What went wrong with this game?

pathatas85
Sergeant
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2016 18:14
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ?

Postby pathatas85 » Fri 29 Apr 2016 10:44

I think infinite income buildings are stupid.
Strategy game ? definitely not. Some players just build them as fast as possible, defend base with cheap and very efficient soldiers.
And in some point of the game just spam. Stupid brainless units spam, don't need any tactics or unit control. Just make hundreds of units, more then your opponent. It doesn't matter what you spam, just click as fast as possible.
this is very stupid idea, camper is more rewarded like active player who controls the map.

does any rts game have so efficient income buildings ? ??????

this is the biggest sht in this game, sometimes I really think better play some other games with less units spam like company of heroes.
Its not strategic, its stupid. ANd laggy like hell with million of units

torinus
Lieutenant
Posts: 1239
Joined: Fri 15 May 2015 22:39
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ?

Postby torinus » Fri 29 Apr 2016 11:03

I agree. The game pace is really good with 3 refinery + 1-2 banks. Income buildings just make it crazy. Having one to replace that first refinery that will run out should be enough. Make it give same amount of $/second as optimal refinery collection.

For the rest go get some POWs.

And as I said, in late game when people start massing income buildings they already got all tech upgrades and unit upgrades, now they got extra cash that is already being invested into unit spamming. It is not needed to make that even crazier with unlimited income building spam.

User avatar
AndreB
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 601
Joined: Sun 17 May 2015 18:49
Location: Mars Republic
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ?

Postby AndreB » Fri 29 Apr 2016 11:07

torinus wrote:I agree. The game pace is really good with 3 refinery + 1-2 banks. Income buildings just make it crazy. Having one to replace that first refinery that will run out should be enough. Make it give same amount of $/second as optimal refinery collection.

For the rest go get some POWs.

And as I said, in late game when people start massing income buildings they already got all tech upgrades and unit upgrades, now they got extra cash that is already being invested into unit spamming. It is not needed to make that even crazier with unlimited income building spam.


Alright so what is exactly the problem though? is it that the games prolong themselves too much that people are incentivized to make income generating buildings?

Do you lack any sort of unit in that 3 ref + 1/2 bank phase to end the game?

Are superweapons not enough? are bombers fragile?

Like what is exactly the issue that makes income generating buildings overpowered.

Generals also had hackers for china, and air drops for US, and black markets for GLA, it didn't seem problematic back then.

torinus
Lieutenant
Posts: 1239
Joined: Fri 15 May 2015 22:39
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ?

Postby torinus » Fri 29 Apr 2016 11:10

I am not talking 1v1, but team games. 1v1 never lasts long enough.

But in team games, in random teams where players are of similar skill income buildings make games last too long and lead to spam units and A-move.

In Generals by the time you made those buildings your natural resources mostly ran out and your income was still normal. Also those buildings took longer to build and were easier to kill (defensive options in Generals were weaker).
In AoA even before your first refinery it out on default resources you can have your first income buildings.

torinus
Lieutenant
Posts: 1239
Joined: Fri 15 May 2015 22:39
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ?

Postby torinus » Fri 29 Apr 2016 11:15

Infinite income buildings screw balance in late game just like how in vanilla many resource locations screwed it from start.

People that enjoy long combat can already set resource fields to last x10, but with income buildings those that spam them and get away with it (just like in vanilla you spammed refineries and tried to get away with it) will win.

In previous good strategy games you planned around having resources run out eventually and that often led to very tense end game scenarios where you tried to use the last few end game tech units to finish it, not throw them away because you have 20 more in the base already.

User avatar
AndreB
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 601
Joined: Sun 17 May 2015 18:49
Location: Mars Republic
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ?

Postby AndreB » Fri 29 Apr 2016 11:28

torinus wrote:Infinite income buildings screw balance in late game just like how in vanilla many resource locations screwed it from start.

People that enjoy long combat can already set resource fields to last x10, but with income buildings those that spam them and get away with it (just like in vanilla you spammed refineries and tried to get away with it) will win.

In previous good strategy games you planned around having resources run out eventually and that often led to very tense end game scenarios where you tried to use the last few end game tech units to finish it, not throw them away because you have 20 more in the base already.


So its a pacing problem? like refs having too much resources that you don't need to plan to get prisoners or income generating buildings, to replace the ref eco.

Maybe instead of removing income generating buildings make the refs have less resources overall, so that you have to plan ahead, and actually tech. Because like you said in generals the income generating buildings were there to replace the standard resource collection.

pathatas85
Sergeant
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2016 18:14
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ?

