This game was made by a bunch of out-of-touch boomers

[batmancool]

This game was made by a bunch of out-of-touch boomers going all-in on a formula no one gives a ♥♥♥♥ about. No one wants yet-another-APM-intensive RTS with an artifically induced "eSports" scene. That atrocious """beta""" (aka demo) shows that Frost Giant has absolutely no idea what they are doing and are under delusional management. I wouldn't be so bitter about it if it wernt for their arrogant claim that this game is the "future of RTS". And also all the RTS influencers (Artosis, Grubby, Tasteless, etc) giving their safe, milquetoast reviews of this DOA game leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

"It's just a beta bro." Yeah just like how Tarkov is just a beta. Except Tarkov actually tried something new and crazy and actually iterated on the FPS genre as opposed to this AI generated game.

[StimJunky]

"It's just a beta. Let them cook."

Except we've learned that their previously stated "fully funded to release" really meant fully funded to early access where they'll then rely on mtx and selling equity in the company to fund this "active development".

Yeah, when I think of the future of RTS i don't envision trying to revive a dying e-sports scene that never took the way it did with MOBAs.

[HighLanderPony]

Have some tea and grab a tissue, that might fix your glaring issue.

[Reva]

Originally posted by StimJunky:

"It's just a beta. Let them cook."

Except we've learned that their previously stated "fully funded to release" really meant fully funded to early access where they'll then rely on mtx and selling equity in the company to fund this "active development".

Yeah, when I think of the future of RTS i don't envision trying to revive a dying e-sports scene that never took the way it did with MOBAs.

What i personally find funny is that so many of this people saying nobody asked for another APM ESports Titel, why the game already got fully funded for early access. I guess most of them knew what they are going for.

[StimJunky]

Originally posted by Reva:

What i personally find funny is that so many of this people saying nobody asked for another APM ESports Titel, why the game already got fully funded for early access. I guess most of them knew what they are going for.

I don't know how you arrived at that. They leaned heavily into "we're a bunch of Blizzard vets who worked on WC3 and SC2". It was the more the nostalgia bait of the current RTS genre is dead and we're the ones with the proven track record to revive it. That and offering co-op modes, a campaign, and a fancy pants editor.

To suggest that people backed their KS, which Frost Giant specifically stated as being run to fund the production of physical collector's edition bundles and ramp up online testing for early testing access, because they want some high APM, spam-fest, competitive scene RTS is rather absurd.

[Machiavelli]

How is Tarkov even remotely related to this game? If you cry about APM, then maybe RTS as a whole isn't for you, at least in a multiplayer setting.

[batmancool]

Originally posted by Fellington:

If you cry about APM, then maybe RTS as a whole isn't for you, at least in a multiplayer setting.

This is why no one gives a ♥♥♥♥ about RTS. It's also exactly the same reason why fighting games are a stagnant genre: No one wants to sit around and practice executing build orders/combos just to actually play the game.

People aren't playing RTS to build supply depots or to make sure their town centers are constantly building villagers. They play for a sense of strategy and armies duking it out. But unfortunately people like you were infected with the eSports mind virus and now we have Stormgate: An AI generated game that screams "We played it safe".

[Machiavelli]

Originally posted by extreme gamer:

Originally posted by Fellington:

If you cry about APM, then maybe RTS as a whole isn't for you, at least in a multiplayer setting.

This is why no one gives a ♥♥♥♥ about RTS. It's also exactly the same reason why fighting games are a stagnant genre: No one wants to sit around and practice executing build orders/combos just to actually play the game.

People aren't playing RTS to build supply depots or to make sure their town centers are constantly building villagers. They play for a sense of strategy and armies duking it out. But unfortunately people like you were infected with the eSports mind virus and now we have Stormgate: An AI generated game that screams "We played it safe".

Most popular RTS are these mechanics you describe. Build orders are a strategy. It's a game plan you follow throughout the early stages. There's no escaping competitive/meta play in any multiplayer mode. People will play the game as optimally as they can, because they want to win. Why should the person who freestyles a match versus someone who actually has a plan beforehand win? This isn't unique to Stormgate. This isn't unique to RTS.

As for the APM argument, there are multiple videos on Starcraft 2 for example, showing people winning with 60 APM. How is this possible if RTS nowadays are all about APM? I'm not an infected with any virus of the sort, I just prefer multiplayer RTS. People have liked multiplayer RTS since the first RTS games came out. Armies do duke it out in RTS or in Stormgate. It just, again, sounds like you don't like the real-time aspect of RTS. Again, maybe you should go play turn-based games, grand strategy or computer wargames. They are great.

