More accessible... but actually NOT.

[Delythyx]

So, theres some big talks about making this game more approachable to casual audience, so we have some quality of life and automation stuff like autoque of units. Which is nice.

However, they said that at least autoque while being one of best casual helpers, is disabled on ranked. Which is why I think this game is not at all more accessible for casual players after all. People who play RTS for PvE, never really had an issue with this stuff in the first place. It is the competitive multiplayer that is turn off to casuals, not the PvE.

But you can play non-ranked. Sure, but even casuals want some form of competition, because most men like sports, because even if u suck, competing in something however irrelevant is kind of nature of men. Playing non-ranked just feels like theres no higher purpose, theres no sense of actual victory even if u win, or any emotional weight in the match itself, which makes non-ranked boring for majority of people.

Which leads to the conclusion that this game fails to be any more accessible than other RTS games, and these non-ranked changes, they change nothing about that. The only thing this might change, is that someone is suckered to buying the game since they THINK it is more accessible and fail to notice the small print saying... but actually NOT.

Also while I personally have no l2p issues with unit queing, I also dont know why it is so important to keep this apm sink in competitive RTS. I want more players and less split playerbase rather than useless apm features in ranked. I guess my friends are gonna say the same about this than any other rts game: "its a masochist genre where you just try patch holes while ♥♥♥♥ keeps pouring in from every direction". These same people find Dota 2 more relaxing than RTS.

That being said, as this is not a personal gameplay issue for myself, I will still buy the game. But I truly believe that many people will not, or will feel betrayed when they find out about the accessible limitations.

[[KeeN] Flame]

i think they did a great compromise keeping aq on villagers and new QOL features. Not having autoqueu on militairy actually makes people play better because they're choosing what to spend resources on, with it always on casuals wil quickly find themselves in a bad situation with too much army and too little economy(for example not enough food to make villagers due to having militairy on autoqueu). But autoqueu on villagers is great because its a repetitive task and should be automated especially because vilagers in aom train in 14 seconds, and in aoe4 its 20-22 seconds. But for militairy it really is better not to have autoque,

One thing I dislike though is that when I select 10 barracks, and press q, it only queues up one unit out of all 10 barracks. That is stupid imo.

I think pros from aoe2/aoe4 and sc2/wc3 wouldnt even give retold a try if it wasnt for the removal of aq on militairy units. So be happy we're gonna get a lot more advertising from these streamers, youtubers and others, and thus hooking in a lot more casuals for us to play with. As a casual player myself im happy with the compromise they made.

[Delythyx]

As you said, Im with you there that this feature will not make u better player, but it makes the game more accessible. Even playing on wood rank is better than playing non-ranked. Which is why I dont understand why remove it from ranked, no1 who is actually good is gonna give two faks about this feature being or not being in ranked, since for most parts those people dont suffer from unit que problems in the first place. And if you are relying on autoque to compete, well then ur not competing at THAT level anyway. So again, removing it from ranked is just bad. If you dont like it, dont use it, if u are good enough in the first place, u dont care who uses it or not.

[peperkoekmannetje.94]

Originally posted by Delythyx:

So, theres some big talks about making this game more approachable to casual audience, so we have some quality of life and automation stuff like autoque of units. Which is nice.

However, they said that at least autoque while being one of best casual helpers, is disabled on ranked. Which is why I think this game is not at all more accessible for casual players after all. People who play RTS for PvE, never really had an issue with this stuff in the first place. It is the competitive multiplayer that is turn off to casuals, not the PvE.

But you can play non-ranked. Sure, but even casuals want some form of competition, because most men like sports, because even if u suck, competing in something however irrelevant is kind of nature of men. Playing non-ranked just feels like theres no higher purpose, theres no sense of actual victory even if u win, or any emotional weight in the match itself, which makes non-ranked boring for majority of people.

