Poll: Base Building in RTS Genre

[I.Muir]

I always used to love to build a tower surrounded by fortified wall near the enemy city in AOE 2. The npc would usually attack it first making it easy to mop up their standing army before turning the canons to their city. Never underestimate the forward position.

Base building is what I play RTS for, almost more so than the battles themselves. Games like risk and total war are other favorites of a different kind.

My favorite rts at the moment is anno 2070 and I might download shogun 2 again

 

[Ambitiousmould]

I love base-building, and the lack of it in Dawn of War 2 was the deal-breaker (that and a lack of funds). I like it because I play defensively (if poorly) and you can't really do that without base building. I want to keep my wall of Tesla Coils that's 3 Coils thick (something I do in Red Alert 3). That said, I do find it irritating when soeone's base spans the entire map, so maybe it should be limited to a certain space.

 

[Bad Jim]

I think that many games like Starcraft are far too dependent on micromanaging your economy to be successful. Most players would like to think that success was largely down to strategy, and typical forum advice tends to be about what to build against what. Refuting this, a pro player called Destiny played his way into platinum league (I think) using mass queens, which is a terrible strategy, but because Destiny managed his economy better he could make more of them and win anyway.

That said, I think that stripping out the base building tends to strip out the strategy as well. When and where you expand, which choke points you block up, and what you build and research are interesting decisions that define strategy. That's why games like COH and DOW, while fun, aren't really strategy games.

What they need to do is stop requiring player input for details that rarely need a real decision. For example, you should never stop building workers in Starcraft, so there should be a way to have them build automatically. Supply depots, overlords and pylons are just built as needed and involve no great strategic insight, so they should be removed. There should be scout units, like the ones in Empire Earth, that scout the map automatically.

Unit queues are exist in Starcraft, but you must pay in advance, which ties up resources and makes you fall behind your opponent. So good players don't use them. Unit queues should require payment when the unit starts building, like in Age of Empires, allowing you to use them and still win.

Of course, while Starcraft and its sequel are too dependent on micromanaging your economy, they do a lot of other things right and other RTS games like Total Annihilation, Supreme Commander, Age of Empires, Command and Conquer etc all have their own faults. Total Annihilation for example makes base defenses too effective. Starcraft also does its story far better than most RTS games do. It's not a great story, but most RTS games don't even try.

 

[Lazy Kitty]

No, the base building isn't the problem.
I wouldn't even play RTS if there wasn't any base building.
BAse building is the fun part.

 

[Xan Krieger]

I liked it in Dawn of War and when Dawn of War 2 basically removed it I felt the series was poorer for it. I always found building bases fun, especially if I could stretch it to cover much of the map. In Supreme Commander I always have multiple bases and I enjoy building them all. Base building is a fun part of the game and I think removing it is what's hurting the genre.

 

[Professor Lupin Madblood]

Base building is what defines RTSs as RTSs. Without base building, they're Real Time Tactics games, where you're given a squad and have to work with what you have (XCOM, Final Fantasy Tactics, etc.). There's overlap and the genre borders aren't strictly defined, of course, but you can't have an RTS be an RTS without base building.

 

[Pills_Here]

I'm still pissed off that I had to build a Citadel of Adun before I could build the damned Templar Archives. That shit was ridiculous, I realize that that gripe is more than a decade old but it's that kind of base building which frustrates me (though I wouldn't say it's killing the genre).

 

[generals3]

There is nothing wrong with base building. It's simply that some games just get very very hectic because you have to manage a lot, i'm looking at you Empires Dawn Of The Modern World.

I think the biggest problem is the publishers constantly spending more money to make more brown and olive FPS games. That and RTS not working well with console controls. The combination leaves little space for new RTS franchises and EA is screwing up C&C royally.

They can't really screw it up any more than they have done. I think we can all safely say they screwed it up.

 

[irishda]

IMO I think the focus on micromanagement is a bigger problem. From someone with low APM, it is kind of frustrating to lose a match cause of slow hands and not worse tactics. I want to command a battle, not babysit Marines all the time.

This. Although the micromanagement can be toned down if the units are similarly scaled down a la Dawn of War. The Total War series have similarly fixed that problem by increasing the scale, making it impossible for someone to just zerg a bunch of units into the opposing base (movement points, turns, the distance, multiple bases, etc.). And the battles are not just who can churn out the most units the fastest since there's no production in them. I'd like to see if someone can make a large scale Total War-style game without the turn-based action though.

 

[Karma168]

If it's done well an RTS can work without a base. I love both DoW 1&2 but I get bored of 1 really quickly because I always fell back on the same tactics of 1-2 squads find the enemy and capture resources while I build up my base to unlock the top tier units and then just steamroll them with a Land Raider, Predators, terminators and a drop pod assault.

It's fun but it gets dull. Even mixing up who I played as (e.g. playing as Orks instead of Space Marines) it still always end up pretty much the same.