[batmancool]

Originally posted by Fellington:

Originally posted by extreme gamer:

This is why no one gives a ♥♥♥♥ about RTS. It's also exactly the same reason why fighting games are a stagnant genre: No one wants to sit around and practice executing build orders/combos just to actually play the game.

People aren't playing RTS to build supply depots or to make sure their town centers are constantly building villagers. They play for a sense of strategy and armies duking it out. But unfortunately people like you were infected with the eSports mind virus and now we have Stormgate: An AI generated game that screams "We played it safe".

Most popular RTS are these games you describe. Build orders are a strategy. It's a game plan you follow throughout the early stages. There's no escaping competitive/meta play in any multiplayer mode. People will play the game as optimally as they can, because they want to win. Why should the person who freestyles a match versus someone who actually has a plan beforehand win? This isn't unique to Stormgate. This isn't unique to RTS.

As for the APM argument, there are multiple videos on Starcraft 2 for example, showing people winning with 60 APM. How is this possible if RTS nowadays are all about APM? I'm not an infected with any virus of the sort, I just prefer multiplayer RTS. Armies do duke it out in RTS or in Stormgate. It just, again, sounds like you don't like the real-time aspect of RTS. Again, maybe you should go play turn-based games, grand strategy or computer wargames. They are great.

Not getting supply capped and constantly doing macro busywork are not strategic decisions or game plans people want to follow. Your point conveniently abstracts out all the tedium one needs to do to actually be presented with meaningful decisions in-game. Until one masters the tedium, RTS is simply a matter of outproducing your opponent.

[GamerMcr]

Originally posted by extreme gamer:

Originally posted by Fellington:

If you cry about APM, then maybe RTS as a whole isn't for you, at least in a multiplayer setting.

This is why no one gives a ♥♥♥♥ about RTS. It's also exactly the same reason why fighting games are a stagnant genre: No one wants to sit around and practice executing build orders/combos just to actually play the game.

People aren't playing RTS to build supply depots or to make sure their town centers are constantly building villagers. They play for a sense of strategy and armies duking it out. But unfortunately people like you were infected with the eSports mind virus and now we have Stormgate: An AI generated game that screams "We played it safe".

Then GO PLAY MOBILE games I can link you a youtube bashing such games what I think about these games. You know the ones where you are full of Buy buttons and everything is automatic, basically no brainer as everything is forced automatic. And it is a wallet wars. no skill needed.

I play fighting games (MK) and I am well aware you have to learn combos. If you have no patience neither to learn RTS nor a fighting game then those games are not for you.

is there one game that is good for you from RTS like AOE4 or you just bash any?

I can agree only on these few points: I didn't expect so large max supply (personally is not a decider for me to play) but makes it a lot more starcrafty. One of the reliefs im seeking is not having to build so many workers. It still isn't so many workers but maybe the large supply makes it like SC having to build again a bunch of rax in no time. Again i can do that too but I expected even more warcraft3-like pace tho Upkeep was never good

[Dr. Sunchips]

why are you acting like it's your problem to solve?

I don't get upset at marvel movies because I don't like them and don't "consume" them
I could give suggestions to improve them. But no one asked, and I won't die if I don't share my opinion on everything every time.

[Reva]

Originally posted by StimJunky:

Originally posted by Reva:

What i personally find funny is that so many of this people saying nobody asked for another APM ESports Titel, why the game already got fully funded for early access. I guess most of them knew what they are going for.

I don't know how you arrived at that. They leaned heavily into "we're a bunch of Blizzard vets who worked on WC3 and SC2". It was the more the nostalgia bait of the current RTS genre is dead and we're the ones with the proven track record to revive it. That and offering co-op modes, a campaign, and a fancy pants editor.

To suggest that people backed their KS, which Frost Giant specifically stated as being run to fund the production of physical collector's edition bundles and ramp up online testing for early testing access, because they want some high APM, spam-fest, competitive scene RTS is rather absurd.

All i said is, there are lots of people liking the RTS-Spamfest from WC3 and SC2 and this is why they backed the game, even if you or else don't. I know alot of people saying AoE 2 and 4 are to slow for them. It's a Turtlefest with Towers and Keeps and everyone is sitting in there base doing nothing than macroing. Some don't like SG too actually, because it's still to slow compare to SC2. There are many different opinions about the game so far arround and nobody of you crying about esports and apm-spam have proven that you are the majority who wants a slow RTS game. I'm sure there will be a big and healthy community arround this game like SC2 still has, even without you or else. And i also know alot of Casuals playing SC2 for the Campaign, Coop or Arcade. This will be a game for everyone.