Which leads to the conclusion that this game fails to be any more accessible than other RTS games, and these non-ranked changes, they change nothing about that. The only thing this might change, is that someone is suckered to buying the game since they THINK it is more accessible and fail to notice the small print saying... but actually NOT.

Also while I personally have no l2p issues with unit queing, I also dont know why it is so important to keep this apm sink in competitive RTS. I want more players and less split playerbase rather than useless apm features in ranked. I guess my friends are gonna say the same about this than any other rts game: "its a masochist genre where you just try patch holes while ♥♥♥♥ keeps pouring in from every direction". These same people find Dota 2 more relaxing than RTS.

That being said, as this is not a personal gameplay issue for myself, I will still buy the game. But I truly believe that many people will not, or will feel betrayed when they find out about the accessible limitations.

Hard disagree, I like that they kept automation on villagers but not on militairy. As a scenario player I prefer not coming back to my base of a big army cause I kept autoqueu on and wasted all those resources. They added a lot of QOL features like global queu and theres shift-q'in. Now I can keep control of how much army I make much better than if there was autoqueu on militairy. Also MUCH more players from other rts games will give retold a shot now. We all remember what happend with age of mythology titans back in 2003. all the good players left cause of autoqueu. like the poster above me said this is a good compromise keeping autoqueu on villagers which is repetitive, but removing autoque on militairy (but still keeping the option as a toggle in lobbies)

Im very happy with the current state of things, and I hope they keep it this way for launch. Therell be so many more players from other games taking aom finally seriously. Cant wait for launch!

[Delythyx]

And those "pros" care a lot more about traction that brings money because thats how they make living...

[[KeeN] Flame]

Originally posted by Delythyx:

And those "pros" care a lot more about traction that brings money because thats how they make living...

I dont think so, aom pros dont care that much about money, but they do want more people to play with online. honestly they already made the game easier with all the QOL additions. Original AoT with autoque on everything is harder to play than retold without autoque on militairy. I dont think we want to be talked about as aom being the meme game again like back on titans. People like beasty and marinelord legitimately want to play the game and bring their audiences to retold, aussie drongo, fitzbro are all making videos and excited for retold, even sc2/wc3 and aoe4 people are excited to try and are finding the game a lot more fun. But if they add autoqueu on everything then the whole launch wil be about the AQ vs no AQ debate. This would be terrible for the game's launch and take away from how fun the game is. all the twitch chat and youtube comments will be full of people meming on the game. Right now they can shut people up by saying theres a compromise and even people like beasty are okay with aq on vills. MIlitairy is going one step too far + it makes people actually play worse. I do agree there should be an option for it as a toggle in customs. But not in ranked.

Theres now : pre-queuing technologies
global queu to keep track of unit production
auto make villager when a new towncenter is made
way more hunt on every map
market in classic to prevent gold starving
upgrade are cheaper

It was legit easier for me to play retold than it was to play the original aot with autoque. It already is very accesisable. I think itll be a huge plus if people from other rts games try out aom and get hooked on it. You have to think about the bigger picture. Casuals will mostly play campaign and not touch ranked and occasionally play some customs and theyll be around silver/gold either way.. you know. autoque or no autoque. But having aom have thousands of viewers on twitch and having a health competitive scene is not something casuals can do.

[Delythyx]

Originally posted by j1mmyneutr0n:

Originally posted by Delythyx:

So, theres some big talks about making this game more approachable to casual audience, so we have some quality of life and automation stuff like autoque of units. Which is nice.

However, they said that at least autoque while being one of best casual helpers, is disabled on ranked. Which is why I think this game is not at all more accessible for casual players after all. People who play RTS for PvE, never really had an issue with this stuff in the first place. It is the competitive multiplayer that is turn off to casuals, not the PvE.

But you can play non-ranked. Sure, but even casuals want some form of competition, because most men like sports, because even if u suck, competing in something however irrelevant is kind of nature of men. Playing non-ranked just feels like theres no higher purpose, theres no sense of actual victory even if u win, or any emotional weight in the match itself, which makes non-ranked boring for majority of people.