DoW2 on the other hand had great variety. While the missions were pretty boring (same setup, same maps, etc.) the fact that you had so much control over the squads and their loadouts/traits it meant you could play the same mission a dozen different ways - do you take the devastators for heavy fire or the assault squad for the jump packs? Even what weapons/extras you took affected how a squad got used - give your devastators the heavy bolter which is fast firing, kills loads of grunts but can't scratch a tank or take the slower missile launcher that can deal with armour with ease but struggles with spaced out infantry?

If you like base building that's fine, but the removal isn't 'killing the genre' in the same way health bars being removed didn't kill the fps. Strategy games are all about tactics and as long as the game allows good tactics to succeed then it's a good RTS.

 

[GloatingSwine]

I didn't know the RTS genre was dying. Pretty sure it's still going strong, it's always been a niche audience since it doesn't really translate to console well. .

The RTS genre isn't dying. It's dead, the corpse just twitches occasionally. Starcraft is alive, but that's basically it right now. Other than that, there's maybe what, one RTS a year?

See, what happened is that the MOBA genre grew as a sort of parasitic attachment to the RTS (DotA started, after all, as a Warcraft 3 custom game), but has massively eclipsed it in popularity so no-one makes RTS any more and everyone tries to release their own MOBA.

 

[GloatingSwine]

If it's done well an RTS can work without a base. I love both DoW 1&2 but I get bored of 1 really quickly because I always fell back on the same tactics of 1-2 squads find the enemy and capture resources while I build up my base to unlock the top tier units and then just steamroll them with a Land Raider, Predators, terminators and a drop pod assault.

It's fun but it gets dull. Even mixing up who I played as (e.g. playing as Orks instead of Space Marines) it still always end up pretty much the same.

That's a structural problem with DoW more than anything. Because there's essentially only one build path at a time for seven of the nine races (Chaos can get to tier 3 from either summoning circle or machine pit, and dark eldar can go hall of blood first or dark foundry first) there's very little variation in how you play.

Against AI I generally found you won most times by expanding as aggressively as possible and then getting loads of tier 2 infantry, especially if you're a race with good upgrade potential because they keep getting better as you tech your base up.

Starcraft 2 is very different in that regard, because there are more tech paths for each race and they require different structures and researches, it takes some time to get one going and therefore takes a long time to switch paths, it's hard to have everything in a competitive game because of that time constraint.

 

[generals3]

I didn't know the RTS genre was dying. Pretty sure it's still going strong, it's always been a niche audience since it doesn't really translate to console well. .

The RTS genre isn't dying. It's dead, the corpse just twitches occasionally. Starcraft is alive, but that's basically it right now. Other than that, there's maybe what, one RTS a year?

See, what happened is that the MOBA genre grew as a sort of parasitic attachment to the RTS (DotA started, after all, as a Warcraft 3 custom game), but has massively eclipsed it in popularity so no-one makes RTS any more and everyone tries to release their own MOBA.

Company of Heroes (and Total War for that matter) is very much alive and the 2 is coming out soon. While i'll admit the genre looks even more ill after the horrible murder of C&C by EA, despite losing yet an other great player (after losing Rise Of Nations, cossacks and Empires DOTMW) it's still alive. There just seems to be some sort of consolidation where instead of having many medium sized players you have a couple of large ones (CoH, SC & Total War).

 

[GloatingSwine]

Company of Heroes is very much alive and the 2 is coming out soon. While i'll admit after the horrible murder of C&C by EA the RTS genre lost yet an other great player (after losing Rise Of Nations, cossacks and Empires DOTMW) but it's still alive.

Company of Heroes is only just alive because someone bought it after THQ went bust.

And I wouldn't be surprised if that's the only not-Starcraft RTS released this year (no, rereleasing a broken version of age of empires 2 doesn't count). Generals 2 might come out, but that's more likely next year's one RTS.

One title a year plus Starcraft does not a vital and active genre make.

The simple fact is that people don't make RTS games nearly as much as they used to, and that's because they're amazingly easy to do badly and their core loop isn't as intrinsically compelling as, say FPS. Even an actually bad shooting game can hold a glimmer of interest because of the core "shoot mans until they fall over" loop which is inherently more player engaging. An RTS that's badly balanced or simply doesn't have interesting factions with different feel and character to them isn't going to draw a significant audience or keep them for long.

And since much of the micro elements of RTS have been replicated in MOBAs they can't even hope to draw a crowd based on that.

 

[DSK-]

I really don't think base building is a problem. From an objectively broad standpoint, base building provides you with your economy, research capability or technology trees to build more/better units and dare I say static defenses.

I think the one of the logical conclusions to make is that old-school RTS games like C&C95, Total Annihilation, Starcraft and Homeworld just wouldn't be all that fun to play for the biggest game consumer base - console users (I know that C&C95, Red Alert and Starcraft were released on console many years back but I don't think they were massively popular, despite being very memorable )

Does anyone remember Stormrise?