[Sephiroth]

WOW BRO IM A BOOMER OK AND I AGREE WE DO NOT NEED ANOTHER HIGH APM RTS.

But most of what you say after that is incorrect.

Also if you do not love Artosis and Tasteless from back in the day then YOU DEFINITELY ARE THE PROBLEM and not everyone else.

I do think starcraft 2 flawed aspect was the high APM needed to play as well as some of the other flawed strategical designs. (marines for 50 minerals basically counter everything in the game no matter how late the tech is or how expensive it is). They could evaporate BC, carriers, Broodlords for example. That is retarded logic and makes no sense.

But I personally played it with low apm and just figured out how to do it most of the time. Normally I never broke 200 if I ever even hit 200 apm it was rare so rare I do not remember doing it. Average for me to play comfortable was probably 110 apm.

[StimJunky]

Originally posted by Reva:

All i said is, there are lots of people liking the RTS-Spamfest from WC3 and SC2 and this is why they backed the game

That's not the reason people backed the KS. That's a conclusion you've jumped to. And, WC3 wasn't a spamfest game. There's a multitude of reasons people backed, as referenced in the KS video, campaign and co-op commander mode, 3v3, as well as the nostalgia bait of WC3 and SC2.

Neither WC3 or SG are as spammy as SC2 so I fail to see how you think that's the reason people supported the KS campaign.

[Reva]

Originally posted by Sephiroth:

WOW BRO IM A BOOMER OK AND I AGREE WE DO NOT NEED ANOTHER HIGH APM RTS.

But most of what you say after that is incorrect.

Also if you do not love Artosis and Tasteless from back in the day then YOU DEFINITELY ARE THE PROBLEM and not everyone else.

I do think starcraft 2 flawed aspect was the high APM needed to play as well as some of the other flawed strategical designs. (marines for 50 minerals basically counter everything in the game no matter how late the tech is or how expensive it is). They could evaporate BC, carriers, Broodlords for example. That is retarded logic and makes no sense.

But I personally played it with low apm and just figured out how to do it most of the time. Normally I never broke 200 if I ever even hit 200 apm it was rare so rare I do not remember doing it. Average for me to play comfortable was probably 110 apm.

APM means nothing in low leagues right. There are many Toss and Terrans playing on low apm Skytoss or Mech. As for Zerg, well it's one of the hardest races to learn in low leagues beside terran bio, but they are getting better in high leagues.

[Sephiroth]

I agree Reva. In addition I think Zerg is overall the hardest race.
(if the other races play right its impossible for zerg to win at all).


As far as strategy goes Terran can literally stick to T1 Marines and kill everything as you are teching up as a zerg player.
Zerg. Makes lings ... sees marines.. ok make banelings.

Terran sees banelings.... they make more marines... and PRE SPIT and win a fight before it starts or even split at the last second. Making zergs answer to marines ... actually NOT A COUNTER. LOL

So then zerg is like ok for this T1 marine banelings are not enough now I should get infestors.... another 150 gas per infestor...... while terran is still just making 50 mineral marines...

Terran says.. Well If I can trade with mineral only marines vs lings banes and infestors then its essentially a win for me still because I lose ONLY minerals and very little at that.

With reactors on barracks I will still have a swarm of marines constantly no matter how many fungals and banes he comes at me with... so....

Conclusion at this point. I can STILL MAKE MARINES dodge a few fungals (with stim not to hard).

and terran is still profiting despite zergs tech investment into countering a T1 50 mineral unit.

So zerg says OK .... let me go up to hive and ultras.....

Terran says ok I have STIM so I can avoid Ultras off creep and I have medvacs so can drop everywhere if I choose.

If I happen to be on the losing end at this point as a terran....

guess what the game has already went on for like 12-15 minutes.

That means terran has spent 12-15 minutes beating zergs @55 all game with T1 units while zerg has teched up and spent all his resources to counter the 1st unit in terrans arsenal.


So

TERRAN SAYS NOW.

Well with all those resources I have banked I can choose to auto win by making mass BC. (battlecruisers)

Which can also like the marine counter the units meant to counter them.

If zerg makes corruptors BC can hold their own but thanks to yamato terran can get free kills on corruptors and also thanks to warp Terran can prevent himself from losing any BC to zerg by warping home.

After a minute or two terran will be maxed on BC and there is nothing zerg can do to beat it. They can warp anywhere on the map and even the units meant to counter them do not do the job.

Vipers pathetic abilities are not going to stop mass BC even when combined with corruptors. Terran can warp to safety and they can also use yamatos on all your vipers.