RTS Games - Build or Blast?

Or do a bit of both and pull an "octopus" - have a reasonable main base, but spread out to take advantage of resources and have several secondary outposts (usually with shields and artillery).
 
both can be fun, but if im in the mood i like games like rise of nations, where you have to spend lots of time building an econemy and base.
 
In games like RA2/YR it's about checking what the enemy is doing and countering it, figuring out surprise attacks etc.

People who say things like "No supers plz" in a ranked QM get on my nerves, they don't make the rules, it's part of the game! If they don't like, don't play QM!

Most games on RA2 / YR are over before supers are used anyway, unless it's 2 very good players vs each other, then it's all about the timing.

Like if you're playing vs a Soviet player, and you see the Iron Curtain go up, you pretty much know if you don't attack then, or figure out quickly how you will counter it, you will lose the game.
 
Hedge said:
Whats a good game for building "Cool" bases, or even towns etc in other games.
Click to expand...

Apparently Supreme Commander has a very complex base building focus with shield generators and cannons etc, much like Total Annihilation.

I've always found the original C&C and Red Alert to be the best base building games.
 
Im more of a builder, like in AOM i used to build walls up quite a distance from my base so i had advanced warning when they other player started to move, but i usally build a couple of infantry for defenseive purpose or to run around annoying the enemy at resources so they cant build as quick.
 
I would have thought most people enjoy building a perfect base more, it seems unbeatable and looks great.... then you get nuked. If you want to win, you have to attack early.
 
On games like empire earth where there was no superweapon or auto win unit i used to do an inital rush followed by a quick build up of troops.

But i dont like players who throw everything in a quick rush win or loss attempt. They cause games to last 5 min and just waste time.

I think the best tactic in an RTS is to attack early, which will cripple a "boomer" or force the enermy to build up units incase you attack again. If you could kill enough of their citizins it would mean only a fool could really loss the game. They end up building out of fear where they think they must get an army but dont have the economy to support it and you sit in your base building up a big army ready to attack them again while they crippled their economy.
 
used to play total annihilation and the key to winning was to getyour first couple of builds up first without stalling resources, getting a bomber/tank and manually attack them as quickly as possibly. usually within the first minute, from there its a case of multitasking attack and teching up and explanding as much as possible to maximise resources.
very hard game to master, i used to be quite good back in the day and its the only way i play rts, a reason im not too keen on the latest c+c series'
 
Hedge said:
Yeah there is nothing worse than building a base, having perfect walls and turrets around it... then bam.. a nuke takes out ya gear... c+c style power generators go down, nightmare :(

The key was always to build everything as spaced out as possible, but that was no fun !
Click to expand...
supreme commander, it's so annoying, is there a mod yet to disable like the artillery?
cause you can have defense against missiles but not artillery
 
Dude? You know how long it takes to make t3 artillery, the game usually is long over before that, seriously how long can you camp?

I used to be in the early days a person who hated rushing, but gave it a go myself, and was stunned how effective it as, any a bit newer players that were rushed just pannicked and forgot devolloping.
Really the best defence is offence, against 99% of the players, just because they can't handle much and just concentrate on defence against the rush instead of a counterattack or their economy.
A proper player mixes both though, build up an awesome base while using spare resources to rush the enemy...
 
Keeping the opponent pinned in with an early probe leading into a forward base, while you develop your own and secure the map is a good strategy.
 
-Nick- said:
supreme commander, it's so annoying, is there a mod yet to disable like the artillery?
cause you can have defense against missiles but not artillery
Click to expand...

i use a mod called siege shields, edited them myself to make them stronger, and now i've had 3 nukes hit my shields at once and they only dropped to 99%, saves your base from constant bombardment too.

To balance it out I also upgrade the Tech 1/2/3 shields for all factions so the AI has the same protection, so the only real way to win is to take air or land forces inside their shields and destroy them like that.
 
gord said:
To be perfectly honest, my strategy has always been to win. I know that a lot of people hate rushers, but ive done it when the game gives them the chance. It reduces your opponents time to turtle effectively, its pretty much shock and awe tactics.

Ive gotten into high rankings of Generals and Ground Control 2, but Generals was humvee troop rush and GC2 was turtle. It all depended on the game for me, but these were strategies that worked 90% of the time.

Thing is, a lot of people miss out on fantastic strategy gaming because they dont rush, i cant describe how much more exhilarating it is to play against a fellow rusher when you rush. Its like an insane stalemate, where your throwing troops at each other, and because its a stalemate thats when your mind tries to throw a curveball to defeat your opponent. They have probably been my best strategy experiences.
Click to expand...
I agree, except with the terminology of "rush". In an RTS I am permanently aggressive. This is right from the offset so it's not a rushed attack, it's constantly sustained harassment distracting my enemy and forcing mistakes. It's how nigh on all RTS games are played competitively.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom