe1/2, or even market in AoE2) long range units having great size on the ground versus gigantic clumpable mass in the air calls for imba, especially with no area of effect vs air units. long range infantry and their dps, the rockets you are showing have their weakness, travel time and overkill potential. Side and rear armor damage bonuses. WCIII is a moba with the game being around the heroes, their equipment, which the rest plays as support to the boss unit. Boss units scale much more and better than cannon fodder that only has one-time upgrades. superweapons and 1 click magic powers, offmaps, in CoH2 it gives too much variables to consider it balanced on many occasions. Damage dealt entirely on RNG (target size + moving accuracy + penetration vs armor) makes for very unpredictable environment. T-34/76 always gets penned,its pen is 120-80 Pz IV pen is 120-100, and its armor is excessive, so as a T-34 you need a chance both to hit and maybe penetrate or come close to hit and a much better chance to pen, doing fixed dmg when penning. They could have come up with proportional damage based on penetration while not exceeding standard max damage. Tank shots when not 'penning' another tank (having less penetration than armor) should do a percentage of damage instead with each shot based on pen/armor. offmaps as in generals costing nothing, being on timer, like nukes or particle guns, just a bad thing. It needs limitations like some sort of upkeep to keep it running. engineers arent cheap, and as a combat unit they are largely ineffective. and then you come up with slow expensive workers being better than say being a combat unit. Sputnik is read as an U letter, not A. No Spatnik. oo - u. SupCom mining site+silos made the building produce more. Something to add vulnerable snipable thing to your resource collection. Imo not too bad, considering how when stuff starts exploding and making a chain reaction, it provides buffs with consequences should it get hit. You could put generators to lessen energy consumption, so in theory you do have a choice. Batteries are essential in keeping good amound of electricity not wasted, when you suddenly start building an uptier or experimental that would eat your power in 2 seconds otherwise. the word strategy in sc seems overused. Isnt it a more tactical choice of just choosing between even pre-built upgrades for your future building ?(barracks building a lab for your future factory for example) Is it strategic to block your base or a tactical thing ? Blocking like in WIII looks very gimmicky because of the pathfinding. It is a pro skill, but it looks bad with melee units being unable to push their way out like in some more realistic looking games. (ancestors legacy) Building for building sake doesnt cut it. It is like playing a game for playing or addiction sake. Like you have nothing worse to do than play games. you are seemingly forgetting about unit/building size, how big your buildings need be to be right, not weak, not op. Not too big to fill your whole screen with with just 1. a lot also plays for the buildings/cliffs whether it is possible to shoot or see through them. Line of sight gives a distinction between a massive hordes of units with not much in depth. Massive unit number means lesser combat depth, or there is too much to simulate for normal people to either care or comprehend at the same time. rise of nations failed in units becoming vessels whenever you touched water, like it is no barrier. Easily sunk by subs, also stealth bombers were uncounterable from the ground and terrible air control made wonders go down one by one. And terrible hard counter system not changed from stone age into digital one. It plays very gamey with missing RL counters in later ages.

It is just me or in your recent videos you talk slower?

@GeneralsGentlemen

5 жыл бұрын

Ha probably, pacing is good.

best RTS ever is StarCraft II. fight me

@snuffsonic23

5 жыл бұрын

carbot bw > all

@toplel_

5 жыл бұрын

@@snuffsonic23 no u

@charlesadams8669

5 жыл бұрын

Aoe2 is

@toplel_

5 жыл бұрын

@@charlesadams8669 no. it's not even close to how balanced SC2 is

@toplel_

5 жыл бұрын

@@Rhosalth7 RTS is about both. If you wanna have fun with no balance, go play LoL

NO

@ilax3071

4 жыл бұрын

yes