File: 1746879032843028.png (11 KB, 436x584)

11 KB PNG

>>2116590
Literally who?

the R in RTS stands for "actually yes, you do need APM"

yes he is, apm is only that relevent in brood war and is a nice scapegoat for shitters aka "gookclick" complainers that tell you their opponent won because they clicked more.
>I swear man that guy only beat me because he kept cycling his guns and sidestepping
but was your aim on point ?
>HE JUST WON BECAUSE HE PRESSED MORE KEYS ON HIS KEYBOARD MAN, FPS IS GOOKCLICK

>>2116590
Yes he is right APM only makes a big difference if you are already very good at the game and even then it is game dependent.

>>2116590
He is right. But RTS in multiplayer is still very demanding.

don't know who that is or what's in the video but looks like clickbait shit as you do infact need to pan around the map all the time and constantly be moving different control groups around. you can't just build a villager and stop to watch him work

Fight using formations against mangonels, or use mangudai blobs, and tell me APM isn't important

>>2116590
Kinda. APM advantages should be wiped mid game. Hot key advantage should be beat by overwhelming and superior strategy. Always. Obviously that doesn't matter to modders and game devs.

Company of Heroes 2 had it so in random 4's a player could afk for the first 5 minutes and still win. So apm was worthless if the afk player came back and just started making counter units and recon. A high apm player who goes artillery usually loses. Also in CoH 2 the AI would capture fuel points and control stars, so it was better than alot of the player base who were so lazy they couldn't be bothered to click the mouse.

I used to play a WC 3 map called Game of Thrones. It was a 12 player map that locked alliances for the first 8 or 12 minutes. So it didn't matter how good a hot key player was they could still be beat by diplomacy or zerging.

Basically, rts is boring as fuck because it forces players to play one style. This happens in modding were they mod the fun or change the fundamentals to favor less fun playstyles. See CoH 2 player updates and Fortnight players who say 1.4ish was the best version. ie I wouldn't go play Warcraft 3 Reforged now because I don't want to play like Grubby and spam my hotkeys. Unless a new player knows to stunlock and focus fire the high level mage or blademaster, it's a bullshit gimmick. With hotkeys the strategy part goes out the window in favor of rock paper scissors via hotkeys and group assignment.

What will make a new player to the franchise or genre stick with it is the main story, which will have them doing what they need to do in multiplayer to win. They will like the world enough to revisit it. Players wanting to get good will watch youtube videos or guides, but they won't do this if the single player world and experience was not good enough to warrant that.

The problem with pvp then is matchmaking, were maybe 1 in 10 games are good and worth coming back to because of a toxic playerbase.

>>2116765
continued...

>at high levels
The noobs won't stick around to get good at gook click or hotkeys. They were smart enough to buy your game, now they dumby dumb dumb noobs when they multiplayer, or they are forced to be the carry if they are good. Both of those forced playstyles get old.

After awhile that juice isn't going to be worth the squeeze, from hacking, to toxic or rambo players. Gambling or in game item stores are used to keep players. After a certain point though it still isn't enough.

Age of Empires looks good, looks fun, even if I never multiplayer. And why would I want to destroy a good experience by letting trolls, tryhards, or cheaters into that good looking world.

>>2116590
>You don't NEED APM
>It just so happens that every good player has high APM
What a cohencidence.

>>2116629
No he's not, APM is relevant in most RTS. Do you really think some guy with 10 is going to do well in AoE2?

>>2116765
>I don't want to play like Grubby and spam my hotkeys
In his heyday grubby was notable for his strategies and number calculation, not his APM. While his APM is obviously higher than a random schlub he wasn't a notably high mechanics player among the pros. It's part of the issue he took with SC2 - a tiny micro decision like not reacting to a single widowmine in time could lose you the game instantly.

>>2116590
The thumbnail is obvious clickbait and the video is way too long for a sane person to watch

>>2116636
High (effective) apm generally means you're good, because you know what you're doing and make decisions without wasting time thinking

>>2116590
He's right for single-player but wrong for multiplayer. RTS needs to be gatekept to avoid being ruined like every other genre that wasn't gatekept.

