RTS Creating the ultimate RTS

[luj1]

By combining the best unique features of each major RTS lineage,

Units should be able to gain ranks

Not in a Warcraft III kind of way (Hero units gaining experience), but a simple three star system found in the likes of Red Alert 2 and Tiberian Sun (also Generals). Always fun seeing a veteran unit lay waste to a dozen ordinary units of the same type. And "Unit promoted" kinda sounds awesome.

Global powers

On-demand powers with long cooldowns (such as God powers in Age of Mythology) add a small but reasonable asymmetric gameplay element to just macro/micro spammage.

Neutral units

Don't go overboard (neutral camps in Warcraft III) but rather just simple and scarce enemies (like Visceroids in Tiberian Dawn and Tiberian Sun) that sometimes add some randomness to a match (you're on the offensive but have to defend your base from a Visceroid) or a reasonably unpredictable gameplay element without going overboard.

Take and hold

Dawn of War centers the whole gameplay on strategic objectives (Listening Posts and Relics) - perhaps they should not be central to resource generation, but I say it's fun to have them around (remember those fountains in Warcraft III? The battles around them were fun)

Cover

A cover system should exist. Perhaps a smple cover system like in Dawn of War (I think two types of cover, light and heavy). Heavy offers more protection but slows unit movement even more.

Attack types

Just a basic rock paper scissors system. We have 3 attack types in Starcraft for example - normal, concussive and explosive. It's similar in Warcraft.

Reloading system

This is very rare but one of Larian's early games was L.E.D. Wars where units rate of fire was displayed on the unit as a dynamic bar.



And some basic stuff we all know,

Units should have memorable voice lines

Starcraft and Red Alert 2 are the best examples here. Stuff like "Power overwhelming!" and "Desolator ready" you hear once and remember your whole life...

Units should be readable on the battlefield

You should be able to skim the screen with your eyes and immediately know what's there (Starcraft, Warcraft III).

Memorable unit sounds

Units audio should immediately tell you what's happening on the battlefield (Starcraft)

Factions should be radically different, yet balanced

Starcraft, Grey Goo

No hero units or RPG elements

The title says it all. We all know this is decline.



Really curious what Nutmeg thinks, he played a lot of RTS. Probably something about elevation I'm missing. Also Jaedar

 

[luj1]

PS

I'm also curious if you guys think there was something awesome in these games that could be implemented,

- Impossible Creatures (doesn't get more unique than that)
- Battle Realms / War of the Ring (hybridising units through training workers)
- Total Annihilation / Supreme Commander RTS lineage
- Myth and Myth 2: Soulblighter RTS lineage (I remember they had some cool features)

 

[Damned Registrations]

I'd add in custom map/unit creation tools. As a very important feature. Access to lots of tools for creating triggers, customizing unit/building properties or even models, and the maps themselves obviously unlocks so much potential in an RTS. This needs to be paired with a good lobby/search system. SC2 failed miserably in this regard, causing a massive decline from the BW and WC3 era of creativity that spawned entire genres from really well designed custom games reaching the top of the pile by virtue of their quality alone. Also, these tools should include the means for creating campaigns as well by combining multiple maps and even adding campagin level mechanics like research or permanent upgrades or perks. People have done some cool SC2 mods along those lines, but that took forever and is basically in full blown total conversion territory AFAICT. Making something as simple as a fanfic campaign where you play as the bad guys and can spend money between missions to hire mercenaries or unlock units shouldn't be difficult.

Good unit pathing/AI is another important feature. One shouldn't need to babysit a few dozen units when sending them across the map to keep them from forming a suicidal conga line, or getting congested at a choke point.

 

[Nutmeg]

Global powers

On-demand powers with long cooldowns (such as God powers in Age of Mythology) add a small but reasonable asymmetric gameplay element to just macro/micro spammage.

These have been around since the first Command and Conquer (air strikes, nukes, ion cannons). What later games did was they created a tree of powers and created exclusive resources for purchasing or invoking powers earned differently from other resources (e.g. in Age of Mythology it's from worship and advancing ages, in most other games it's from kills).

that sometimes add some randomness to a match

If the game has veterancy, then neutrals are a resource. Warcraft 3 tunes this incorrectly, BfME gets it right.

Attack types

For me, it's about projectile simulation and arcs of fire.

Anyway something you haven't talked about is base building abstraction and faction differentiation, which I am a big fan of. Good examples are Rise of Legends cities, BfME 1 plots, and the Hierarchy and Novus factions in Universe at War.

