Menu
DoW fans, especially DoW2 fans
2 years ago
Altair
should have a look at this
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/kingartgames/iron-harvest
Friend just told me about it and if you see it you will know what I mean.. it's like true DoW ideas reincarnated the way they should be, I backed immediately.
3
Comments
Draconix
I usually don't backing on Kickstarter, but I might wait for Iron Harvest.
Thought I don't expect it to be a huge success and I don't expect to have huge fanbase for a long time. And don't get me all wrong, its just that I'm not overhyping and I don't think that it could succed Coh2 just like Planetary Annihilation didn't succeded Total Annihilation and Supcom, despite being their spiritual successor. But returning to Iron Harvest, I might try this game, but I don't expect to be much excellent for many fans, but oh well, I like to play some mediocre games like Dow3 as well.
Slight pity to me, that many RTS players really loves CoH gameplay style so much even if I understand, cause it might make large battles obsolette in any of future RTS. And I really like to have large scale battles, even if I don't have nothing against CoH style after all. But its harder to have large battles in it, unless its 4vs4, but still not as large as in other RTS. Just my preferences.
Dandalus
Trash.
CANNED_F3TUS
Lmfao. No iron harvest looks garbage.
Pre alpha or not. Its going to be a coh clone and it will suck.
Ololo111
You won't believe me, but those very DoW2 fans were advertising this over DoW3 at the time of it's release. Aaaaand, how is it going? US$ 584,803. Not bad. They need just as much to reach "Multiplayer" by Sat, Apr 14 2018 5:56 am EDT. or 850,000 to have at least skirmish.
Also, they had nothing to show in July of last year when they were signed in for a game exhibition (you can find the link in the Steam thread).
Oh, and you shouldn't expect too much from DoW2 fans as the most feverish ones obtained it on THQ bankrupcy sale (that's what I did, too, brother).
And the last, that Huilo or Julliano guy not just once, but in at least 2 of his interviews contraposed DoW3 and his game. I don't feel like supporting anyone who is trying to pull that trick. I too well remember how Grey Goo losers were attacking Etherium and how new PA buyers did the same with the old ones. There is close to no space on the gaming market for the genre as whole, but, yeah, let's try to rise on others failures, way to go.
Also, there is a game called Deadhold, it's on Steam EA and they have claimed to work on the hybrid between 2 best RTT's ever - DoW2 and Myth, so you should consider to support them, too.
Draconix
It doesn't look interesting to me at the moment, especially that it offers no base building. But even if you could at least produce units, Fantasy setting is not in my taste so much, unless it has base building like Spellforce, Warlords Battlecry and even Warcraft. But well, I'm think I'm gonna pass on Deadhold.
ReubenUK
This doesn't fill me with confidence at all.
charlando
For better or worse, its being released on consoles.
That runs the risk of dumbing down the gameplay to suit consoles
Lordnine
The release on console is a minor concern but it looks awesome to me. I have never cared for massive scale meat grinder style battles so this is exactly what I want in a strategy game. Small scale, tactical battles where positioning and strategy matters more than your economy and the number of units you throw at the enemy.
Draconix
Well, I respect your tastes, but to be honest, while I might try Iron Harvest, cause I enjoyed both Coh2 and Dow2, I actually prefer larger scale battles, cause I like to see big armies clashing each other. Just like in Dow1 and 3 and other games like Supcom, CnC, Grey Goo, Act of Aggression and Ashes of Singularity, where you can have big battles. Though even in Dow2 and Coh2 I tended to max popcap as possible in my compstomps.
Lordnine
I can understand that, big battles look cool, but more often than not, I get to the point where I don’t care about my units anymore and just think of them as HP counters. At that point it starts to feel more like a math equation than a game.
One thing that always puzzles me though is when I hear people request the big battles thing will also belittle team games (3v3, etc.) and say they shouldn’t be the focus of the game. 3v3 games in DoW2 felt pretty epic towards the late game and being on voice with team mates and setting up epic coordinated ambushes and flanking maneuvers felt amazing and captured the feel of a large scale battle far better than just giving each player more units.
Draconix
With all the respect, but I really don't bother with larger scale being a meat grinder, cause I enjoy that. And when there are more players in a match then big battles can be epic too, especially when it is free for all. Not to mention that big battles are traditional thing in RTS from 90's.
As for smaller scale, I get that what you say, but I wouldn't call Iron Harvest with small scale a truly RTS (real-time strategy), rather a RTT (real-time tactics) just like Dow2 and Coh series and any game based on Coh style.
Overall, it is a matter of tastes. I get that Coh style is more popular, but I wish to see also RTS with large scale in future. And I wish to Dow4 also feature large scale as in Dow3, meaning with titans too.
ParanoidKami
Looks like CoH with a few mechs added in. No cool combos, large armies and lots of destruction that would attract a DoW 2 player.
Ololo111
And gamepad.
Dullahan
It's Company of Heroes. not Dawn of War.
Back when DoW2 came out people insisted "True Dawn of War" was huge armies of fragile units ripping each other apart. Funny how DoW3 delivers exactly that and people now want CoH in Space after blasting DoW2 for the first few years of its life over it.
