I do not know what I should think about that. and RTS game combined with an rts shooter reminds me of the old spell force games when you were able to take command over a unit and control it like an mmorpg charackter. But how he wants to desing is rather complicatet or I miss understood.
The fact that a player need to reqeuts the force he is wanting to play and the comander has to call down these reinforcment is rather stupid. We need a prober tech tree and dont want some tryhard minute 2 already playing his genji dt to his hearht content. Besides the skill tree in game is rather more dificult. As a terran you dont have aces to static command and probaly want one of your “heros/field comanders” there to have a prooper defense.That means we have a player which is bored and is getting overpowerd and dominatet by every other player on the field. And I dint hear out that the "commander/strategie player is able to control units himself. That would take away drop play because most people dont want to take a Kamikaze flight into zerg main base to have an instant death after 1 minute of traveling.
That 7th dislike is from me.
1 Like
not all heroes wear caps.
1 Like
If you’re looking for a game where RTS is combined with First Person Shooter, Natural Selection 2 is your game. It’s got asymmetrical first person shooter teams between marines and aliens (sort of like TvZ) where each team has a designated commander that sees the battlefield from the top down view and researches on the tech tree, places buildings, health packs, upgrades, etc. The commander’s resources come from their team’s ability to control critical regions on the map so the FPS players have to be constantly moving to cover flanks and be in the right position. Pretty fun imo
1 Like
What is a “prober tech tree”?
Commanders build units just like all the other StarCraft games. Since the units are real players they have to enter the game somehow. The FPS players basically just skirmish for a while until they find a game by an RTS commander building a unit. How would you do it different?
The flagging of disruptive players discourages “tryhards” from completely doing their own thing.
Why would a player get “dominatet by every other player on the field”?
What is your question about “commander/strategie player is able to control units himself.”?
What are you saying about “Kamikaze flight into zerg main base”?
Just as you had trouble understanding my design, I had trouble understanding your comment. Spelling and grammar would really help. There is a spell checker on this forum. Also you should read your comments before posting next time.
The way its introduced in the Video makes it in my opinion not enjoy able, I gave my opinion which I would change and what my concerns are but over all it dosent work, The combination of RTS and FPS is on the market to some extent but more FPS focused like Mount and Blade Holdfast or Arma regiments works.
RTS play rather like chess with unit sacrifces and a more simple play ground. Would we make it more RTS focused way more decision of sacraficing units for a later moment would make the game extremly frustrating for the FPS player and letting them wait in a skirmish or on a defensiv position on the other part of the map would bore them while other players which are fighting advance in theyre skill tree. With the fact that how the flagging works and players cost more if theyre better players than other is going to expand the waiting time for certain peoples which makes it for to many not enjoy able and the game just dies and not like dawn of war 3
Thanks for telling me about that. I just watched a game review. It is pretty amazing. I had honestly thought RTS over FPS was a new idea because I had never heard of Natural Selection 2. My design is very different from that. But it is nice to know RTS over FPS has been field tested.