Oh my god so its not just me? StarCraft was the most stressful game I've ever tried to play and it turned me off of every rts even though i love watching the games.
@@xxArCxxWavExx Ladder anxiety is very common. It shows you value ( sometimes even overvalue ) your ranking, and while ranking should be tense, it shouldn't scare you away. All too common fear unfortunately, but it's also just a skill you learn.
@@cryptorcd9352 The animations to the units in Battle Aces look so polished and filled with personality, not to mention the unit designs are clear and interesting, while Stormgate feels like it's still finding its legs (tbf it has potential).
It's the visual design. It looks way more polished, unit control looks very tight like it has SC2 dna. The unit designs look very clean, and have distinctive silhouettes. By comparison, don't know how else to say it but Stormgate looks very janky, the units look messy in large groups, it's not very readable. I;m just let down that it seems to not have basebuilding, altho at least it has macro.
Very much appears to me, as someone who isn't big into RTS games, that this is an entry level RTS that I will ABSOLUTELY be checking out. Starcraft is far too challenging for a new guy, this looks to be bridging that gap.
Same. Looks less focused on clicks per minute and more focused on strategy. Probably because resource management was abstracted away to such an extent.
I like the fact that matches are less than 10 minutes, short time tends to make 1vs1 competitive games less frustrating when losing and learning quicker
More importantly it took 1 MINUTE for the very first fight to break out! Many games nowdays, including SC and LOL have like 5 minute ritual before anything even happens.
Looks more like a real time tactics than a strategy game to me. I'm sure the fights are fun but I'm afraid it's going to be.. too scaled down? Reductive? You lose so much when it's "just" fights. The uncertainty if a drop will be detected. Options to prevent harass besides moving units to prevent it. Building placements and worker/army production balance just to name a few. A lot of complexity is lost, but I'm sure new complexity such as draft mechanics are introduced as well. Sorry just some rambling thoughts/first impressions.
Well i agree, but speaking from the pespective of someone who loves watching SCII games but could never imagine playing it for fun, since its just far too stressfull for me, this kind of game could hook me up. I dont want high levels of complexity, i want something i can enjoy and relax after a days work. Which is why i am also playing games like Chivalry 2, Diablo IV (i got really hooked up with this season) or direct strike. I do also play more complex games, but they either tend to be turn based, like the total war games, or single player builders, like Oxygen not included. In a nutshell, complexity is not always good, especially for casual gamers.
I think one thing that's really interesting about the draft mechanic (in this and ZeroSpace) is that it kinda gives a chess960 feel to things. Instead of knowing timings and build orders (if it's a 12-pool, my opponent's first unit will reach me at...) you kinda need to just play some RTS. For better and worse, like... the depths to which we understand SC2 strategy is only because the community has collectively played millions of games of the exact same matchup. But at the same time, there's a degree to which SC2 strategy boils down to "execute a Clem build order better than your opponent and then don't walk into their tanks" that I'm hoping this'll avoid.
I will definitely play it, but I have seen previous titles focusing solely on competitive multiplayer struggle with retaining a player base. If there aren't enough players, then new players just get stomped by veterans until they mostly quit.
I wonder why devs keep trying to focus on 1v1. 1v1 games are hard and intense by nature (chess, fighting games, starcraft etc), but shooters and mobas have been using 5v5-8v8 for a very long time now and its obviously very popular. Just enough for one player to have an impact but not enough that its necessarily your fault if you lose. Especially with how popular 2v2s are in starcraft it seems like a no brainer.
@@alphachicken9596 it's a little easier to design and balance around, easier to link players without connection issues, generally reduces toxicity within the community as you can't blame someone you're supposed to be working with, and allows for more individual skill expression. 1v1 games and team games both have their strengths and weaknesses, both from a technical and design perspective. I think for a lot of designers, they tend to find a concept they prefer and keep working at it. These guys might just really like 1v1 games, feel comfortable working with them, and want to make them. All my opinion, of course.
I see this actually winning over a lot of people that like the micromanagement aspects of games. Easy to improve at positioning, stutterstepping, etc. And fast rounds is likely to help that. Quick to get into a game, quick to get out.
@@waffen98 It seems addictive, but for the wrong reason though Imo it's more addictive to play because it's easier to boot up and play immediately but it likely won't give as much satisfaction as a single full game of SC2, or really any other RTS for that matter
One thing I'll be interested to see is if pros do what you often see in fighting games, where they'll focus on 1 fighter (or, in this case, 8) as their 'main.' I think it'll be really interesting to see what kinda combinations pros commit to if this does happen
I'm old, but for me the best parts of RTS is always the base building itself, starting from 0 building up expanding and then clearing the maps. C&C/Warcraft/Starcraft/total annihilation/Dawn of War i'm sure there are others, they also had so much story. I hope long games and build ups in RTS's come back into new games. Until then I'll keep it with BW and Sc2 as a viewer and casual player. Graphic wise this game feels very cartoonish same as Stormgate, made for a younger age in my opinion though that's pure taste.
I have the same thoughts. I was really looking forward to the new RTS games, but none of them look like they will be better to watch than BW or better to play than SC2/War3.
It's definitely a shame. I feelike base building aspect has been specialised in other sub RTS genres like tower defence or resource management Sims game.
If I want base building I play Tower Defense Games or games like They Are Billions or Cataclismo, as everyone said, this low niche of such gamers had already a saturation of RTS games from tripple A devs to indie devs. yeah we should have another 2-digith RTS game.
Love the look of this. It feels like a fair point to bring up that maybe a little map design variety could help in addition to the aforementioned draft type mode(or maybe just have that as default). It could save needing an update every other week as units need changed or dodge the need almost entirely.
Not gonna lie the fact that it auto ends at 10 minutes makes me not wanna play. Within my last few sc2 games I played 2-3, long 35-50 minute come backs.
I think this is an issue that needs to be adressed by proper game design rather than reducing QOL features. No one who even remotely wants to have success with their game would revert controls back into the 90s. Just make the objective so that you have to split your army in order to win. Have several points of interest that reward splitting + multi tasking. That way you can counter deathballs.
Selecting all units vs selecting limited units isn't an outdated design choice, it's just a different one that makes deathballing substantially weaker because of the amount of extra focus needed to control it. Being able to select all units isn't QOL. It's something that makes the game fundamentally different, and is probably the single biggest difference between SC BW and SC2
@@FORtheSWARM1000 You must be joking. Limited unit selection was a thing due to technical limitations at the time. Not because developers thought having to select groups of units individually is a fun mechanic. Name one succesfull modern RTS that has limited unit selection. Bloated apm requirements for unit control is nothing we should aim for if we want the genre to have a future. Just design your game to reward army splitting. That would be innovative.
You go around with your entire army on one hotkey and see how many games you win once you get out of the dirt leagues. The game has so many fast units you would lose all your outer bases while you chase around small harass groups with your mob
I like the idea of reducing the APM tax on players - mechincs like building workers manually, injects, chronoboost, etc. are literally just APM sinks. Not having to split your attention between your base and your units makes the game a lot less stressful and means you can focus solely on microing units, positioning, battles, etc. However, losing all base-building, upgrades, tech research, etc. just feels sad. It's removing a core part of the player fantasy of RTS. Why are battlecruisers and carriers so beloved in SC2? Because they're these massive, expensive ships that take a long time to get to, but are very strong. And building up to the required tech level is literally the emotional build-up that makes them feel so valuable and significant, it's what helps you emotionally invest in your units. If you could build carriers 2 minutes into the game, they'd feel cheap. And same goes for the setting/lore/theme of the game. To use board game terminology, this feels like a euro-game, while classic RTS are always "ameritrash". Meaning, this game focuses heavily on pure mechanics, and the theme is paper thin. There isn't a fictional world to get excited about. IMO, this is terrible - this hinders the emotional investment even more. RTS games lean hevily into the setting, be it fantastic or historical. Take Warhammer 40k, Total War, Starcraft, Warcraft... Picking your race/civilization and "cosplaying" it is a huge part of the appeal, of the player fantasy. Remove that, and you basically get checkers or Rocket League. The setting feels very casual, like a mobile game, but the genre is very hardcore, and I don't see this discrepancy working out well. To put it very bluntly, if my game pieces are boring, the game too becomes more boring. People want to see a tyranid telepathic space-parasite duke it out against a dark eldar hoverboard BDSM-lord. They don't care whether gray high-HP circles will win over brown glasscannon triangles.
Due to No single player campaign & extremely simplified/dumbed down gameplay - ive immediately moved on to more promising new RTSes Stormgate, Zerospace and Tempest Rising
I like how palatable this will likely be for beginners and how cleanly the developers can focus on balance and gameplay without too many bells and whistles involved. And I like the moba feel, it's like playing a moba as the creeps rather than the hero units! Makes me think also about how fun a roguelike single player mode could be for an rts, unlocking cool weird unit comps and wacky synergizing upgrades as you play, which might lower another barrier for entry if people don't want to do pvp but still want to dip their toes into the genre!
I am not sure on how to put it, the newer games just lack the soul to it. There's no world building, there's no lore to get you into it. It's just straight PVP MOBA style, despite being 'RTS'.
A bit more development in design, and I fell like this would be a banger of a game! I agree with you with the 'guns with legs', cause I get all these different units have different abilities, but all I can see are just small lumps with slightly adjusted shades. Except for that big ass tentacle eye, most of the units look bland. Hope the devs are willing to breath life into the units and their lores. That's what makes a game more lovable imo.
I think most units are diffrent enough. With one look you can recognise snipers, scorpions, the small tentacle guys, blinkers, recallers, the anti-air that looks like a small cyclone, the fast shoting one like small diamondbacks, etc. There is still room for improvement of course, but most units seems pretty distinct to me already.
Cool game! Two things i would like to see. 1. positioning spreads with a click-hold-drag move command like in total war. 2. Less fog of war. For newer players, fog of war simply means base trades or only using the recall unit
This looks pretty dumb to be honest. Like they took RTS and dumbed it ALL THE WAY down. The scouting, tech path, expansion locations, worker production, and more are done for you?!?! It's closer to an action adventure game. Junk. Nothing will top SC2
@@Kowzorz I've been watching the feedback from several creators comment sections, and the people are consistently angry that the game is dumb... However, the entire idea of the game is to be a simplified, easy to play, for fun with friends experience.. Thank you for quintessenizing the idea of the idea...