>>2116812
>RTS needs to be gatekept to avoid being ruined
RTS is a literal dead genre, the top games are still SC2 and AoE2 being kept alive by the old guard
(Don't @ me with total war)

>>2116787
of course everybody not retarded knows the question isn't "can you win with 0.01 apm" but "is the obsession sc2 fags and 'gookclick complainers' have with apm justified ?" and the answer is no, you don't need 250 minimum apm to make it above ELO 10 or get out of rank shitter and it matters even less if you play for fun
better decisions beats pressing more keys
>>2116810
>oh no, a video I could put in the background as I do something else, you must be insane to watch, let alone have the attention span to pay attention to it all
truth is after the 28th minute you don't really need to watch he's explaining the basics of aoe4 pvp to people who've never touched an rts
>>2116726
I'd engage with that but let me guess you'd also start complaining about the length ?
anyway like the other guy only the first
>>2116765
>>2116769
while I think your point about apm is shit and how the games should play seems confused, you do touch on something the video does talk a bit about : yes RTS as a genre has problems with onboarding new players
which is why for some reason the guy decided that making 2/3rd of his video teaching aoe4 pvp was the right answer

>>2116819 (me)
fucked up my post
>>2116819
only the first 28 minutes have the meat of the matter, if you care anyway

>>2116819
It is justified though.

File: 1754443899115909.jpg (269 KB, 2000x2000)

269 KB JPG

That video essay is the quintessential example of the mdiwit who think he is really smart. But the 85 minutes of lenght should have be a huge give away.

Millenials LOVE a video essay, maybe there's a feeling of having read a book without any of the effort

>>2116590
Partially. If you don't have the APM, you have to compensate elsewhere, like by having superior scouting and resource management for instance.
The funny thing is, even though it is a popular thing to complain about, it's actually the easiest thing to improve - all you have to do is train to be faster. And if you're fast, you can execute your strategies earlier, you can multitask better, and you can correct your mistakes quicker.

This video is long because it's not about APM like the thumbnail would suggest but about the new player experience of trying to get into PvP RTS. After all the title is "RTS is incredible and you should play it" and his argument regarding APM is that it's a red herring because there is so much more to get better at than doing things fast.
It's taking things slow to explain the basics thoroughly for those who have no experience with RTS and for those who might want to get their friends into RTS.

Everyone's entitled on an opinion on the topic but I humbly ask anons to never be hostile to effort. Sometimes videos are long because they have to be and something like that is better than the myriad of easily watchable short form videos which are rotting the brain of the new generations.

>>2116838
stop watching tik tok

File: millennials still unironi(...).jpg (380 KB, 1196x718)

380 KB JPG

>>2116839
It's an aging millennial making an overly-long video in the desperate attempt to drum up support for a niche video game genre that everyone moved on from like a decade ago because it never went anywhere and people got bored. He's desperately trying to revive a part of his youth and it's kind of sad to see. Never become that person that refuses to accept that time marches on whether you like it or not.

>>2116787
>No he's not, APM is relevant in most RTS. Do you really think some guy with 10 is going to do well in AoE2?
You clearly didn't watch the video. Stop your hyperbole, and stop replacing his words. He did not say "APM is irrleveant." He is debunking all the complaints of people who claim you can only get into RTS if you have high APM which is flat out wrong. Basically APM is red herring and a common excuse people use for loosing.

High APM is only a necessity for the game if you are at around the very top group of the competitive scene, the rest of us average players can improve by learning other things about the game multitasking, build orders, matchups, unit comps, timing attacks, switching etc. High APM is the last thing that you will need once you have already learned all other things.

>>2116963
>Never become that person that refuses to accept that time marches on whether you like it or not.
Keep saying that until you get replaced by automation.

>>2117013
There's only one thing that could possibly revive RTS as a genre if it's ever gonna happen. Convince developers to stop chasing esports money by focusing on appealing sweatlord multiplayer players who aren't even interested in moving away from the ancient games that already scratch their autism itch. Invest instead in bringing in people who know how to create a fun and interesting campaign mode that makes people feel like they're doing cool shit with their armies. The RTS games that became big multiplayer sensations did so by sheer chance.

>Watching a YouTube video essay for an hour and twenty five minutes
There's no way it takes 85 minutes to explain that RTS games are good, and APM is not that big of a deal for the average player.
Verbose faggots have begun imitating chat bots, just yap yap yap.

>>2116983
I did. It was stupid - half of that IS APM, the other half is strongly correlated with it. It was someone insisting that APM doesn't matter in a subset of RTS where it very much fucking does and rote execution decides the early game more than anything.

>>2116590
fuck off, not gonna watch your hour long yt essay slop

>>2117070
I would watch your hour long yt essay slop anon

>>2116590
"You don't need APM" is essentially the same as "you don't need to be good."
APM is a metric used to measure skill, but it's a ridiculous metric to maximize for the sake of maximizing it. Trying to max APM makes your APM grow slower and it makes you learn the game slower. You suck if you have low APM and you suck if your goal is to maximize APM.

>>2117052
Honestly, you don't need a campaign. That's another complete idiotic mindset. What's needed is a game that's fun to play.

>>2117094
You definitely need a campaign if you want your RTS, and the genre in general to take off. You're coming at this from the mindset of a sperg, but there aren't enough spergs out there to sustain a genre in today's industry.

