Are any RTSs actually strategic?

[omega 616]

Every game requires strategic thinking.

Most RTSs are just spam units.

Not really, you have to manage your resources for a start, do you build 4,000 pesky things that don't deal much damage by themselves but en masse there awesome or build 5 very high damaging units, maybe even the middle ground.

You also have to think about countering units, if you build hundreds of units that can't attack air units and they make even one air unit you just lost.

Do you turtle up and tech yourself out or rush them, maybe a little of both.

All things that need tactics and thought for.

 

[SteveeVader]

Ever play Stracraft 1? Just building masses of soldiers is a quick way to bite the bullet. You'll be fucked without defenses and strategic choke points.

ever play Starcraft 2 where that is eliminated and all it is make unit... make unit

and at OP any of the total war games and if anyone says any of the starcrafts may they publicly be hung

 

[scythecow]

Every RTS should involve strategy. Even making nothing but one unit is a strategy, just a very simple one that should really lose. The very simple strategies should only work against the poorer opponents mostly though. The thing about the real time aspect is it also requires good handling of what you do have, so the strategy is also how well you can control the units. You also have to think quickly about how much of what to make when.

Starcraft 2 obviously involves strategy, but you don't need a whole lot of strategy at lower rankings or playing the campaign on easy.

 

[omega 616]

Every game requires strategic thinking.

Most RTSs are just spam units.

That's a strategy.

I mean REAL strategy.

What counts as `real' strategy? I'm pretty sure unit spamming is a legitimate strategy in the real world.

Well in WW2 it was ... seriously, "your all looking a little tired, time to go over the top and run at machine guns!"

 

[Shaegor]

Every game requires strategic thinking.

Most RTSs are just spam units.

That's a strategy.

I mean REAL strategy.

What counts as `real' strategy? I'm pretty sure unit spamming is a legitimate strategy in the real world.

Well in WW2 it was ... seriously, "your all looking a little tired, time to go over the top and run at machine guns!"

I believe you mean WW1 there.
OT: Most games have some degree of strategy, most people probably just won't admit that because it's not "real" strategy.

 

[fanklok]

I know this thread was done a while back but since then a bunch of new RTSs were released sooooo yeeeeaaaahhhhhhh....

Basicallyo any RTSs involve straegy? So far I think RUSE is the only one, please correct me if I am wrong.

you ever heard of Starcraft 2

All you do in that is spam units.

You seem to be confused. There are people who just macro (mass units then attack move into a base) but against a good player they rarely win. You have to consider your build order, scouting your opponent to find out what they're building, then building effective counters all while maintaining base expansion, economy, defenses and tech upgrades.

 

[redisforever]

Yes, there is one, quite cheap indie one. Called Hegemony: Philip of Macedon. I quite like it, except there is only a stroy mode. But it is a good one.
Just google it, they have a demo.

 

[omega 616]

Every game requires strategic thinking.

Most RTSs are just spam units.

That's a strategy.

I mean REAL strategy.

What counts as `real' strategy? I'm pretty sure unit spamming is a legitimate strategy in the real world.

Well in WW2 it was ... seriously, "your all looking a little tired, time to go over the top and run at machine guns!"

I believe you mean WW1 there.
OT: Most games have some degree of strategy, most people probably just won't admit that because it's not "real" strategy.

Typo'd.

Wonder what they were thinking when they thought it was a good idea?

 

[Zacharine]

Every game requires strategic thinking.

Most RTSs are just spam units.

That's a strategy.

I mean REAL strategy.

What counts as `real' strategy? I'm pretty sure unit spamming is a legitimate strategy in the real world.

Got to agree here.

The russian/soviet 'human wave' strategy worked for them, for a time. Got a problem? Just throw manpower at it until it is solved.

But with games that have hard counter units in them, just spamming one or two units is an instant loss against any competent opponent: they build the counter unit to them, decimate your army/keep it occupied while flanking to your base and taking you out.

In several games, ruses and feints and more than successful strategies. So is specialization to specific tech patterns to complete them quickly in order to gain an edge.

All of this has been around from even before Stacraft 1.

The problem here might be that the OP has never been properly challenged in the RTSs he's played. Perhaps too low a difficulty, or simple unwillingeness to try any strategy beyond spam, so that in the end spamming a few basic units is all that he sees.

 

[Judgement101]

I know this thread was done a while back but since then a bunch of new RTSs were released sooooo yeeeeaaaahhhhhhh....

Basicallyo any RTSs involve straegy? So far I think RUSE is the only one, please correct me if I am wrong.

you ever heard of Starcraft 2

All you do in that is spam units

Every game requires strategic thinking.

Most RTSs are just spam units.

That's a strategy.

I mean REAL strategy.

AHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH...no really...AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAH.
yeah you are the WORST Starcraft 2 player in the world.there is no RTS where spamming units is effective you sir are a dipshit and need to shut up before you embarrass yourself even more.

You need to stop fucking trolling.

 

[ThePirateMan]

I know this thread was done a while back but since then a bunch of new RTSs were released sooooo yeeeeaaaahhhhhhh....

Basicallyo any RTSs involve straegy? So far I think RUSE is the only one, please correct me if I am wrong.

you ever heard of Starcraft 2

All you do in that is spam units

Every game requires strategic thinking.

Most RTSs are just spam units.

That's a strategy.

I mean REAL strategy.

No, no, no, no, no.

Starcraft 2 is not just spamming units.

You have to maintain a good economy, try to downgrade the enemies' economy, lock them into their bases/stop them from doing that to you, keep an eye on what units they're geting, expand your own base, make sure the terrain is either "neutral" or at your advantage in encounters, etc etc. (Harr, I went "etc etc" twice in one thread.)