 

[Jaedar]

Take and hold

Dawn of War centers the whole gameplay on strategic objectives (Listening Posts and Relics) - perhaps they should not be central to resource generation, but I say it's fun to have them around (remember those fountains in Warcraft III? The battles around them were fun)

I think this is actually kind of essential, but for a different reason. It's important that you have something to fight over that isn't just destroying the other persons base or wrecking their army. This is what enables strategic maneuvering instead of just deathballs. Doesn't have to be DoW style, the c&c type games have something similar with how the harvesters need to go onto the map to give resources. Although I think the dow style is superior, since it allows for investing into an area to both make it easier and more valuable to hold, but also worse if you lose it.

Attack types

Just a basic rock paper scissors system. We have 3 attack types in Starcraft for example - normal, concussive and explosive. It's similar in Warcraft.

This is a bit simplified. Both of these games also have different armor types for the units, that interact with the armors. It's not just rock paper scissors.

I think your list is missing base building (obvious, and yet...) and research. It's important that you can specialize your faction for the current match, and that this is slightly sticky by having costs in time and resources as this means that players have time to react to eachothers specialization. Also important of course that it gives power, thus demanding that the enemy react in some way to mitigate it.

 

[Feyd Rautha]

Units should have memorable voice lines

Starcraft and Red Alert 2 are the best examples here. Stuff like "Power overwhelming!" and "Desolator ready" you hear once and remember your whole life...

Isn't that just a cheat code?

Anyway some great ideas and I agree. However what about base building and resource gathering? Personally I just want Command & Conquer-style however I do like bases with build plots like in BFME1 and Kohan. To me it's annoying to have to manage workers like in AoE2. Much better to have simpler construction and resource gathering like in C&C.

 

[Nutmeg]

BFME2

1 not 2.

 

[Feyd Rautha]

BFME2

1 not 2.

I know, some admin must have edited my reply and entered incorrect information.

 

[thesheeep]

No hero units or RPG elements

The title says it all. We all know this is decline.

Fuck that. RPG elements or bust.

 

[Feyd Rautha]

What about "hero mode" as in Rise and Fall? That game was great.

 

[luj1]

Take and hold

Dawn of War centers the whole gameplay on strategic objectives (Listening Posts and Relics) - perhaps they should not be central to resource generation, but I say it's fun to have them around (remember those fountains in Warcraft III? The battles around them were fun)

I think this is actually kind of essential, but for a different reason. It's important that you have something to fight over that isn't just destroying the other persons base or wrecking their army. This is what enables strategic maneuvering instead of just deathballs.

Yeah I agree 100%

 

[luj1]

Units should have memorable voice lines

Starcraft and Red Alert 2 are the best examples here. Stuff like "Power overwhelming!" and "Desolator ready" you hear once and remember your whole life...

Isn't that just a cheat code?

Nope

 

[luj1]

No hero units or RPG elements

The title says it all. We all know this is decline.

Fuck that. RPG elements or bust.

RTS games were great way before the introduction of RPG elements. Why bust? That makes no sense at all.

 

[luj1]

I'd add in custom map/unit creation tools. As a very important feature. Access to lots of tools for creating triggers, customizing unit/building properties or even models, and the maps themselves obviously unlocks so much potential in an RTS. This needs to be paired with a good lobby/search system.

No doubt

 

[anvi]

I would take the camera and controls from TA/SupCom/FA (Beyond All Reason). And I'd take the super weapons from C&C and the stuff like emp and vision drones etc. Most of the rest would be like Tiberian Sun which was probably best RTS. Bigger maps, bases for the independents, etc. Add the long range artillery from World in Conflict. And the resource structures from Generals.

Preferably an infinite world like Factorio. But better geography, valleys and mountains and rivers and stuff.

 

[BrotherFrank]

I’m going to make a few potentially controversial suggestions.

-squads, not single units
I’ve always hated needlessly excessive unit micro like in blizzard games and is one of the reasons i prefer the relic model of rts, imo in the ideal rts you should be commanding squads of troops with ai so advanced they might aswell be real people with their own hopes and dreams, bonus points if each random trooper has unique name and voice acting (yes it would be stupid to spend money on this for real but we are talking about the best possible rts made in the best of of all possible worlds).
Whilst they will follow orders, they will have some automation and sense of preservation in accordance with their personality and training (aka elite troops will dodge most grenades and get into cover perfectly aswell as try to follow your orders even if they are practically suicidal).

