site banner

Friday Fun Thread for March 28, 2025

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

1
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

OK, now that the site is working and I can actually read it, I can say that I really disagree with that person's opinions on RTS games. To me, they feel like the sort of opinions people have from thinking about RTS games and making them, but not so much actually playing them. Judging by this: https://zero-k.info/mediawiki/Cold_Takes/3_-_Fight_your_opponent,_not_the_UI it seems like he wants to make a game that's slower and more thoughtful. But that's just not how RTS games work... the strategy comes from which things you focus your limited attention and focus on. If you make everything too convenient and automated, there's nothing left for the player to do, and all games go the same way.

It's funny to me that he complains in that article about how much busywork is in the macro of Starcraft2. One of the big changes in that game compared to the original was that they greatly eased the task of macro, by adding automine and multiple building select. Lots of us complained about that change, and I still think we were right... the beauty of original Starcraft is that your opponent is constantly distracted with those macro tasks, so there's lots of opportunities to attack and win battles even when you're outnumbered. There was a glut of games from the 2000s that tried to "fix" RTS by automating things, including Total Annihilation (which I guess this game is a mod of?) and there's just no staying power to any of those games. Once you figure out the meta build, that's it, there's nothing left to do in them. Meanwhile, original Starcraft is still going strong after all these years with an active community of both pros and casual players.

I've never even heard the term "monospam." In what game was that a problem? I guess Total Annihilation? It was never an issue in starcraft or AOE2, since it's natural to want a combination of units unless you're doing a very early rush. If anything, noobs tended to build too many different types of units, and you have to learn as you get better to just focus on a few that share upgrades and buidings.

Still, well-written and thoughtful, so thanks for sharing it.

Zero-K is somewhat difficult to play and niche, personally I prefer Supreme Commander Forged Alliance (which has been taken over, updated regularly and sustained wholly by fans after the official servers shut down over a decade ago). There is absolutely staying power in the concept.

It's really aiming for RTS elitists, a much higher level of complexity than Starcraft. In Zero-K there are maybe 8x more units than Starcraft, there might be 5 different kinds of air to ground bombers, not to mention the gunships. You can fight on water and beneath the water, you can terraform the ground, you're commanding armies with maybe 5-10x more units in them fighting on multiple fronts, you're managing large-scale radar networks, building tactical missile defence, upgrading your command unit, managing an entire minigame of power/mass generation. Your wind power plants are actually more effective if you build them on a higher plateau!

There is no clear meta build, Supreme Commander certainly hasn't been solved and Zero K is even more complicated. It's certainly not a popular way to make a game though.

I never really liked the "tier 1-3 units" thing in supcom. Just seems like complexity for complexity's sake. I know StarCraft has unit tiers too, but they're implemented elegantly and your late game composition will always include "tier 1" trash units like zerglings and zealots.
"Lurker 'ling defiler" is a base of low and mid tier units that synergize with the high tier one.

Ignore marines ofc.