>>2117106
I wondered if calling it idiotic was going too far, but apparently it wasn't far enough. You're just a moron that doesn't consider someone might have a point when they think you're being stupid.
A campaign is just one way to make a game engaging. It has never been a checkbox every successful game has checked. Where is the campaign in League of Legends? Who is the sperg again?

>>2116590
I don't care because I only play campaign and fun custom games

>>2117115
Every successful RTS game has had a campaign. It's what drew the casual players in, some of which stuck around and became multiplayer sweatlords, but that group was always a relative minority. Developers eventually figured they could pander to this minority and become the next Brood War instead of having things in their game that would appeal to the casual player, which was retarded and has never worked for this genre. An RTS can of course exist without a campaign, but it won't be successful.
>Where is the campaign in League of Legends?
LoL is not an RTS, retard. It's its own genre that branched off.
>Who is the sperg again?
You, since you're incapable of understanding what regular people outside of your small sperg bubble liked about RTS back when the genre was actually relevant.

>>2117234
>LoL is not an RTS, retard. It's its own genre that branched off.
See, you are sperging hard now.
You can't even engage with the idea presented. You're hell bent on the idiotic idea that an RTS game must have a campaign.
I could've picked Worms, I could've picked any genre of game. You just have a very narrow and autistic understanding of how people engage with games.

>your small sperg bubble liked about RTS back when the genre was actually relevant.
You're completely mistakes about where I'm coming from. I'll just have make it absolutely clear so that even someone as retarded as you gets it, then.
>RTS needs esports
>RTS needs a campaign
These are completely idiotic statements, about equally stupid in measure. You think one of them is stupid. Many successful games had NEITHER.

You want to know the REAL elephant in the room? Is RTS for the sake of keeping the genre alive a good thing? A mobile dating sim gacha RTS would absolutely be the where the smart money is.

>>2117258 (me)
I'm done with this debate, but I'll address something some people out there might not understand.
>but Worms had campaign????
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
The original didn't. You launched the game, watched the short animations, and you had a button labelled "start game" which took you to match setup. That made sense in the time it was made, since it aligned with how people engaged with games. That's the key thing here. Don't be a moron, understand how people engage with games. In the case of RTS, the whole push for esports was just a misunderstanding of how the majority of people engage with games.

When you say the push for esports ruined the way you engage with games, and you turn around and say campaigns are the hot stuff, you're doing the exact same thing. There's a large amount of people who are disgusted by the idea of a campaign. A campaign is there just so that people that want to play alone have some guaranteed way of engaging with the game. That's a good thing to have, but that's not the only way to go about it. There's this idea that single player games are dead when they absolutely aren't.

>>2116590
only shitty rts that dont have automated commands that cut down apm and require apm to be really necessary,it becomes a programming rts at that point but unexcited things that require attention then need apm in the moment

>>2116590
A Better Strategy can beat APM any time.

But APM with Strategy is king. So APM will always be important.

>>2116590
you don't need apm unless you are trying to be top 1%

>>2117258
>LoL is not an RTS
>See, you are sperging

If LoL is RTS, then so is M&B 1 and 2. So RTS needs a story campaign. Even if the story world story line is simple to be open, similar to Magic the Gathering were every player is mage and they are just customizing their spells, it still needs a world and a story. LoL just uses a biography description to accomplish world building and story.

And MOBA came from WC 3 which made Defense of the Ancients, then came League of Legends.

Just list them as non builder RTS, but if the art and the story suck no one will play them. Worms proves that art sells a game. Blizzard confirmed this when they lost their sh*t over losing out on DOTA money to Gabe over at Steam.

I push non builder RTS on here as an alternative to Blizzard slop and the die hards blow me off because losing Starcraft to them is the same as losing an arm. I've come out of my coma. I've accepted they will accept nothing short of Starcraft 3 and moved on.

File: compfags in SHAMBLES.png (260 KB, 1131x1875)

260 KB PNG

>>2116590
Need I... say more?

>>2117561
No, it can't.

>>2117595
This. APM is essentially asking for scripts and special hardware. Nudging shaking bumping a pinball machine introduced tilt protection. RTS could use RNG or limit the number of commands issued, but at the end of the day 3rd party scripts and hardware become a requirement for serious play. One might as well get some cheat software or use exploits while they are at it. (A pinball machine will give warnings then lock the flippers if a player nudges too much for those who are unfamiliar.)