 

[BlindTom]

The problem with the ideal 'strategy' elements that people are looking for is that scripting for such scenarios is incredibly difficult.

If the A.I is scripted poorly they will behave as the standard A.I - stream units at you in poorly devised bits and pieces attacks, at which point any meanful strategy evaporates.
If the A.I is given too much knowledge of the map it behaves in an omniscient manner and it can never be surpised or exploited.
If scripted events are used to add a sense of urgency to the players attack (i.e You've breaked the enemies perimeter but a miraculous counter attack has appeared in the middle of your base out of the clear blue sky (looking at you Red Alert)) they will inevitably either be exploited or hated.

Basically what you are asking is why don't A.Is in computer games behave like human players! The behaviour is too complex to model.

I also agree with Baby Tea though, there is strategy in most games, just not always what you are looking for.

I would like to see more strategy like DoW but with modifications; I think cover and high ground bonuses should be displayed on the GUI somewhere and give you a sense of increased cover or damage modification. I think damage modifies have to be more extreme - it needs to not be based on economics - some things need to have massive modifiers against certain enemies while doing neglible damage to others. e.g. an infrantry unit in heavy cover could withstand a tank pounding them for sometime before being obliterated but they would do effectively 0 damage to it in that time, untill the tank buster rocket launcher unit arrives...

If anyone knows of a game like that, tell me tell me tell me!

Company of Heroes is made by the same bros as Dawn of War and functions just like what you described. Your units will make use of hard cover like chest high stone walls etc. Heavy tanks possess armour that is pretty much impenetrable to small arms and anything else that isn't a high explosive will need to attack it from behind where the armour is weakest. Infantry and fixed heavy machine guns can hold a choke point indefinitely if garrisoned properly in church belltowers etc, at least until the artillery strikes arrive. (kekeke)

 

[Steel Ronin]

I know this thread was done a while back but since then a bunch of new RTSs were released sooooo yeeeeaaaahhhhhhh....

Basicallyo any RTSs involve straegy? So far I think RUSE is the only one, please correct me if I am wrong.

you ever heard of Starcraft 2

All you do in that is spam units

Every game requires strategic thinking.

Most RTSs are just spam units.

That's a strategy.

I mean REAL strategy.

AHAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH...no really...AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAH.
yeah you are the WORST Starcraft 2 player in the world.there is no RTS where spamming units is effective you sir are a dipshit and need to shut up before you embarrass yourself even more.

You need to stop fucking trolling.

You talking in the mirror?Also i'm not responding anymore to your bullshit claims whatever you say so don't waste your time anymore.You are just confusing macro with massing units and miss the whole strategy element in the game if you mass say Colossi and go up against a couple of Vikings then you'd be pretty fucked now wouldn't you.

 

[HotFezz8]

I know this thread was done a while back but since then a bunch of new RTSs were released sooooo yeeeeaaaahhhhhhh....

Basicallyo any RTSs involve straegy? So far I think RUSE is the only one, please correct me if I am wrong.

the Total War series doesn't have any if you want to play to win, but you can try to play "properly".

alternatively if you are intersted in true strategy the Operational Art of War is a decent game to pick up.

 

[BrotherRool]

I know this is asking a lot of investment for a throw-away thread, but check out some of the casts here,

http://www.youtube.com/user/huskystarcraft?blend=2&ob=4

After you watch a couple of those, I'm pretty sure you'll be in a good position to judge effectively.

Saying that, from the videos Ive watched, I would judge Starcraft 2 to be less strategic than one. There have been a lot more macro wins, a lot more times where people win every encounter but lose overall and a lot more clust**** fights. The strategy is still intense but a little less so. Saying that, Starcraft 2 is still newso the strategy hasn't got oodles deeper than pump ou thte correct counter-units, like it did eventually in 1.

In the end i comes down to difficulty settings. Games with low difficulty can be won with unit spam, competitive games require you to be more devious. It's the same with a lot of things in life, from Squash to FPS'.

The only other problem with RTS' is I find there's a large barrier to overcome before your planning and clicking skills can enable you to take the strategy higher than unit spam. Pros can click at 200 times a minute and this frees them up for strategy

EDIT: Found a great example, just 12 minutes and shows what a skilled player can do to a player with a little less skill. http://www.youtube.com/user/HDstarcraft#p/u/4/dxsJaPT14uM

 

[snow]

Every game requires strategic thinking.

Most RTSs are just spam units.

Examples or it's flame-bait!

Yes OP, rts games have Strategy in the name. The strategy in most single player does die down a little bit once you get those high tier units, because the majority of the people will just mass those units due to how little the computer harasses you, but playing online, if you try to sit there and turtle in to build that mass army, you will lose every time.

 

[Judgement101]

Every game requires strategic thinking.

Most RTSs are just spam units.

Examples or it's flame-bait!

Yes OP, rts games have Strategy in the name. The strategy in most single player does die down a little bit once you get those high tier units, because the majority of the people will just mass those units due to how little the computer harasses you, but playing online, if you try to sit there and turtle in to build that mass army, you will lose every time.

You sure are quick to label stuff as bad. Examples: Zerg Rush, Rise of Nations, everything of that sort.

 

[Judgement101]

Every game requires strategic thinking.

Most RTSs are just spam units.

The only time that has ever worked in any RTS I've played was with the infamous Zergling Rushes of Starcraft.

Still, even a bit of strategy is required in almost all games.
Example: Blindly running in, guns-a-blazing usually gets you killed in FPSs.

Good point.