We will know the goal has been achieved when sensitive players start feeling bad for every random grunt that gets killed, whilst those of a less sensitive nature can revel in the carnage. Throw in a sequence after a game like the burials in cannon fodder whilst you at it, can be displayed at the postgame scoreboard.

-Sync kills, matched melee animations
Dawn of war did this correct. Also in case it isnt obvious, i am highly for random factors that takes control away from the players, which is one of the reason some loathe sync kills.
Sod that, rts should have an element of intuition and randomness.

-good campaign and skirmish, maybe coop?
It is a fact of life that despite being the loudest, competitive rts players are an extreme minority of its population, most people dont dabble in pvp at all, for a bunch of reasons.
Rts which over caters to sweats tends to fail hard because they want to chase esportness, sod that, dont make that mistake.
Coop, map maker, custom games, those will do more for the longterm player base of an rts then wanting to become the next starcraft in korea

 

[BlackAdderBG]

OP is basically describing Company of Heroes. It has all the features except neutrals.

 

[Gahbreeil]

Company of Heroes mixed with Empire Earth. Yes, it would be a good RTS. Perfect? Only if the Europa Universalis IV map is implemented as a giant RTS sandbox map.

 

[luj1]

I’m going to make a few potentially controversial suggestions.

-squads, not single units
I’ve always hated needlessly excessive unit micro like in blizzard games and is one of the reasons i prefer the relic model of rts, imo in the ideal rts you should be commanding squads of troops with ai so advanced they might aswell be real people with their own hopes and dreams, bonus points if each random trooper has unique name and voice acting (yes it would be stupid to spend money on this for real but we are talking about the best possible rts made in the best of of all possible worlds).
Whilst they will follow orders, they will have some automation and sense of preservation in accordance with their personality and training (aka elite troops will dodge most grenades and get into cover perfectly aswell as try to follow your orders even if they are practically suicidal).

We will know the goal has been achieved when sensitive players start feeling bad for every random grunt that gets killed, whilst those of a less sensitive nature can revel in the carnage. Throw in a sequence after a game like the burials in cannon fodder whilst you at it, can be displayed at the postgame scoreboard.

-Sync kills, matched melee animations
Dawn of war did this correct. Also in case it isnt obvious, i am highly for random factors that takes control away from the players, which is one of the reason some loathe sync kills.
Sod that, rts should have an element of intuition and randomness.

DoW was perhaps the last good RTS and brought at least 2 innovations - squads and sync kills

Im not against this at all

 

[BlackAdderBG]

Sync kills in DoW were tolerable as there was not that much melee focus so they were pretty rare. On principle they are a big negative as shown in nuTotal War games.

 

[Nutmeg]

CoH1 was an excellent RTS with its only real flaw being absolutely nothing interesting going on w.r.t base building (I mean strictly base building, not field defenses) to the point it could have been removed altogether and the game would have been no worse or better.

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

Factions should be radically different, yet balanced

Starcraft, Grey Goo

I dunno, both radically asymmetric and mostly-symmetric factions work - compare Starcraft vs Age of Empires.

Age of Mythology is closer to being midway between Starcraft and AOE, but that depends on wherever you consider every Primary God a faction or a sub-faction. In which case, you have anywhere between 4-16 civiizations. Althrough I think you can reasonably say the AOM factions are more symmetric than the Starcraft ones.

Warcraft III factions have a lot of mostly similar unit roles, especially at the upper levels, but every faction can play pretty differently. Furthermore, you have Hero Choice which has a strong influence and shaping on how your game will go.

A sub-faction system could allow for both, allowing the player to choose his sub-faction according to his playstyle.

 

[luj1]

I dunno, both radically asymmetric and mostly-symmetric factions work - compare Starcraft vs Age of Empires

...

A sub-faction system could allow for both, allowing the player to choose his sub-faction according to his playstyle.

That's interesting but what are the examples?

 

[tritosine2k]

You need to look at what BW did in endgame, 200unit count wasn't a hard cap because carriers and reavers had their own units too and arbiter recall would result in plenty on screen also.
Then it becomes a sprite vs. polygon problem how you deal with lighting because former doesn't really allow it and you might not want to go all-in on latter because it'd slow to a crawl. It's not easy, btw same holds for ARPG that went stupid with "pack"-s.

 

[flyingjohn]

Seeing only one mention of good pathfinding is disgusting.