That is to say, I have nothing against games that don't follow the old formula and do things differently; although I do ahve to say my experience with DoW 2 was pretty poor because of how repetitive the game was :/

 

[FourCartridge]

I don't think basebuilding is the problem, if its done correctly. I do think that CoH has a very good balance, where the basebuilding is subordinated to the combat.
I want the basebuilding to consist of structures necessary to tech, and emergent defences and creation of chokepoints.
A game that encourages the creation of a fortified sim fucking city that leads to trench warfare is no fun.

IMO I think the focus on micromanagement is a bigger problem. From someone with low APM, it is kind of frustrating to lose a match cause of slow hands and not worse tactics. I want to command a battle, not babysit Marines all the time.

Have you tried the Wargame series? Wargame European Escalation/ Wargame Airland Battle?

You command a battalion-regiment sized force in a fictional WW3 between NATO and the Warsaw Pact. There is no basebuilding, and you have a choice between hundreds of authentic units. The game is all about selecting the correct force composition and planning and executing a strategy to win. The micro required is very low, as all your decisions have a sort of weight and inexorability about them. The victor is generally the one who has the best tactics, not the one who can click the fastest. Some of the top players have an APM of under 10.

Sadly no, my PC is a 6 year old POS. I visit GOG not out of a love for retro games, but because they can run on my comp with little problem(though System Shock 2 is a blast).

How much is a mid-end PC nowadays? The guy at my computer shop was charging $500...

 

[Generic4me]

Base-building is my favorite part of RTS games.
When you don't have base-building, you end up with horrible, horrible games like Command and Conquer 4. (Okay, the always-on DRM before always-on DRM is a thing is what made it so horrible, but it's still a crappy strategy game.)

Although they could use something to make the starting-up periods a little faster, I'm completely okay with how it is now.

I'm an average micro-er, so I'm not TOO unhappy about micro-focused games, but as said above I hate it when I have to tell every unit EXACTLY what to do.

Hell, if anything I would like MORE base-building. I remember spending hours creating mega-fortresses in Age of Empires and Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds against the AIs). Walls. Roads. Turrets. Big turrets. Turret walls. BIG TURRET WALLS. Making my slave army painstakingly build a massive, unbreachable Stronghold and watching to see if the AIs can break it while I amass my horde to steamroll them is literally the most fun I'll ever have in game.

 

[Bad Jim]

OT: I have to agree with the micromanagement thing. I'm really enjoying Starcraft (the first one, because I figured I'd play for the story of all things) but goddamn if the campaign just doesn't pull any punches to an RTS-newbie like me.

I don't really mind base-building, but when I'm moving troops into enemy territory I tend to forget about the base being there and often-times still needing to be actively defended. And I much prefer the Dawn of War II approach to troops being part of a squad rather than individual soldiers, or at least the Sins of a Solar Empire approach of being able to group them all up into specific task-forces. Starcraft and Warcraft III both have this issue with only allowing you to select up to a certain number of units at a time, and it really makes it frustrating to try moving large forces all at once. Probably the biggest part about them that shows their age, even held up against their graphics.

One bit of advice I can give for Starcraft is go into the game options and turn the speed down when the game is getting hectic. The slowest setting is almost a pause mode.

Other advice:
-Most maps have an expansion or two for you to use if you scout around a little. Use them.
-Make minimal use of unit queues. You have to pay in advance, which ties up an amazing amount of resources when you have eg two factories queued up with tanks.
-Don't let several thousand minerals sit idle in the bank. Make stuff. If your production buildings are running at capacity, make more production buildings. It is in no way unusual to have say 3-4 factories going.
-Avoid building static defenses. Build an army instead. When the enemy attacks, about 3/4 of your static defenses will be nowhere near the action, but all mobile units can be rushed to the defense. Plus, mobile units can be used to attack.

EDIT Also you can select a bunch of units then create a hotkey for them by pressing ctrl and 1-9. Pressing that number key will select those units. So it's actually not that hard to control 50+ units.

 

[Bostur]

Base building is what defines RTSs as RTSs. Without base building, they're Real Time Tactics games, where you're given a squad and have to work with what you have (XCOM, Final Fantasy Tactics, etc.). There's overlap and the genre borders aren't strictly defined, of course, but you can't have an RTS be an RTS without base building.

That was my thought as well. A real time tactical or strategic game without base building is an entirely different type of gameplay.

We haven't seen many new RTS games lately, but I think that is because evolution has brought it as far as it can go, and maybe because developers are wary about competing with Blizzard. New games go in different directions in terms of genre for instance tower defense and MOBAs.
The general decline in PC exclusive games probably also matters. The RTS genre was designed with Keyboard and Mouse in mind.

I agree with a lot of the others in this thread that micromanagement can put the skill ceiling too high for us players of average skill. To me it sometimes feel like I'm only playing 25% of the game, and that I'm not really capable of thinking strategically, because macro and micro skills have too much of an impact. Slower game speed and better AI, or unit automation could help out in this regard. Maybe thats one direction new RTS games could take, in an attempt to make them less action-oriented.

 

[loa]

Yeah because dungeon keeper and populous which were nothing but base building sucked so much.
Oh wait.