I’d be hard pressed to think of very many “economy-based RTSs” that are endless.
Like, say, Total Annihilation.
-
I have played it, to about the 7th mission. And yes, it’s similar in the sense that it has very scarce resources, making you focus much more on the units you have than most RTS games.
-
I never said they were endless. I said, " Well, even if you can double your initial forces, that’s a far cry from the endlessness of CoH and most economy-based RTSs." CoH = endless. Most economy-based RTSs = still a far cry. Not the clearest statement, but only someone hell bent on finding the slightest thing to complain about would fixate on it.
Additionally, the non literally endless economies are close enough to it to make my point still valid. Not that your naturally anal nature cares.
Again, as a professional writer you’d think you’d be able to actually read correctly. Perhaps in real life you listen better than you read?
The campaign doesn’t even begin to hold a candle to CoH multiplayer. Spend your time on that if you don’t like the SP :).
Oh, oh, I will. Don’t you worry. I certainly loved the MP demo. It seems like it’s designed around the MP and the campaign is something of a design challenge to see what they can come up with on that basis. The Outfit was the same way. I’ll catch you online!
There is something that I’ve never figure out… actually two things:
When you upgrade the ammo depot or whatever on the allied side, it says it “reduces the upkeed of units”. Does this decrease the cost of all units overall, or what?
Also, what does the “supply drop” do on the Airborne command tree? It drops a box, but I have no idea what to do with it.
It means what it means. When you build more units, your resource gathering rate goes down (upkeep). Lowering your upkeep will lessen the resource gathering penalty with more units.
Send a unit of infantry (engineers, riflemen, etc) to open up the two boxes. One will contain MGs and mortars, the other 100 ammo. Send engineers to equip MGs/mortars and you just got yourself cheaper MG/mortar squads. Now if only it airdropped free bazookas too…
Ah ok thanks.
I had no idea that having more units meant your resources were gathered slower.
And isn’t that exactly one of the things you TA-philes wish other games would copy: limitless resources?
-Tom
Save your ‘whoopsie-daisy-lil’-ol’-me-is-so-misunderstood’ schtick for P&R.
Whatever the point is you think you made – JTF and Myth have similar gameplay? Most RTSs have limitless economies? You’ve got some sort of weird axe to grind whenever reasonable people engage in discussions with you? – you’re still coming up with stuff out of left field. And flailing around all ad hominem with it, to boot.
-Tom
I know this is a great game because today’s law of the Internet is people get into heated arguments about games they’re passionate about. If they’re bored with it, no argument or busy discussion thread even develops. :)
For my part, yes I love the campaign because it’s Company of Heroes, but that doesn’t explain why the MP play leaves me mostly frustrated and dismayed (because the hyperactive speed play online brings it closer to being Just Another RTS, albeit with destructability).
I don’t really see the point of arguing about it. If you think the SP campaign’s boring, are you gonna care what someone who loves it says about it? No. I could tell you 20 reasons I love it and you wouldn’t care less. You’d just keep lecturing me why it’s no good. If you love the campaign, are you gonna pay attention to someone saying it’s boring and nothing new? No. I’d just waste a lot of time typing in my reasons it’s better than that to no avail.
So, as much as I’d love to share why I love the campaign, I don’t think I’ll break my skull against that particular brick wall. But again, it’s cool the game generates enough passion that people wanna disagree about 279 aspects of the game. :)
Save your ‘oh-silly-person-how-could-you-be-so-ridiculous-as-to-disagree-with-me’ zingers for your fan letters, and it’s a deal.
In the sense that they both share a very limited economy, like I’ve said over and over again if you bother to read what I wrote, yes they are similar. As for ad hominem, when in Rome… Why? You can dish it out but you can’t take it? “Do you have this much trouble communicating in real life?” ring any bells?
It should - you wrote it.
Hey, I saw your awesome much-love thread and it made me feel bad that I didn’t have that kind of reaction to this game’s SP. So I posted why, and wondered if anyone else felt that way. What’s wrong with that?
BTW, isn’t Relic doing a sort of dynamic Rise of Nations type thing with the Dawn of War expansion? Mmm! I want that.
Yeah. You get to buy wargear for your commander between missions, and units carry over, too.
I’d almost be excited if I actually played RTSes by myself.
I don’t think of this as a problem. Rather, I think of it as an opportunity.
- Alan
Kohan’s another exception, then, I guess? Get your economy in the black, turtle up, then buy all the techs at once with your big fat money hat on…
Rise of Nations, as well. But far more games follow the Dune 2 method of plentiful but finite.
On some maps at least I think if you waited long enough more spice boons would always appear.
Since my favorite thing to do in an RTS is to obsessively build fixed defenses on every possible inch of ground, I really like the CoH single player campaign so far.
Yeah, it does. The bells of irony.
-Tom
Kohan was not only infinite, but it was really cool for how it wasn’t based on a model of gathering up stuff and spending it. I wish more games had aped that model.
The recent non-finite RTSs like BFME2 and COH are based on finite territory rather than finite material; the more you control, the faster your income rate. I really like that tweak for how it connects your economy to your military.
-Tom