Postby pathatas85 » Fri 29 Apr 2016 11:30

torinus wrote:I agree. The game pace is really good with 3 refinery + 1-2 banks. Income buildings just make it crazy. Having one to replace that first refinery that will run out should be enough. Make it give same amount of $/second as optimal refinery collection.

For the rest go get some POWs.

And as I said, in late game when people start massing income buildings they already got all tech upgrades and unit upgrades, now they got extra cash that is already being invested into unit spamming. It is not needed to make that even crazier with unlimited income building spam.



and must think about random players, who don't play in teams most of games. So I just cant harass all 3 players to prevent them from income buildings spam with fragile pumas for example. And i don't know, my team help or not. Few soldiers, im dead in second. Money I spent for tanks, they invested to income buildings or fast tech to defcon 1, so they are in huge advantage just because DO NOTHING.
no effort, no map control nothing.

i think if they choose this strategy they should be much more vulnerable. But with so efficient garrisoned soldiers they can even destroy heavy tanks in seconds.

this is much worse in 3v3 games with random players where you cant coordinate so good. Which are most of played games

pathatas85
Sergeant
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2016 18:14
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ?

Postby pathatas85 » Fri 29 Apr 2016 11:34

Maybe instead of removing income generating buildings make the refs have less resources overall


less resources ?? 95% of players will go fast income buildings. If they know refinery wont last a long time.

you know what is the problem for me ?? Boring, nothing but boring. Very low strategic level, i like fights like heavy tanks supported by artillery and airstrikes.
With income buildings ???
just spam everything, click as fast as possible.

sometimes i just leave the game when its neverending story of units spam
Last edited by pathatas85 on Fri 29 Apr 2016 11:44, edited 2 times in total.

torinus
Lieutenant
Posts: 1239
Joined: Fri 15 May 2015 22:39
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ?

Postby torinus » Fri 29 Apr 2016 11:35

AndreB wrote:
torinus wrote:Infinite income buildings screw balance in late game just like how in vanilla many resource locations screwed it from start.

People that enjoy long combat can already set resource fields to last x10, but with income buildings those that spam them and get away with it (just like in vanilla you spammed refineries and tried to get away with it) will win.

In previous good strategy games you planned around having resources run out eventually and that often led to very tense end game scenarios where you tried to use the last few end game tech units to finish it, not throw them away because you have 20 more in the base already.


So its a pacing problem? like refs having too much resources that you don't need to plan to get prisoners or income generating buildings, to replace the ref eco.

Maybe instead of removing income generating buildings make the refs have less resources overall, so that you have to plan ahead, and actually tech. Because like you said in generals the income generating buildings were there to replace the standard resource collection.

If you did that, people would complain a lot. I have played a lot of RTS over the years (started with Dune 2, C&C 95 was my first MP), I don't remember any of them having such end game infinite resource potential. In all of them end game was a game of starvation where you usually fight will less but better units than in mid game. Mid game was always the part where you did big pushes and big plays.
In AoA seems as the game goes on you get more and more resources and it never ends. The game can have endless clashes of big armies in the middle if player wants. Even in basic resource mode.
Maybe this is better, maybe all future RTS will be like this... but I am pretty sure most of them in the past were not. And neither is Sc2 which is most popular out there (some of the best sc2 games came out of players lacking lots of resources in the end game and needing to get creative).

EDIT: By having easily accessible endless income resources you are training your players to play this way. You are letting them be slow and spammy.

EDIT2: Don't forget in Generals you have SW that could not be stopped. You have General powers that would in 95% situation do damage. I lost the income buildings constantly in Generals. I don't remember ever being able to keep more than 2 alive, usually just one.
In AoA, even Reboot you can turtle like crazy, make your income farms almost untouchable, especially from ground.
Only way I ever managed to kill those in end game was with mass Valkyrie, no attack behind the base with transports does much and SW are mostly useless by that stage of the game.

pathatas85
Sergeant
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon 14 Mar 2016 18:14
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ?

Postby pathatas85 » Fri 29 Apr 2016 11:41

me too. i have never seen game with 40 income buildings possible + antiballistic protection + efficient infantry + no units limit.
It should be in settings like extended resources.

thanks to income buildings i have many many frustrating games when i think, better play some counterstrike like this spamming sht. Cs is more strategic mygod where you must think which gun to buy, or when to save the money

Return to “Act of Aggression”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests