| |
Site Navigation Main News Forums
Games Games Database Top 100 Release List Support Files
Features Reviews Previews Interviews Editorials Diaries Misc
Download Gallery Music Screenshots Videos
Miscellaneous Staff Members Privacy Statement
|
 |
|
|
RuySan
Eager Tradesman


Joined: 11 Jul 2001
Posts: 42
Location: Portugal |
quote: Originally posted by Danicek
Ok, I agree that RTS with pause function is no longer real pure RTS. But I prefer such RTSs (because we can not call it turn based just because it has pause function).
I know that some games are designed to be pure RTS and pause button would destroy them. But good game made to work with pause function is better choice for me.
exactly! and you know any other game like that besides the ones i mentioned? |
Thu Oct 02, 2003 8:38 pm |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor


Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
The point of RTS is having REALISM, and the challenge that comes with it. If you want a simplified and dumbed down Turn-Based system, that's cool, but don't pretend it gives you more strategy simply because it gives everyone all the time in the world to think about their next move. There would be no pressure, no REAL strategy.
Or is it because you believe that generals and warlords today, and through history have fought in turn-based battles? That slick Hannibal must've used the pause function, right? _________________ Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
Fri Oct 03, 2003 4:53 pm |
|
|
stanthony
One Smart Dog

Joined: 28 Oct 2002
Posts: 556
Location: Tallinn, Estonia |
quote: Originally posted by Hexy
The point of RTS is having REALISM, and the challenge that comes with it. If you want a simplified and dumbed down Turn-Based system, that's cool, but don't pretend it gives you more strategy simply because it gives everyone all the time in the world to think about their next move. There would be no pressure, no REAL strategy.
Or is it because you believe that generals and warlords today, and through history have fought in turn-based battles? That slick Hannibal must've used the pause function, right?
I dare say, Hexy, that there is hardly some realism in trying to manage 200 *brainless* soldiers in real-time. On the other hand, in most RTS we talk about tactics, not really about strategy. Strategy is something of a slightly more global extent. Hearts of Iron, for that matter, is one of the few pausable real-time *strategies*.
And historically strategical combat was indeed won using little less than all the time in the world. Including Hannibal battles - those guys were not in a hurry usually Strategy is about staff-like thinking, maps and planning. _________________ - Druids do not fight with metal weapons! Sit here, and you over here. Put the elbows of your right arms on the table...
- Arm-pulling? Get me back me pan!
R.A.Salvatore The Cleric Quintet. Canticle |
Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:10 pm |
|
|
Danicek
The Old One

Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 5922
Location: Czech Republic |
quote: Originally posted by Hexy
The point of RTS is having REALISM, and the challenge that comes with it. If you want a simplified and dumbed down Turn-Based system, that's cool, but don't pretend it gives you more strategy simply because it gives everyone all the time in the world to think about their next move. There would be no pressure, no REAL strategy.
Or is it because you believe that generals and warlords today, and through history have fought in turn-based battles? That slick Hannibal must've used the pause function, right?
Well, I do not know. I simply have no time to create big strategy plans while managing hundreds of units during real-time. Only basic choices like - melee units to the front, range units up to the hills - that is everything I am able to do. I agree that pause function is not add-reality function. There is no pause button in reality, however I am able to do play with more strategy elements during turn-based games than in pure RTSs.
Maybe I am just too slow :]. |
Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:26 pm |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor


Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
quote: Originally posted by stanthony
I dare say, Hexy, that there is hardly some realism in trying to manage 200 *brainless* soldiers in real-time. On the other hand, in most RTS we talk about tactics, not really about strategy. Strategy is something of a slightly more global extent. Hearts of Iron, for that matter, is one of the few pausable real-time *strategies*.
And historically strategical combat was indeed won using little less than all the time in the world. Including Hannibal battles - those guys were not in a hurry usually Strategy is about staff-like thinking, maps and planning.
At least more realism than managing 200 brain-dead troops while beeing able to read a book, go to sleep, or do whatever. Of course, the actual troops don't simply stand around. Often, they do basic things like attack a close enemy, or try to get away from enemy fire.
I hardly think Hannibal simply stopped the battle to go take a leak. Once the battle started, I don't think they took it very easy. As for, planning, that's what you have build-orders and maps for. You can use that to plan in both RTS and TBS games. Differance is that once you're in a RTS game, you have to be on the level and be able to make quick decisions. You know, using REAL tactical ability. _________________ Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:39 pm |
|
|
Jaz
Late Night Spook

Joined: 20 Jan 2002
Posts: 9708
Location: RPGDot |
quote: Originally posted by stanthony
I dare say, Hexy, that there is hardly some realism in trying to manage 200 *brainless* soldiers in real-time.
Ummm... sounds very realistic to me. _________________ Jaz |
Fri Oct 03, 2003 6:06 pm |
|
|
stanthony
One Smart Dog

Joined: 28 Oct 2002
Posts: 556
Location: Tallinn, Estonia |
Maybe you're right, and in reality troops really have very limited mental ability, I don't know. But I still think there is very little strategy in trying to be everywhere at the same time, developing light-speed shortcut reflexes and seeing your well prepared lines fall merely because you spent 20 seconds reading a description of another building in the opposite end of the town. Hell, no! This is exactly what I call hack'n'slash. And in real life I think one officer would be in charge of construction, another of defence of the perimeter, and yet another will be busy building offensive strategy. Yes, I can do it all myself - unrealistic situation in real life - and for this I need equally unrealistic turns.
Wooooohhhhooooo... Now this was one emotional defense of TBS genre. I could say more, I'm sure
EDIT: Hmmmm... If our ex-soldier Danicek says that maybe he's too slow for RTS, then I can safely confess being slow, too  _________________ - Druids do not fight with metal weapons! Sit here, and you over here. Put the elbows of your right arms on the table...
- Arm-pulling? Get me back me pan!
R.A.Salvatore The Cleric Quintet. Canticle |
Fri Oct 03, 2003 8:45 pm |
|
|
Danicek
The Old One

Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 5922
Location: Czech Republic |
quote: Originally posted by stanthony
Hmmmm... If our ex-soldier Danicek says that maybe he's too slow for RTS, then I can safely confess being slow, too
But look at my picture I am very old and therefor very slow. You are young elf, and young elfs - everybody knows - are extremely quick :]. |
Sat Oct 04, 2003 5:49 pm |
|
|
Korplem
Swashbuckler

Joined: 23 Dec 2002
Posts: 853
Location: Pearl Harbor, HI |
i have to agree that there isnt much strategy in building 40 farms so you can make a billion grunts to defend yourself from 2 billion grunts that are being sent your way in the first 10 minutes of the game...(i'm not speaking only for warcraft, im just using 'grunts' as a generic soldier term) _________________ If soot stains your tunic, dye it black. This is vengeance.
-The Prince of Nothing |
Sun Oct 05, 2003 2:14 am |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor


Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
Really? Cuz, I always saw food-limits as a way to incorporate more choice and strategy into the games. Plus, of course, realism. Either you can waste your money on troops, and have a small ammount pretty fast, or you can build up to have more later on.
Furthermore, base-building is so very simplified in RTS games that it hardly plays a huge factor in game control. Plus, it only makes the game more realistic. You are after all the leader in most RTS games, and all decisions go through you.
Plus, of course, choices are once again open, and strategy is increased if you can choose to either spend time on building your base or search after enemies.
TBs let you do all those things and eat a bag of chips. How realistic is that? Hahaha, MAYBE in a PERFECT world! _________________ Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
Sun Oct 05, 2003 6:59 am |
|
|
stanthony
One Smart Dog

Joined: 28 Oct 2002
Posts: 556
Location: Tallinn, Estonia |
Hey, these are only games To summarize - for me the main minus of RTS is speed, speed and speed again. I simply don't like games with a need to do anything in a rush - maybe playing HalfLife on LAN is the only exception. I might agree that speed adds to realism, but it also - in my personal opinion - takes away the most precious part of a *strategy* game - time to think about your actions, time to built a perfect plan.
But, again, this is completely IMO. _________________ - Druids do not fight with metal weapons! Sit here, and you over here. Put the elbows of your right arms on the table...
- Arm-pulling? Get me back me pan!
R.A.Salvatore The Cleric Quintet. Canticle |
Sun Oct 05, 2003 8:04 am |
|
|
RuySan
Eager Tradesman


Joined: 11 Jul 2001
Posts: 42
Location: Portugal |
Realism??? These are computer games for chirst sake! If i wanted realism i would not be playing games with orcs or men realeasing fire from their fingers...
I only care about fun, that's it. And for me, RTS can be more fun with pause function. Anyone played warlords battlecry? |
Sun Oct 05, 2003 11:28 am |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor


Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
Yeah, you know, I agree. For example, take The Lord of the Rings trilogy. I always thought it would be funny to end the magnificent, epic saga like those MMORPG spoofs that were written some time ago, you know, like when Frodo tries to destroy the ring he gets a quest bug, a visit by the GMs or whatever. I mean, it's just a fantasy book, right? Books are supposed to be entertaining (or in some cases educational), right? _________________ Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
Sun Oct 05, 2003 1:16 pm |
|
|
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2
All times are GMT. The time now is Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:34 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|