Which leads to the conclusion that this game fails to be any more accessible than other RTS games, and these non-ranked changes, they change nothing about that. The only thing this might change, is that someone is suckered to buying the game since they THINK it is more accessible and fail to notice the small print saying... but actually NOT.

Also while I personally have no l2p issues with unit queing, I also dont know why it is so important to keep this apm sink in competitive RTS. I want more players and less split playerbase rather than useless apm features in ranked. I guess my friends are gonna say the same about this than any other rts game: "its a masochist genre where you just try patch holes while ♥♥♥♥ keeps pouring in from every direction". These same people find Dota 2 more relaxing than RTS.

That being said, as this is not a personal gameplay issue for myself, I will still buy the game. But I truly believe that many people will not, or will feel betrayed when they find out about the accessible limitations.

Hard disagree, I like that they kept automation on villagers but not on militairy. As a scenario player I prefer not coming back to my base of a big army cause I kept autoqueu on and wasted all those resources. They added a lot of QOL features like global queu and theres shift-q'in. Now I can keep control of how much army I make much better than if there was autoqueu on militairy. Also MUCH more players from other rts games will give retold a shot now. We all remember what happend with age of mythology titans back in 2003. all the good players left cause of autoqueu. like the poster above me said this is a good compromise keeping autoqueu on villagers which is repetitive, but removing autoque on militairy (but still keeping the option as a toggle in lobbies)

Im very happy with the current state of things, and I hope they keep it this way for launch. Therell be so many more players from other games taking aom finally seriously. Cant wait for launch!

While I understand your point that back in the day people disliked such features, but gaming overall was much different. People valued hardcore skills and all the gamers were more or less hardcore bcs gaming wasnt nearly as casual every household hobby back then.

Also I just cant imagine a world where actually good modern players would dodge a game because of autoque in RTS. Any competent player understands that at the level where competition truly matters (tournaments) the impact that queing units has is very minor. And as you said, past certain skill level it would become hindrance not a plus. Its only beneficial for those playing in the lower leagues. 2003 and 2024 are way too different worlds to draw direct comparision. 95% of gamers cant even hold attention to read/listen quests even on casual bangers like assassin creed / diablo 4 and so on, yet alone have the stubborness to start mastering the most stressfull genre as it has been in past decades, it needs evolution.

[Delythyx]

Originally posted by doctor.chocolate91:

Originally posted by Delythyx:

And those "pros" care a lot more about traction that brings money because thats how they make living...

I dont think so, aom pros dont care that much about money, but they do want more people to play with online. honestly they already made the game easier with all the QOL additions. Original AoT with autoque on everything is harder to play than retold without autoque on militairy. I dont think we want to be talked about as aom being the meme game again like back on titans. People like beasty and marinelord legitimately want to play the game and bring their audiences to retold, aussie drongo, fitzbro are all making videos and excited for retold, even sc2/wc3 and aoe4 people are excited to try and are finding the game a lot more fun. But if they add autoqueu on everything then the whole launch wil be about the AQ vs no AQ debate. This would be terrible for the game's launch and take away from how fun the game is. all the twitch chat and youtube comments will be full of people meming on the game. Right now they can shut people up by saying theres a compromise and even people like beasty are okay with aq on vills. MIlitairy is going one step too far + it makes people actually play worse. I do agree there should be an option for it as a toggle in customs. But not in ranked.

Theres now : pre-queuing technologies
global queu to keep track of unit production
auto make villager when a new towncenter is made
way more hunt on every map
market in classic to prevent gold starving
upgrade are cheaper

It was legit easier for me to play retold than it was to play the original aot with autoque. It already is very accesisable. I think itll be a huge plus if people from other rts games try out aom and get hooked on it. You have to think about the bigger picture. Casuals will mostly play campaign and not touch ranked and occasionally play some customs and theyll be around silver/gold either way.. you know. autoque or no autoque. But having aom have thousands of viewers on twitch and having a health competitive scene is not something casuals can do.