@@Kowzorz making things easier... less APM... less multi-tasking ability etc... means its dumber. You might think it's better... can't fault your taste... but this game is objectively dumber in every way than SC2.
I don't like that the base building aspect is completely removed. I think building and planning a base is one important part of each RTS. So the fights are cool, but there is no base building at all. That's the reason why it won't reach so many people. It's like having a shooter game without a multiplayer. Or like a hack & slay without items. It feels now like a MOBA with an army instead of a hero. Will find its fan base, but it's nothing SC:BW players, Age 2 players, C&C Generals players, Warcraft 3 players, or Dawn of War 1 players looking for. And this game is fast-paced. How good that worked in SC2 we have seen for many years. Good luck with this game!
“It won’t reach so many people” is crazy reductive. More mechanics doesn’t automatically mean better for attracting an audience. For every person like yourself who is sad by the lack of base building, there is another person (or maybe 2 people or maybe 10, you don’t know) who is happy they don’t need to think about bases.
@@zaxtonhong3958 I think this assessment is correct based on the data. Traditional RTS enthusiasts are going to find fault in the game's lack of dimension, but this format is likely to capture a much broader casual audience. Whether or not there will be enough depth and variety in the gameplay remains to be seen, but it already looks like the format caters much better to the monthly MTX update model. The game essentially looks like a marriage of StarCraft 2 and Warcraft Rumble.
I'd argue removing the base building aspect is a strength in this case. Like there are oodles of people who enjoy the tactical and micro-focused aspects of RTS games and want that primarily or are new to the space and are intimidated by the seeming complexity of a more traditional RTS. Really the one major problem I think they need to address is new player onboarding. 1v1 and 2v2 pvp formats no matter how short and punchy are an extremely punishing way to onboard new players they need an engaging campaign or at least a well designed Coop PVE or AI Skirmish mode to dip RTS curious players toes into the space without letting them get discouraged by a string of losses to a human opponent on their first few days. Like to return to the personal appeal here: I play a lot of Zero-K on the spring engine its from the same lineage as sup-com, total annihilation, beyond all reason and the like but its laser focus on making it so that you focus on fighting your opponent rather than fighting the UI or unitutive knowledge checks, where you just have to know that X does bonus damage to Y like in Age of Empires II-III-IV. This allows it to focus more purely on the choices that matter and the fighting for information, control, and resources that make the game one of the most engaging RTS I've ever played. How zero-k does this I could write a small essay about but the game's creators already wrote it better than I could so you can read their posts about if if you want. But a quick example is that they reduced the complexity of the Economy so you don't have to focus as much on the macro details and can instead focus on the micro. Energy and Metal and Build-Power are spent at one to one ratios. (Build Power is literally just a measurement of your ability to spend your other resources doesn't have a perfect translation to Starcraft though you could compare it to having a lot of larva as zerg or capacity in your production buildings as Terran or Protoss to spend your bank away.) If it costs 70 it takes 70 metal, 70 energy, and 7 seconds in any factory (Which all have 10 build power), 3.5 if you boost the factory with one caretaker which also has a buildpower of 10 . Simplifying the economic macro allows for the early game to focus more on fighting for information and map-control against your opponent
I honestly think RA3 did good with dumbing it down. workers only mine, bases build everything (but differently), units eat resources while producing, which means queue-ing up is free. There was no supply tho, maybe it would've benefited from that..
This game misses out on: - The modders/beginner game designers that work in scenario/map editor - The VN/4x bois who play campaign and campaign mods - The simcity builders who just want to macro really, REALLY hard So this is... certainly a set of design decisions.
Wow that one looks so good. Focused on fast micro. Love the mechanics so far and the units are really good looking, animations are very good too. It feels right at home and can imagine it being real fun to watch once we see players with world class micro skills.
You can make the spirits I mean sprites like umm well I don't know about animation but like, 0000, ooo1, o1..' 🤣🤣 wait... Like.. light 100%, wait. I'm high. Like dother and overlap, someone says cones 4D symmetry supreme ice cream cones
This looks really interesting, I love watching SC2 but it is extremely unlikely I’ll ever get into actually playing due to the complexity of the game, Ive also gained an interest in LoL lately but on that side the teammate RNG is stupidly frustrating at times. Ive been craving a MOBA style 1v1 competitive experience and this game could really scratch that itch when it is released.
It's gonna be dead on arrival. Everthing you can do wrong as an RTS dev they are doing. No campaign, focus on PVP, obsession with micro and competitiveness. Units dumb as rocks, no automation, stone age UI and controls.
This game looks so fun! It is probably lower budget game, and simpler to understand. It captures fun essence of the RTS multiplayer game. Although for me deeper resource management and better setting would be more preferable - robots are soulless by definition :)
Nah for me, this looks like LOL. A real rts is spending 30 mins building a base and balancing your economy and military. Of course 5 Min games where you don't need to do any of the hard work prob appeals to wider audience
I think they need to slow down the unit production times, its too fast, kind of makes it so you constantly are clicking unit creation. Also a few randomized map events or some map points of interest would be nice, like resource pickups, destructible rocks, mercenary camps. They can even make it so you have a side deck of 3 or so units and then a building in the map where you can produce said units. Why no building? Why not make a simplistic building system or make a building deck too?
I'm calling it now- Kraken is broken If it doesn't lose damage as it loses HP, then it's better than an army of smaller troops. An army gradually loses attack power as units die, but the Kraken does max damage until the moment it dies
Quite nice to see a different concept to the other RTS in development atm. Personally I am not a fan of the visuals as is regularly the case with newer titles, my boomerness prefers gritty. That being said, curious to see how the game will feel.
It looks stripped down, which I appreciate, but I do hope that it is not too stripped down to such a degree that it loses strategic gameplay in favor of purely tactical, or that the strategy boils down to rock-paper-scissors
Could be boring after few games. No base building, no strategic areas to defend except the base. just spouting units out and put them to the enemy base.
all looks cool but my inner sceptic can only look at this and see them micros/dlcs in the form of 'unit packs' that are subject to 'op meta of the season/month' and a p2w game in the end. i hope i'm wrong tho
At the semifinals of every sc2 tournament: 2 Zerg, 1 Protoss, 1Terran _You win again David Kim._ For real though this looks like a fun game for normies, I wish them luck. Cheers
![[UA] NAVI проти G2 Esports | Blast Premier Fall Final](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QWlIm4FGESQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I cant wait to nervously stare at the 1v1 button each day for a few minutes before finding an excuse to do something else.
😂😂
Happy to hear that I'm not the only one
Oh my god so its not just me? StarCraft was the most stressful game I've ever tried to play and it turned me off of every rts even though i love watching the games.
@@xxArCxxWavExx Ladder anxiety is very common.
It shows you value ( sometimes even overvalue ) your ranking, and while ranking should be tense, it shouldn't scare you away.
All too common fear unfortunately, but it's also just a skill you learn.
@@rintv3675 nah, i feel that even in unranked games. The 1v1 experience is just stressful to me.
"The lead balance designer/scapegoat" 😂💀💀
This has come out of nowhere and already interesting me more than Stormgate
Same here. This has so much potential.
And they even are going for similar graphic style, but this is 10x better!
And feels noob friendly enough where I would actually try to play it lol
@@cryptorcd9352 The animations to the units in Battle Aces look so polished and filled with personality, not to mention the unit designs are clear and interesting, while Stormgate feels like it's still finding its legs (tbf it has potential).
StormGate, ZeroSpace, BattleAces.. they're all not great let's be honest, no one is leaving SC2 or WC3 for these
It's the visual design. It looks way more polished, unit control looks very tight like it has SC2 dna. The unit designs look very clean, and have distinctive silhouettes.
By comparison, don't know how else to say it but Stormgate looks very janky, the units look messy in large groups, it's not very readable.
I;m just let down that it seems to not have basebuilding, altho at least it has macro.
Footman frenzy the rts lmao
You love to see it
Glad I'm not the only one old enough to spot it.
Marine Arena from Brood War UMS, even
Reminds me of mushroom wars but with unit micro
Very much appears to me, as someone who isn't big into RTS games, that this is an entry level RTS that I will ABSOLUTELY be checking out. Starcraft is far too challenging for a new guy, this looks to be bridging that gap.
yeah same looks very accessibly to newer rts players that just want to focus on the fighting
Same. Looks less focused on clicks per minute and more focused on strategy. Probably because resource management was abstracted away to such an extent.
I'm big into RTS and this also looks amazing to me too. Let's remove all the boring bits getting in the way? Just the strategy and battles? Awesome!
I like the fact that matches are less than 10 minutes, short time tends to make 1vs1 competitive games less frustrating when losing and learning quicker
More importantly it took 1 MINUTE for the very first fight to break out! Many games nowdays, including SC and LOL have like 5 minute ritual before anything even happens.
Looks more like a real time tactics than a strategy game to me. I'm sure the fights are fun but I'm afraid it's going to be.. too scaled down? Reductive? You lose so much when it's "just" fights. The uncertainty if a drop will be detected. Options to prevent harass besides moving units to prevent it. Building placements and worker/army production balance just to name a few. A lot of complexity is lost, but I'm sure new complexity such as draft mechanics are introduced as well. Sorry just some rambling thoughts/first impressions.
Well i agree, but speaking from the pespective of someone who loves watching SCII games but could never imagine playing it for fun, since its just far too stressfull for me, this kind of game could hook me up. I dont want high levels of complexity, i want something i can enjoy and relax after a days work. Which is why i am also playing games like Chivalry 2, Diablo IV (i got really hooked up with this season) or direct strike. I do also play more complex games, but they either tend to be turn based, like the total war games, or single player builders, like Oxygen not included. In a nutshell, complexity is not always good, especially for casual gamers.
I think one thing that's really interesting about the draft mechanic (in this and ZeroSpace) is that it kinda gives a chess960 feel to things. Instead of knowing timings and build orders (if it's a 12-pool, my opponent's first unit will reach me at...) you kinda need to just play some RTS. For better and worse, like... the depths to which we understand SC2 strategy is only because the community has collectively played millions of games of the exact same matchup. But at the same time, there's a degree to which SC2 strategy boils down to "execute a Clem build order better than your opponent and then don't walk into their tanks" that I'm hoping this'll avoid.