>>2117590
>unironically posts re**it screenshot about muh toy soldiers
do SP fags really ?
>>2117603
comp scene has been here for a while and those scripts are nowhere at top of play and the hardware is still the same....also why even equate apm with bumping
>>2117589
nta but come on anon, LoL is rts adjacent enough that the lack of a campaign and success was relevant to the discussion for him to point out, you even say yourself how the start of LoL was the rts community and expended beyond that without a campaign that doesn't mean LoL is an rts but it made it relevant in the discussion

>>2117561
If you can literally think faster than the other guy can click, and anticipate all his moves sure. But that's easier said than done and you might as well work on your APMs instead.

>>2117069
No you did not or you are deliberately ignoring it, otherwise you wouldn't be talking vague made up hyperboles, when the video shows concrete examples.
There is literally a video where Harstem playing Starcraft 2 tried to play as low APM as possible and he could beat a 334APM opponent with only 64APM. And that is in SC2 that is most often labelled by needing high APM to win. The example clearly demonstrates that this not true.

A high APM is a result of being skilled in RTS, but not the cause. This is an old debate where both sides of the argument are completely right, but they choose to follow definitions that purposefully miss the point in order to make themselves definitionally right.
You don't need high APM to be successful in RTS (with high APM and success defined in the right way)
You need high APM to be successful in RTS (with high APM and success defined the right way)

Now, if you really understand what it takes to learn to get high APM, you'd realize that the issue is that RTS games are a bitch to learn. They exist in this special place where you need to invest a lot to get out of it, and you're going to realize that the game design isn't perfect way before you learn how to play. I'm not talking about balance, mind you. I'm talking about the broad strokes. The win conditions in a StarCraft or Warcraft game are kind of stupid, really.

>>2117676
And how often could he repeat that? Was his opponent completely incompetent on the strategic level? Could he do it with 30 or 20?

>>2117676
I'm going to go hard against the grain.
64 APM is making one action each second. It's not an inhumane demand, but that's actually a lot.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RY9nzjg-ILM
"So wait, how is that a lot?" you will reasonably ask.

Each action consists of multiple key presses. If you've practiced enough to have 300 APM, slowing down is going to be a piece of cake. That's kind of the problem with learning RTS. You have to memorize how to make actions fast enough. That's the issue here. Harstem being able to play well at 64 APM proves way less than you think it does. APM is just a metric we use, but you're putting the cart ahead the horse when you focus on it in either direction. A pro can do the necessary actions as fast as possible.

Have Harstem play with fucked up key bindings and a fucked up periferal that doesn't resemble a real keyboard and you have the real issue come to light. An RTS is largely about mechanical skill. That's the issue people have when they talk about APM.

>>2117766
This got me thinking about the slight incongruence between the gameplay and win conditions in RTS. I got an interesting idea. What if you could win in Starcraft by just mining >50% of the minerals in the map, and killing the other guy just gave you all the remaining minerals in the map?

>>2117589
>If LoL is RTS, then so is M&B 1 and 2. So RTS needs a story campaign
Those two statements don't have any correlation between them

>>2117805
>What if you could win in Starcraft by just mining >50% of the minerals in the map
Make that 66% and it sounds like sudden death win condition in some 4X games.

>>2117815
Sure, other games have similar mechanics but for very different reasons. There's a very good reason I'm thinking it should be 50%.
In a 1v1 game, it's much more akin to a classic board game. Mining 50% of the minerals is pretty ironclad proof you "controlled" 50% of the minerals.

Of course, that way of thinking no longer works in FFA or games with multiple teams. You'd need to adapt it.
The reason I kind of like that idea of mined minerals measuring victory is that the win condition flows naturally into how the game is played strategically. Instead of just being an instrument to kill your opponent, the minerals are the goal, and killing your opponent is the instrumental part.

>>2116629
Not having an attack-move & guard hotkeys was already inexcusable around WC2, no idea why are you trying to defend this bullshit decision that only exists to filter non-bugmen and neurotypicals.

>>2117629
At least someone got it.
"An RTS needs an campaign" has the same vibes as people in the 80s - UNIRONICALLY MIND YOU - saying that nobody is interested in a game nobody can beat. It's a really poisonous mindset. An RTS very much benefits from something to do if you want to play alone. A campaign just fills this need. Problem is, now you need a campaign design team.

File: IMG_20250812_223145.jpg (163 KB, 1070x1334)

163 KB JPG

>>2117820
>no attack hotkey
couldn't even be bothered to check huh ?
>no guard hotkey
I'm not dure this hotkey is even used in games that have it so it isn't a loss and I don't see the few use cases I can see for it used in brood war

>>2117590
I don't care what reddit thinks.