Those <10 Aom pros arent even worth of discussion what comes to selling aom:r - sorry but that is just an fact.

[Kimochi]

You can auto q military in non rank matches. What are you complain about? If you wanna do rank then git gud

[Delythyx]

Bro Im conq player in aoe4, im thinking about those silver players like you who would enjoy smashing armies instead of struggling with ur 20apm

[[KeeN] Flame]

Originally posted by Delythyx:

Bro Im conq player in aoe4, im thinking about those silver players like you who would enjoy smashing armies instead of struggling with ur 20apm

aq militairy is not good, theyll just autoqueu everything then go back to their towncenter and realize they havent been making villagers for 10 minutes. it only benefits good players honestly.

[Delythyx]

good players honestly dont want to ♥♥♥♥ their build orders for just a little bit of help for something they have 0 problems doing by hand.

why do u think good players are good? u think they struggle with producing units? this feature has nothing to do with anything that is not low elo gaming.

and yes accidentally producing 1 extra unit can lose u the game if its in the wrong moment at certain skill level.

[Delythyx]

like the only thing this does is lower the skill floor of entry and make the genre more approachable for people who think its too stressful and button smashing with camera bouncing everywhere, and perhaps allow them to have fun, which is like 98% of all gamers.

[Delythyx]

and no, RTS should not remain a niche genre for sweaty tryhards.

[Carighan]

Originally posted by Delythyx:

and no, RTS should not remain a niche genre for sweaty tryhards.

That already happened, it split into two genres:

* Turn-based strategy ate the casual, strategic and slow-thinking portions.
* MOBAs ate the high-skill, e-sports and sweaty (not in a bad way, "sweat inducing action") portions.

RTS were a proto-genre before MOBAs came out of it and caused the battle parts to instead be folded back into TBS.

Playing a game such as this is something I do for nostalgia. I am aware the genre is dead in the water except for highly modified niche titles such as SoaSE. I mean just look at Stormgate which we can now play and that is just laughably bad and unfinished.

[Delythyx]

Stormgate being a turd has nothing to do with the genre being dead, its like saying action rpg is dead just look at the suicide squad. Meanwhile Assassin Creed and Rockstar games, u get the gist?

Turn based games are NOT good games for "smart" people who want strategy games, why? None of the most popular turn based games with quality production on the market even with hardest difficulties offer any meaningful challenge, and are broken extremely easy. And against players they just take too long and are too boring. They are just for casuals to unwind after work.

The only 4x game that has any meaningful weight is Total War series still holding real time battles.

Moba is better because the gameplay itself is extremely relaxing, approachable and with more average fun compared to RTS, which gives it more traction in widespread audience, which creates more moneyflow, which creates more competition leading to an esport. Theres a lot of frustration and pain that moba players are enduring just for the lack of options.

Now if you managed to create approachable and fun to play RTS it could easily reel in those frustrated and suffering Moba players who are despredly wanting solid options. In which Stormgate ofc is not an example of solid option.

The genre being actually dead is an internet meme, the genre is not dead, but its niche and as esport very limited to few worthwhile tournaments per year, because it fails to be approachable and enjoyable for 99% of players due to unfun and heavy mechanics involved with most of the time spent to something else than actually fighting with ur army which ultimately is the most fun part of RTS games, for majority of the players at least. SC2 being much more faster paced offered faster and less exhausting games and more fighting catching an bigger audience, but was never truly nurtured as esport the same way like CS and Dota, eventually leading to being abandonware by choice of developer, who decided selling skins in WoW is more profitable and less effort, and has zero interest in gaming as culture.

Much like valve dropped the support for big Dota Internationals moving forward, because its just much more hassle for less profits. Idling and selling other peoples games is far easier and generates more money.

None of this means that its pointless to create approachable well made RTS games with actual next gen innovation (not Stormgate that is direct downgrade from launch SC2) moving forward.