While playing online, many RTS games and gamers fall into their own categories due to peoples' different styles and interests, yet they may cause worse conflicts, arguments, trolling and something else when some controversial opinions come together between gamers. What are they? Mostly the "rude pros vs. friendly beginners" or vice versa. I mean those people and their famous stereotypical "LERN TO PLAY NUB" and "HELP ME PLZZZ" phrases. Everybody hates em, we know it. I used to play several strategy games online, and have come to a bus stop of dissappointment; among the majority mass of the gaming group, there seems to be a single or two "proper" ways to play games to beat everyone else, to be the best and have the "skills" that other people agree you being a smart and great player. If someone uses his own, different ways to play, s/he is proclaimed as a newbie, or something else dull. For example, there is a match between a player, which is a common rusher -type (annihilate the opponents as fast as possible however you can), and a player, who prefers turtling -styled tactic (build up defenses and then attack). The Turtler loses by rusher's quick tank spam inside ten minutes and gives his/her comment about it. The Rusher replies with a classic phrase:
"learn to play, u just suck"
Anyone can think anything about that kind of situation. I, however, am irritated. As a gamer, who rather enjoys the game and its components self than winning, really irritated. The majority I've met online wants to rush. I don't have anything against any tactic, but this one... goes absolutely ridiculous.
I know it, I've tested it and played with that way few times, and dissappointed due to its simple routines and overall dullness. The games' genres say it: "real time STRATEGY games"
...where did the strategy go in rushing?! You win and easily, but hey. You know what? In my eyes, and possibly for many else, it's a weak and really unfair show... to see a player who owns another player with his/her routinized attack and uses the similar "tactic" over and over again in any battle. This is a strategy? I don't know is it ejoyable way to play, but I try to have all fun and joy from the games by all ways; try different attacks and ways to break the enemy defense and annihilate its empire piece by piece... I've played some times with rushing style, and noticed that it stumbles into few troubles:
1) Your base becomes a sitting duck if you simply build a pack of tanks and attack.
2) Your base lacks lots of important stuff to prevail in case you fail at your attack.
3) If your charges fail, THEN what? You're weak after an attack, and you have much less to defend with.
So it's mostly all about your first/second/third/X th attack to take care of the foes, but your chances ain't fat if it gets screwed. Simple, eh? No sense. No brains.
What about turtling? Well, it isn't the best one either, if you close yourself inside your base COMPLETELY, and wait your enemies. This leads to slow and painful end of your empire while the enemies are bombarding your walls slowly off, and breach inside.
Call me a turtler, call me a slow player, call be a newbie, I don't care...
...Oh, so how do I play, then, eh? I prefer to build a proper defense, THEN attack when I've gathered a strong and versatile force. Why? Because in that state I know that my opponent HAS some possibilities to survive if he's fast... and knows what to do. THAT shows the real skills: in fair play, you are able to fight and defend more versatile ways and tactics against your enemy. In this situation, even rushes are acceptable, WHEN they're done in later game, when you have a thought that your enemy may have an oppoturnity to take your armada down some way.
Now I ask from you: Do you enjoy fast rushing and quickmatches? If yes, why?
Edited by JarmoNator, 18 June 2007 - 04:43 PM.