>>2117820
aoe2 didn't have attack move but starcraft did

APM ever taking off as a big genre spanning concept just doesn't make much sense when you stop to think about it anyway.
SC1 and broodwar had enormously inflated APM stats since the selected unit cap was universally smaller than your armies, being especially bad for Zerg, and the games were super fast paced. Wanna foucs on that selection cap because it means that a game limitation forced more APM by default to even control you army, not even efficiently, you had to do more to just move more than 12 units from A - B.
Compared to the 40 selection cap that AoE2 (OG edition) I hope you can sorta see what I'm getting at here. The APM thing doesn't really transfer across games as a standard measurement of skill/needed investment when some games absolutely require you to do more just to get the same thing done.

>>2118260
When you put it like that, it's possible that inventing the concept of APM killed RTS. Instead of being reasonable QoL changes, it became noobs crying that they weren't fast enough. Instead of focusing on which parts of the game were menial and unnecessary rote actions, it became a case of removing all actions to lower APM. A need for APM didn't kill RTS, but the concept of APM influenced people's minds too much and stopped the reasonable types of innovation from flowering.

>>2118264
not really.

>>2118271
It's not possible? Silly statement. The world is full of these concepts that start having real effects because we believe in them.
RTS didn't die? That's the part you could debate.

File: army men rts dafoeq.png (768 KB, 680x688)

768 KB PNG

Anti-possum missles?

>>2116590
>you dont need apm
Right.
>you should play RTS
Wrong.

>>2118264
Yeah, Starcraft shows the players' APM stats after the match. When you get beaten by a better player, and his APM happens to be several times higher than yours, you get the idea of how much you suck, much like with the K/D stat in FPSes.
Once you know you're no good, what will you do? Commit to training until you're better than everyone, or quit and go back to playing solitaire? And when you add ladder anxiety, it becomes clear why shitters think MP is only for godlike players.

>>2117629
>also why even equate apm with bumping
>WC 3 has a formation button
>fps games use scripts by the best
>putting a magnet on the glass of a pinball machine vs bumping the case
>owning said pinball machine and making it free to play
>reprogramming the pinball machine to show adjust high scores accordingly

APM just points to limitations of the game. Playing at the edges of those limitations is encouraged. SC 2 is free for reason. No matter how many battles you win or lose the galactic war is never won. The space frontier is never tamed.

Scripts get used to cut down actions or speed up actions. Mice and keyboard binds shortcuts get used to reduced apm on the human side while the program receives the increased inputs.

Look up a video called the wiggle that killed Tarkov. If AI can handle a high skill high apm human better there's your answer.

I use pinball because at one point The Who had a song about those leet proto gamers. For a skinner box to get recognition as skill based, it can still charge 25 cents to play while SC 2 is free. I can hear streamers clicking buttons and spamming keys when they play. Explain the needless goofy actions because it looks closer to cringey tryhard stuff. A strategy game would build order or formation selection. Maybe move on to fps? Limitations of the game have been met, why bother when winning just looks like spamming needlessly?

So why pinball? Because Street Fighter 2 could arguably be put next to pinball machines and players would pay to play it. So why would or should a SC players apm be considered skill along with those 2 games?

The comparison in skinner boxes is there and reasonable.

>>2117771
He was playing against SC2 ladder Grandmaster players and it was 2 examples. You could call these random outliers if you want but they still prove that it is possible to beat the average player if you know what you are doing even if you have significantly lower APM.

>Could he do it with 30 or 20?
Again, for the 3rd time stop with the hyperboles, next time you are going to ask "Can he beat an enemy while being AFK?" or something.

>>2117777
>Have Harstem play with fucked up key bindings and a fucked up periferal that doesn't resemble a real keyboard and you have the real issue come to light. An RTS is largely about mechanical skill. That's the issue people have when they talk about APM.

here is the original video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2W-jQiVNO4w

There were times when he just A-moved his army into an enemy army and then let go of all the controls and just "prayed" for several second before even adding a single move command.

>Harstem being able to play well at 64 APM proves way less than you think it does.
The point of the entire video in the OP and the entire discussion we are having is to dimiss this red herring that you need high APM to just play an RTS. That you need a minimum of 100APM or 200 APM or 300 APM or whatever number sounds cooler. Which is just flat out untrue. Yes, he is a long time pro so he obviously knows all the ins and out of the game but that is the point, that knowing most of the ins and outs of the game is way more important than APM.

>>2116590
I prefer turn based but love games like Total War, RTS slop like Starcraft is shit

>>2118264
This goes both ways. Whenever you want to remove rote menial actions the tryhards start whining it's part of "skill" they have spent a lot of time practicing. You still occasionally get some weird faggots who will defend starcraft having low selection limit and shitty pathfinding as a feature.
Also, realistically, most classic RTS games are mostly execution of a plan you made before the match. Nobody comes up with streats on the fly, high level players just have broader pool they practiced.
Admittedly the most important skill is not getting tunnel visioned and knowing when to switch, but for that you still need to have scenarios practiced so you can switch on the fly.