SC2 just needs to adopt the minor deck buffs of Company of Heroes 2, just flat out rip the entire system and glue it into SC2.
Which has lower APM ceiling -- Battle Aces or ZeroSpace?
as someone that doesnt really play rts, this game looks really fun. Looks like you get to get straight to the fun and just micro everything
Visually this one looks way better than Stormgate and zero space. Looks very responsive too.
2v2 in this game looks like where the fun will be.
I will definitely play it, but I have seen previous titles focusing solely on competitive multiplayer struggle with retaining a player base. If there aren't enough players, then new players just get stomped by veterans until they mostly quit.
new RTS titles MUST have a way to play solo, if only to learn how the controls work. else the playerbase will dry up eventually as you say.
I wonder why devs keep trying to focus on 1v1. 1v1 games are hard and intense by nature (chess, fighting games, starcraft etc), but shooters and mobas have been using 5v5-8v8 for a very long time now and its obviously very popular. Just enough for one player to have an impact but not enough that its necessarily your fault if you lose. Especially with how popular 2v2s are in starcraft it seems like a no brainer.
@@alphachicken9596this game isn’t just 1v1 there is 2v2 though. Go watch Pig’s video.
@@alphachicken9596this game has 2v2. The 3rd game
@@alphachicken9596 it's a little easier to design and balance around, easier to link players without connection issues, generally reduces toxicity within the community as you can't blame someone you're supposed to be working with, and allows for more individual skill expression.
1v1 games and team games both have their strengths and weaknesses, both from a technical and design perspective. I think for a lot of designers, they tend to find a concept they prefer and keep working at it. These guys might just really like 1v1 games, feel comfortable working with them, and want to make them.
All my opinion, of course.
What do you think of "replayability"? My impression is that you'd get kinda bored after a few hours
Everyone who has played it says the gameplay loop is highly addictive
Counter Strike is always the same, but people play the heck out of it.
I see this actually winning over a lot of people that like the micromanagement aspects of games. Easy to improve at positioning, stutterstepping, etc.
And fast rounds is likely to help that. Quick to get into a game, quick to get out.
@@waffen98 has anyone played it for more than a week though?
@@waffen98 It seems addictive, but for the wrong reason though
Imo it's more addictive to play because it's easier to boot up and play immediately but it likely won't give as much satisfaction as a single full game of SC2, or really any other RTS for that matter
This looks super fun, love the lack of races so you can make any composition. Lots of expansion potential too.
Adding a blink style mechanic is diabolical lol
One thing I'll be interested to see is if pros do what you often see in fighting games, where they'll focus on 1 fighter (or, in this case, 8) as their 'main.' I think it'll be really interesting to see what kinda combinations pros commit to if this does happen
I'm old, but for me the best parts of RTS is always the base building itself, starting from 0 building up expanding and then clearing the maps. C&C/Warcraft/Starcraft/total annihilation/Dawn of War i'm sure there are others, they also had so much story. I hope long games and build ups in RTS's come back into new games. Until then I'll keep it with BW and Sc2 as a viewer and casual player. Graphic wise this game feels very cartoonish same as Stormgate, made for a younger age in my opinion though that's pure taste.
Well there is Age of Empires, which is a slower game, more focused on building than SCII imo.
I have the same thoughts. I was really looking forward to the new RTS games, but none of them look like they will be better to watch than BW or better to play than SC2/War3.
It's definitely a shame. I feelike base building aspect has been specialised in other sub RTS genres like tower defence or resource management Sims game.
If I want base building I play Tower Defense Games or games like They Are Billions or Cataclismo, as everyone said, this low niche of such gamers had already a saturation of RTS games from tripple A devs to indie devs.
yeah we should have another 2-digith RTS game.
Agree with everything you said.
i absolutely hate this comic-y look of all the new rts games
Are the comments all bots? This game looks like garbage.
The execution looks very good, but the concept is not my kind of thing. I never liked footman frenzy
Love the look of this. It feels like a fair point to bring up that maybe a little map design variety could help in addition to the aforementioned draft type mode(or maybe just have that as default). It could save needing an update every other week as units need changed or dodge the need almost entirely.
feels more in line with a moba than an rts (not talking mechanics as those are rts)
Not gonna lie the fact that it auto ends at 10 minutes makes me not wanna play. Within my last few sc2 games I played 2-3, long 35-50 minute come backs.
This is the starcraft equivalent of a mobile game. Hard pass.
honestly yes, it looks mobile game af
looks like mushroom wars on the playstation
Ironically capped to 10 minutes.
Able to select all units. It's just gonna be another deathball RTS.
yay.... :/
I think this is an issue that needs to be adressed by proper game design rather than reducing QOL features. No one who even remotely wants to have success with their game would revert controls back into the 90s. Just make the objective so that you have to split your army in order to win. Have several points of interest that reward splitting + multi tasking. That way you can counter deathballs.
Selecting all units vs selecting limited units isn't an outdated design choice, it's just a different one that makes deathballing substantially weaker because of the amount of extra focus needed to control it. Being able to select all units isn't QOL. It's something that makes the game fundamentally different, and is probably the single biggest difference between SC BW and SC2
@@FORtheSWARM1000 You must be joking. Limited unit selection was a thing due to technical limitations at the time. Not because developers thought having to select groups of units individually is a fun mechanic. Name one succesfull modern RTS that has limited unit selection.