>>2116590
Whenever I lose in online RTS it's because the other guy walks a huge army into my base before I can make one or he makes units that counter me or he has one unit I can't deal with. I have literally never thought "oh man, he just dodged my ability, what a sweat!".
I say this because I actually really like micro. It just isn't that relevant until you get to a high level, which I'm guessing (you) didn't.

Unless you're really slow, like below 50. Then go play against AI grandpa

>>2119258
>RTS slop like Starcraft is shit
they are called gookclick for a reason. I also enjoy Total war games and I loved playing coh2 which is more of a traditional pvp rts but without the gookclick.

>>2119080
I don't think your babble makes as much sense as you think it does.
bumping and aimbot take advantage of simple designs and are both cheating. in pinball you can physically create new forces to influence the ball that were not intended, in fps to win you just need to have your crosshair in the right place relative to the enemy's hitbox so cheating tools are kind of rudimentary.
apm doesn't fit, it's just interacting with the intended game controls faster.
>scripts get used to cut down or speed up action
are you talking about player side programmed command macros ? I don't think you realise how little those actually make sense in rts. if you take the production side (the one that fits your argument the most), you'd need a macro for every unit, you'd need it to be toggable so you can do single round of units or have better control when early game makes the match a low eco game or so you can pause it to stock up on ressources for a new base or a tech and before you know it you're back to manage your production just as much just through different controls
on the other hand macros can barely be used in raw eco and combat situations due to how sensitive they are to ingame context without actually reading game info which is what strategy is about, where do I expend, how to take that fight so I win.
to make a "open a new woodline" macro command you'd need your tool to recognise which woodline you're talking of, which side to start chopping first, decide of which group of villagers to send, get one to make a lumber camp and maybe get the newest town center to rally new villagers there
see where I'm getting ?

>why SC player apm be considered skill
apm isn't the skill, it's what is developed as they increase their skills like multitasking, reading the state of the game and coming up with a tailored solution to win and effectively acting it
hence apm by itself is not important, but player with higher skill tend to have practiced enough to also have high apm.

>click each move order 20 times
high apm is that easy

>>2119259
I articulated like a retard, this is what I meant when I said that marrying APM and RTS stopped reasonable innovation from flowering. It's just a nasty relationship that didn't need to happen.

>>2119372
Not every RTS is Starcraft or AoE. Christ you people.

>>2117590
That's why grand strategy took over.

>>2117590
He's reddit, but he's right. Even in SC2, people prefer the gimmicky coop vs ai mode. A lot of people would play multiplayer if it wasn't so harsh and optimized. Most people probably actually have had a lot of fun in multiplayer, but playing against friends, ignorant of the meta or proper playstyle which kills all appeal for the game when encountered. It's not just rts, pretty much every genre has this exact issue right now.

>>2116629
I was told that, I haven't played since I quit starcraft in 2010 so I came back to try AOE4
I was having fun, then I played online and saw people animation cancelling archers to get one more attack in
so I just quit playing multiplayer
Unfuck this kind of shit and I won't care about your APM, archers should get stuck when attacking
this kind of league of legends shit needs to fuck off

>>2120853
>unfuck animation cancelling archers
Compfags love abusing glitches, exploits and other unintentional fuckery, and turn them into an element of the competitive skill set. It's one of those things devs just have to respect if they don't want to be accused of balancing the fun out of the game.
Imagine if after all these years AoE2 lost the flanking formation, you know the one that's used exclusively for dodging mangonels, just because it's silly and immersion-breaking or something. There would be riots and blood in the streets. Better treat it as a legitimate skill and a funny meme.

>>2120840
>It's not just rts
Nobody has a problem playing multiplayer in shooters, fighting games or party games.
Fortnite, amogus, TF2, fall guys, cod, battlefield and so many other games have a playerbase who is completely fine with "breaking the power fantasy". They don't need to be told that they're the best 24/7, they don't need to play against inept AIs, they are happy playing a game for its gameplay against other people on an equal ground.

>>2120853
>>2120899
"animation canceling" in AOEIV isn't a glitch and it's doesn't let your archers fire faster.
Ranged units will stand still while they wait for their weapons cooldown if their target is in range, but if their target is running away or if you're attack moving they'll give chase and they can even fire longbows on the move which looks very weird.
If I understood correctly what you're complaining about is people stopping their archers as they're running away to let them turn around and fire at their pursuers, but this doesn't let them win an engagement if you're either engaging them with your own archers, because yours can fire as their chasing without needing to stop, or if you're chasing them with horsemen since they are faster anyway.
It can have impact in certain situations but you're not going to win games from that alone, it's a very silly thing to quit multiplayer for.
I've been getting into AoEIV recently and 90% of the time I win or lose games because the loser is either going for a greedy strategy or failing to scout what the winner's is doing.