Bloated apm requirements for unit control is nothing we should aim for if we want the genre to have a future. Just design your game to reward army splitting. That would be innovative.
You go around with your entire army on one hotkey and see how many games you win once you get out of the dirt leagues. The game has so many fast units you would lose all your outer bases while you chase around small harass groups with your mob
Reminds me of HydraZone (SC1) and Marine Arena (SC2)... fun concept, but to me, macro is what makes RTS games fun to play
This ain't for me, I can already tell.
no campaign. doa
I like the idea of reducing the APM tax on players - mechincs like building workers manually, injects, chronoboost, etc. are literally just APM sinks. Not having to split your attention between your base and your units makes the game a lot less stressful and means you can focus solely on microing units, positioning, battles, etc.
However, losing all base-building, upgrades, tech research, etc. just feels sad. It's removing a core part of the player fantasy of RTS. Why are battlecruisers and carriers so beloved in SC2? Because they're these massive, expensive ships that take a long time to get to, but are very strong. And building up to the required tech level is literally the emotional build-up that makes them feel so valuable and significant, it's what helps you emotionally invest in your units. If you could build carriers 2 minutes into the game, they'd feel cheap.
And same goes for the setting/lore/theme of the game. To use board game terminology, this feels like a euro-game, while classic RTS are always "ameritrash". Meaning, this game focuses heavily on pure mechanics, and the theme is paper thin. There isn't a fictional world to get excited about. IMO, this is terrible - this hinders the emotional investment even more.
RTS games lean hevily into the setting, be it fantastic or historical. Take Warhammer 40k, Total War, Starcraft, Warcraft... Picking your race/civilization and "cosplaying" it is a huge part of the appeal, of the player fantasy. Remove that, and you basically get checkers or Rocket League. The setting feels very casual, like a mobile game, but the genre is very hardcore, and I don't see this discrepancy working out well.
To put it very bluntly, if my game pieces are boring, the game too becomes more boring. People want to see a tyranid telepathic space-parasite duke it out against a dark eldar hoverboard BDSM-lord. They don't care whether gray high-HP circles will win over brown glasscannon triangles.
I've always been interested in the idea of a micro-focused RTS, just all about the units's, like in Day9's game
I hope this game does well
Battleforge. Unfortunately EA closed it down.
Due to No single player campaign & extremely simplified/dumbed down gameplay - ive immediately moved on to more promising new RTSes Stormgate, Zerospace and Tempest Rising
I like how palatable this will likely be for beginners and how cleanly the developers can focus on balance and gameplay without too many bells and whistles involved. And I like the moba feel, it's like playing a moba as the creeps rather than the hero units! Makes me think also about how fun a roguelike single player mode could be for an rts, unlocking cool weird unit comps and wacky synergizing upgrades as you play, which might lower another barrier for entry if people don't want to do pvp but still want to dip their toes into the genre!
Good idea, I hope they add a singleplayer campaign at some point
I am not sure on how to put it, the newer games just lack the soul to it. There's no world building, there's no lore to get you into it. It's just straight PVP MOBA style, despite being 'RTS'.
Bla bla bla
Who cares? There are plenty of great single-player games. Including rts that already exist. Go play those.
A bit more development in design, and I fell like this would be a banger of a game! I agree with you with the 'guns with legs', cause I get all these different units have different abilities, but all I can see are just small lumps with slightly adjusted shades. Except for that big ass tentacle eye, most of the units look bland. Hope the devs are willing to breath life into the units and their lores. That's what makes a game more lovable imo.
Agree, these units aren't nearly distinct enough. Many of them look very difficult to discern.
I think most units are diffrent enough. With one look you can recognise snipers, scorpions, the small tentacle guys, blinkers, recallers, the anti-air that looks like a small cyclone, the fast shoting one like small diamondbacks, etc.
There is still room for improvement of course, but most units seems pretty distinct to me already.
I am a fan of this concept! This is more appealing to me than Stormgate. I think this is more beginner friendly than Stormgate too.
So no basebuilding? This is just dawn of war 2?
Looks awesome but you lost me at no pve
Would be great if they made some pve content for it like boss battles with interesting mechanics and different skirmish/survival modes
cool looking game but i haaate the voices, the effect needs to be tuned lol
I also feel like some of the units blend in a bit too much, but I guess that's just first impressions
Cool game! Two things i would like to see. 1. positioning spreads with a click-hold-drag move command like in total war. 2. Less fog of war. For newer players, fog of war simply means base trades or only using the recall unit
Calling this an RTS is such a stretch lmao goofy aah clash of clans looking thing
This looks pretty dumb to be honest. Like they took RTS and dumbed it ALL THE WAY down. The scouting, tech path, expansion locations, worker production, and more are done for you?!?! It's closer to an action adventure game. Junk. Nothing will top SC2
What elo are you in any popular competetive game:
League, CSGO, Overwatch, Fortnite, ect...
This sounds like a low elo response
One dude's "dumbing down" is another dude's "refinement toward quintessence".