>>2120911
>Fortnite, amogus, TF2, fall guys, cod, battlefield
All these games put you against a lot of random people at once and don't have an ELO system. Fighting games do have the same problem, which is why the genre has continually gone downhill since the 7th generation.

>>2120911
TF2 is fair, no idea about the others. Lobby game culture is definitely dying in FPS and giving way to ladder grinding where it hasn't been replaced already, but it's slower than some other genres, presumably because of how uncontrolled and messy large teams are. Fighting games do have the same issue though, most people bounce off the online entirely, which is why they're now putting such an empasis on the story modes. Even street fighter seems to be releasing more casual singleplayer/social mode content than things relating to the actual game, now.

>>2120917
>>2120936
You guys are not wrong. I had this thought for a while that RTS would benefit from having their own TF2 style casual game where someone can drop in mid match and mess around without needing to sweat or being forced to stay in a game from start to finish, problem is that it's not possible to make a casual RTS like that with workers, teching or bases so if something like that came out RTS fans would call it "casualized assfaggot trash" and spurn it.

>>2120911
Most of those games have a much much lower barrier to entry and can be played just fine at shitter level. Fighting games have the same problem with casual dropoff.

>>2119372
Have you ever in your life touched Supreme Commander or BAR? Both of those games have saveable building templates to streamline building when you know what you want and an economy where that actually makes sense.

File: 1438811777991.png (48 KB, 392x293)

48 KB PNG

>>2117590
>multiplayer is bad because it... exposes all the fundamental design flaws about a game that make it bad due to tryhards exploiting them

>>2121190
yes I have and beyond it only making sense in those game's economy compared to games where you would pay a bunch of buildings upfront (so you would need to float a lot of ressources to save a couple clicks)

but they also have the least restricting maps, you tried that in company of heroes, dawn of war, brood war, and even some aoe2 maps you'd find your template doesn't fit in your buildable area because of the size but also shape of the buildable area and the shape of the rest of your base

and that's not even to mention half those games don't need half a million barracks built each game

>>2120853
>>2120899
I still don't get this argument, if units have the same behaviors and responses for every player then what's wrong ?
>b-but he's beating my units and I can't win that skirmish in the middle of the map
then disengage anon, surely your economy is bigger and you have a tech edge or maybe you're sneaking units in his backline while your opponent is in the middle of tunnel-vision on his little army, you're not playing at pro level anon so an opponent of similar level can't match you in every part of the game while investing his time and attention on one fight
unless it's just a scapegoat because you needed a simple answer that shifted the blame away from yourself and protect your panzer general ego

>>2119372
>scripts get used to cut down or speed up action

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek0E_bnxEW0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDO3cYZ5k60

I know Counterstrike had a bunny hop script at one point.
Many fps games and at one time to play a druid? class in WoW one had to macro. I consider a game bad if a player has to get additional commands or hardware to play. I had a friend who became the #1 warrior in duels in WoW and his setup had him with no UI and a special mouse that cost over $100. He could literally not press the keypad he had to solely play his rotations from a mouse. He had scripts, some to specifically counter another classes ability.

>>2117809
The grand view map in M&B plays just like a MOBA with the lanes being varied and the castles or towns act as towers in MOBA. The lanes vary in passes or wide valleys.

What sets M&B apart from APM is the pause during player and only player battles. Killing looters is the same as killing creeps in a MOBA just M&B allows the fight to be micro managed. I have seen M&B made in the WC3 map maker exactly like this. Also they allow for npcs to form their own parties that do not need to be microed.

The tldr is the pause in the single player M&B experience makes APM useless as well as not having to import scripts or buy special hardware.

I assume things are a given and I end not explaining well enough. My bad.

>rts has all of the cool large scale battles in vidya
>the most effective tactic in like half of RTS games for 99.99% of players is to never watch a single battle and just macro / cycle through active abilities and then return to macro
no wonder shit died

>>2116783
not sure i'm blaming this one on the jews desu

>>2122619
Nice try, Shekelberg!!!

>>2117590
>multipalyer killed the RTS genre
MP is what keeps the genre alive even today.

>>2116590
the fuck is apm?

>>2122796
apes per minute

>>2122796
Watch the video it tells you. Or even better just do a 2 second internet search you lazy bum.

>>2122547
'It doesn't make sense for RTS because most are using a shittier economic model that increases the amount of busywork you have to do' is proving his point.

>>2117590
This is why the best RTS games have a solid singleplayer experience, like AoE2. And I still replay the original C&C campaigns, mostly for nostalgia, but they still more or less hold up to this day.

>>2116590
Not really, because everyone's idea of "low APM" is 30 APM when most casual players have like 15 APM on average.

>>2116590
Anyone who blames APM for not getting into the RTS genre are coping. You can climb in any RTS, even BW which is notorious for needing apm, if you just make correct decisions. The reality of RTSs is that people suffer from information overload since so many things can happen at once.Once you understand what you need to focus on the game becomes simple and climbing will come naturally.

When it comes to RTS the most important aspect is Effective Actions Per Minute. This is Actions that actually affect the game. The average EAPM of players even most pros, for BW is around 150 EAPM. APM is fluff. EAPM is what matters.

People stopped playing RTS games because other genres (GSGs, 4X, even MOBA to some extent) found better ways to scratch the same itch of 'strategy game'. I say this as a huge fan of the RTS genre and who grew up playing C&C 95 and Starcraft and Warcraft 3 (and FWIW grinded to Master in WoL)

For most people, a single player campaign is a fun way to kill 12 hours or so but that's a pretty middling value proposition these days (This isn't the year 1999 anymore - building a cool army on the computer isn't automatically impressive or engrossing - and there are free games that can provide hundreds of hours of gameplay). And the multiplayer is simply too stressful and not fun.

I think that will continue to be the case as long as RTS basically follows the standard genre multiplayer conventions of 'need to gather resources + build base + build army + expand + harass my opponent + kill my opponent'.

It's simply a lot of actions you need to take, really quickly, and not mess up, and it feels bad when you fuck up or your opponent shows up with an army you didn't expect or in a place you didn't expect and now all your workers are dead and fuck it ragequit. Something about 1v1 multiplayer is also pretty stark. No team to fall back on, no cooperation, just 'execute build order and harass perfectly or lose'. Yeesh.

Even pretty competitive and sweaty games like CS have a team you're on and more downtime during the rounds where tension builds and releases, and you can take a second to catch your breath or have a laugh. With RTS in the AoEII/SC2 mold, as soon as the game launches it is ON and you are frantically locked in for 20-40 minutes, and there's always high risk of losing the whole match in an instant. It's just too much.

I have no idea who that video is made by and I didn't watch it (Youtube video essays are usually extremely gay)

>>2116590
He's right
Mr Yo is the top 2 AOE2 player and his APM is abyssmal for pros

>>2122862
If I need to watch a video that tells me what something is in game I've been playing just fine for years than it's completely fucking useless and doesn't matter at all.

>>2126714
I disagree. It seems like you're trying to rationalize it when you yourself diagnose the issue. Why do other games scratch the itch better?
APM isn't the problem, but it's definitely related. Looking at the issue holistically, there's an issue with APM. But, it's not the PM part that people have a grudge with. It's the A. The type of actions you take in an RTS don't make for a fun game.

APM is a meme-number which only happens to correlate with better performance.
Case in point you can inflate it by spam clicking movement orders, doesn't improve your win chances though.
At most it is an indicator for your ability to multitask and micro, but even when not observed in a vacuum it is a shit metric which is unreliable at best and completely useless at worst.

>>2126803
Completely true. A lot of newbs would honestly benefit from slowing down to focus on the important things. That's kind of a problem in itself. People would rather do the fun actions.

>>2116590
>Was he right?
they pull the wool over your eyes
you can only cram so many actions into a single minute without them becoming superfluous and slowing you down

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDOdWPWFeB8

>>2116590
Was he?

>>2126777
>doesn't matter at all
Well that's the whole point of the video, congratulations.

>>2129176
He thought therefore he was

File: 1728895374914095.jpg (35 KB, 378x453)

35 KB JPG

APM is important in an RTS in the sense that, given two players of exact skill, the one with higher APM is simply more likely to win
I've been playing AoE2 ladder since the Voobly days, and the amount of times I beat up some shmuck who was doing all kinds of fancy micro tricks with xbows only to have a completely disfunctional eco back home is far too high; send two knights to his woodline and watch him immediately resign after he realises he hasn't made a vil in 5 minutes
People simply don't play RTS games because
>they're not "trendy"
>they're less immediately satisfying to learn
>1v1 settings force people to recognise their own mistakes
>they put a LOT of constant pressure on a player (as >>2126714 eloquently put it)
Any other reasoning or line of thinking is cope

File: lol.gif (3.34 MB, 480x270)

3.34 MB GIF

>>2129176
>Was he?
there is no benefit to button mashing
I would assume these people just run scripts in the background that plays the game for them or some other shenanigans is going on
and other people who geniunly think this makes them better at RTS fell for it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbpCLqryN-Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0CSJs8iXUo

maybe it was real in the beginning or not I have no idea but you can tell when you watch the video
it's a lot of pointless commands and it more likely results into canceling a building if you did that