@@Kowzorz I've been watching the feedback from several creators comment sections, and the people are consistently angry that the game is dumb... However, the entire idea of the game is to be a simplified, easy to play, for fun with friends experience..
Thank you for quintessenizing the idea of the idea...
@@LearnH2L this question makes no sense and i wont respond to it
@@Kowzorz making things easier... less APM... less multi-tasking ability etc... means its dumber. You might think it's better... can't fault your taste... but this game is objectively dumber in every way than SC2.
Looks fun to play, kinda boring to watch tbh, since it doesnt seem that dynamic with the units being to symmetric.
also it looks kinda boring. I mean the visual. It's not bad, but it's just kinda boring
@@benismann Yep, really bland to look at, I couldn't imagine watching a tournament of this.
It's a LABA (Large Army Battle Arena).
I don't like that the base building aspect is completely removed. I think building and planning a base is one important part of each RTS. So the fights are cool, but there is no base building at all. That's the reason why it won't reach so many people. It's like having a shooter game without a multiplayer. Or like a hack & slay without items. It feels now like a MOBA with an army instead of a hero. Will find its fan base, but it's nothing SC:BW players, Age 2 players, C&C Generals players, Warcraft 3 players, or Dawn of War 1 players looking for.
And this game is fast-paced. How good that worked in SC2 we have seen for many years. Good luck with this game!
It's a subgenre. That's like saying moba would fail because it has no base building or tower defence would fail because it has no units.
“It won’t reach so many people” is crazy reductive. More mechanics doesn’t automatically mean better for attracting an audience. For every person like yourself who is sad by the lack of base building, there is another person (or maybe 2 people or maybe 10, you don’t know) who is happy they don’t need to think about bases.
@@zaxtonhong3958 I think this assessment is correct based on the data. Traditional RTS enthusiasts are going to find fault in the game's lack of dimension, but this format is likely to capture a much broader casual audience. Whether or not there will be enough depth and variety in the gameplay remains to be seen, but it already looks like the format caters much better to the monthly MTX update model.
The game essentially looks like a marriage of StarCraft 2 and Warcraft Rumble.
I'd argue removing the base building aspect is a strength in this case. Like there are oodles of people who enjoy the tactical and micro-focused aspects of RTS games and want that primarily or are new to the space and are intimidated by the seeming complexity of a more traditional RTS. Really the one major problem I think they need to address is new player onboarding. 1v1 and 2v2 pvp formats no matter how short and punchy are an extremely punishing way to onboard new players they need an engaging campaign or at least a well designed Coop PVE or AI Skirmish mode to dip RTS curious players toes into the space without letting them get discouraged by a string of losses to a human opponent on their first few days.
Like to return to the personal appeal here: I play a lot of Zero-K on the spring engine its from the same lineage as sup-com, total annihilation, beyond all reason and the like but its laser focus on making it so that you focus on fighting your opponent rather than fighting the UI or unitutive knowledge checks, where you just have to know that X does bonus damage to Y like in Age of Empires II-III-IV. This allows it to focus more purely on the choices that matter and the fighting for information, control, and resources that make the game one of the most engaging RTS I've ever played.
How zero-k does this I could write a small essay about but the game's creators already wrote it better than I could so you can read their posts about if if you want.
But a quick example is that they reduced the complexity of the Economy so you don't have to focus as much on the macro details and can instead focus on the micro. Energy and Metal and Build-Power are spent at one to one ratios. (Build Power is literally just a measurement of your ability to spend your other resources doesn't have a perfect translation to Starcraft though you could compare it to having a lot of larva as zerg or capacity in your production buildings as Terran or Protoss to spend your bank away.) If it costs 70 it takes 70 metal, 70 energy, and 7 seconds in any factory (Which all have 10 build power), 3.5 if you boost the factory with one caretaker which also has a buildpower of 10 . Simplifying the economic macro allows for the early game to focus more on fighting for information and map-control against your opponent
I honestly think RA3 did good with dumbing it down. workers only mine, bases build everything (but differently), units eat resources while producing, which means queue-ing up is free. There was no supply tho, maybe it would've benefited from that..
Sooo... This game (Battle Aces) its like Dawn of War I and II (Leaning more on DoW II gameplay), me like.
looks like a custom game in sc2 lol
looks interesting, excited to try
I’m not a micro player, I play Zerg ;(
The art style seems so much better than stormgate
Given how I'm addicted to Direct Strike and wasn't too sure about Mechabellum cause there didn't seem to be any micro potential, I'm excited for this.
This is the Starcraft for gen z, going to get my friends to check it out
It looks pretty interesting
It looks like they took the worst aspects of SC2 (for me) and doubled down on them. Graphics look good but I'm already bored after watching 10 games.
This game misses out on:
- The modders/beginner game designers that work in scenario/map editor
- The VN/4x bois who play campaign and campaign mods
- The simcity builders who just want to macro really, REALLY hard
So this is... certainly a set of design decisions.
All of these are irrelevant. The only relevant players are 1v1 competitive players who are good at the game and not cringe campaign PvE players
@@HenriqueRJchiki poe's law is so fuckin dead, long live poe's law
Aka a dying breed of gamer in a dying genre.
Wow that one looks so good. Focused on fast micro. Love the mechanics so far and the units are really good looking, animations are very good too. It feels right at home and can imagine it being real fun to watch once we see players with world class micro skills.
You can make the spirits I mean sprites like umm well I don't know about animation but like, 0000, ooo1, o1..' 🤣🤣 wait... Like.. light 100%, wait. I'm high. Like dother and overlap, someone says cones 4D symmetry supreme ice cream cones
This looks really interesting, I love watching SC2 but it is extremely unlikely I’ll ever get into actually playing due to the complexity of the game, Ive also gained an interest in LoL lately but on that side the teammate RNG is stupidly frustrating at times. Ive been craving a MOBA style 1v1 competitive experience and this game could really scratch that itch when it is released.
Looks interesting! More of a real time tactics game, than a rts, but it looks interesting. Will play it as it comes out :)
It's gonna be dead on arrival. Everthing you can do wrong as an RTS dev they are doing. No campaign, focus on PVP, obsession with micro and competitiveness. Units dumb as rocks, no automation, stone age UI and controls.
This game looks so fun! It is probably lower budget game, and simpler to understand. It captures fun essence of the RTS multiplayer game. Although for me deeper resource management and better setting would be more preferable - robots are soulless by definition :)
Nah for me, this looks like LOL.
A real rts is spending 30 mins building a base and balancing your economy and military.
Of course 5 Min games where you don't need to do any of the hard work prob appeals to wider audience
I think they need to slow down the unit production times, its too fast, kind of makes it so you constantly are clicking unit creation.
Also a few randomized map events or some map points of interest would be nice, like resource pickups, destructible rocks, mercenary camps.
They can even make it so you have a side deck of 3 or so units and then a building in the map where you can produce said units.
Why no building? Why not make a simplistic building system or make a building deck too?
I'm calling it now- Kraken is broken
If it doesn't lose damage as it loses HP, then it's better than an army of smaller troops. An army gradually loses attack power as units die, but the Kraken does max damage until the moment it dies
feels the kind of game you get bored of pretty fast tbh
Each to their own. I personally can see myself sinking a lot of time into this. Short focused RTS gameplay sounds awesome
Quite nice to see a different concept to the other RTS in development atm. Personally I am not a fan of the visuals as is regularly the case with newer titles, my boomerness prefers gritty. That being said, curious to see how the game will feel.
Uttt ohhh what time is it 2 days 30? The sun, does a partial eclipse here in northern CA🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🌀🦑 and stops🤣🤣🤣🇺🇲
looks bad to me :-( sorry. trailer was so cool, but this gameplay is disappointing. it's just ball vs ball in all of these examples
Any RTS that's lacking than Supreme Commander 2 is just crap to me...
I wish Stormgate was as aesthetically pleasing as this. Stormgate feels and plays much more to my appeal, but it looks really rough in my opinion
David Kim made this game? god my hopes are low, prolly gonna need 3 expansions before storm gets nerfed again...
It looks stripped down, which I appreciate, but I do hope that it is not too stripped down to such a degree that it loses strategic gameplay in favor of purely tactical, or that the strategy boils down to rock-paper-scissors
Could be boring after few games. No base building, no strategic areas to defend except the base. just spouting units out and put them to the enemy base.
all looks cool but my inner sceptic can only look at this and see them micros/dlcs in the form of 'unit packs' that are subject to 'op meta of the season/month' and a p2w game in the end. i hope i'm wrong tho
I'll take another Starcraft series over this any day. With no single-player focus it's a no for me.
It reminds me of zone control on sc custom games
reminds me of Command and Conquer 4 but I like the general map layout and format better. Very interesting
Can't wait to forget this zoomer game ever existed even before it launches.
This looks super fun just like Immortals and Zerospace 😊
I'm excited to play this game, beta cant come soon enough
New rts are never gona be an evolution of what Sc2 is, they will always look like a simplified mod
An RTS without substantial macro? Nah, not for me.
just looks a bit 1 dimensional. kind of like a battle royal. but worth a try even though ima miss the base building
Kraken ❤ this game looks amazing! So much good stuff🎉🎉
nice video. In 5 minutes you can tell it is big smoking pile of poo. It might have more success on mobile tbh
Nah, I don't play RTS games for the multiplayer.
was initially excited but pvp only, no factions and essentially being a microable tft is gonna be a no from me
I'll probably play it but isn't this a glorified version of clash royale?
Seems more like a unit tester or proof of concept or tech demo than a true rts. This doesn't seem to have a chance to pass up Stormgate.
I am very intersted in this game but I fear that its could be to flat and easy when it is for newbies in the RTS genre
what are the sniper ranged units called? the ones at about 35 min in to the video that kill the "not tanks"
its just been a few clips and its already getting boring. its crazy.
Marine Arena / Footman Frenzy
As usual with new RTSs, it looks better than Stormgate…
Is there a single player mode, like a campaign to play by myself?
At the semifinals of every sc2 tournament: 2 Zerg, 1 Protoss, 1Terran
_You win again David Kim._
For real though this looks like a fun game for normies, I wish them luck. Cheers
this needs to be on Mobile
Lack of a campaign makes it a no for me, but maybe it'll be fun to watch
This is clash royale on steroids
Should have added more elements than just fighting the whole time