Dullahan
\
Team games have a different dynamic. The battles are larger, but the map flow, game balance and teamwork element are significanty different from 1v1 with large armies.
Team games in RTS are pretty lame imo. Instead of a battle of wits and skill it becomes a lot more about an exercise in the concentration of forces.
Lordnine
Wits are still come into play. The most successful tactics will resolve around having allies setup a front while another player plays the sneaky flanking maneuver. Communication becomes key. Don’t think of it as having three different armies; consider that you are all one very big army with shared controls and better map awareness. What is different is that if one player falters, the other players can often prop them up, which makes for a more fluctuating flow to the battle. Digging in and holding the line while your buddy recuperates instead of a 1v1 where one mistake can cost you the game.
Renner
I'll wait for CoH3, which is probably under development, rather than backing a clone with the alternate history and mechs...
Plus, a new member sneaking its kickstarter on an RTS forum...? Could be a dev, who knows.
Ololo111
Actually, it doesn't seems alive at the moment http://steamcommunity.com/games/deadhold/announcements/detail/1598082909734377508
Seriously, instead of KS, I would have put 100 USD toll on some sweepstake site that Iron Harvest is going to be there as well, or will be sold in a manner that CoH2\PA were.
CANNED_F3TUS
Iron harvest isnt really a strategy game. Its more of a tactics game like you pointed out.
Dullahan
If it's like CoH, there will still be strategy. But certainly tactics will be the predominant skillset.
CANNED_F3TUS
The level strategy will primarily be based around the map and what points are gonna be important for you.. Just like DoW 2. Thats all really.
Draconix
So Kickstarter was over and Iron Harvest has been funded with 1, 530, 887 dollars by 16, 607 backers. Hmm. Impressive that there is apetit for such RTS. Who knows if it will be a success after all?
Still, I won't overhype too much, cause there is always a risk of successfully Kickstarter project going wrong. Perhaps the best example of it is Mighty No.9, which was Megaman's successor supervised by Inafune himself and we all know how it ended (thought I watched it on Youtube and looks okay at least for me
). Eventually just like in Dow3's case I will buy Iron Harvest but after release. I like Coh style as well, but I would like to see new large scale based RTS in future as well, just for variety. 
Good that Iron Harvest will aside of 1920+ universe, that looks interesting to me but its just because of mechs, there will be also base building which I like so much. Dow2 had a base of course but without build system, while Dow3 had base building. Simplified, but still had base building. Interesting, it was similar to the one from Coh2.
Btw, I always thought that there where just 3 factions in 1920+ just like Iron Harvest and suprise, there are actually 7 faction in this universe (thanks to info about Scythe board game). But overall if a expansion for Iron Harvest will be, then will be and if not, well.
Last thing is that there will be of course Heroes in Iron Harvest but, thought I'm not sure, supposedly there has to be Super Units as well. If yes, then cool since I like Super Units in any RTS.
Of course I won't forget about Relic's Coh3 if it will be announced, since I liked Coh2 so much, but Dawn of Wars will be always among my greatest favorite RTS games. If a new DoW or WH40K RTS has to appear, then I would like it to feature large scale battles with hero system and with base building and faction mechanics, since it is what I liked in Dow3 most.
Dullahan
There is a lot of people hungry for RTS but not a lot of people actually willing to play them on a regular basis.
They get hyped, they come out and then they die because the playerbase doesn't stick.
Decepticats
@Dullahan I think people are used to being coddled by the popular genres out there currently: MOBA, MMORPG, FPS, BR. Games designed to reward players at a reasonably fixed interval right from the go. Meanwhile, RTS games have a long ramp up of losing before a measure of proficiency is attained.
Where'd all the badass gamers go that understood that learning curve was worth it for the awesome possibilities it opened up?
Amoc
Why is the learning curve any different for an RTS vs a shooter? A new player to Overwatch is going to get spattered against the wall. It's even worse for a MOBA, since there's so many mechanics to understand and memorize.
No, the difference in the genres' popularity is something else. Personally, I think you're on to something when you talk about the incremental rewards. Relic obviously thought so as well (with the skull system) but they implemented it horribly.
Decepticats
@Amoc because all shooters basically play the same: WASD, left click, right click, a few guns and (in the case of hero shooters) a few abilities. It's very straightforward, they've been around forever, and going from one FPS to another is easy. Even if you're rusty on FPS in general, you'll usually still do OK in a match. Plus most of the game modes are gradual, you get to respawn a few times and there's no real "snowballing" mechanics. Also, most FPS games are kinda laser taggy (not overwatch as much, but more COD and such) so kills are easy to come by.
MOBAs have a lot to learn and memorize but that's breadth not depth. Mechanically, they are quite simple and there's not a lot of depth to master in controlling one character. If you just keep picking the same character, the learning curve is pretty linear until it plateaus. Further, you can go from one MOBA to another without much difficulty since the only new things you're learning are again: Breadth not depth. There aren't typically complex interactions and you don't have to master a whole new set of skills, strategies, stats, etc..
I like both MOBAs and FPS games, so please don't take this as me dismissing them as lame or unfun. It's just that at the end of the day the knowledge and skill floor (i.e. the minimum you need to know and be able to execute) to be successful is quite low (the ceiling is still high, if not quite as high as for an RTS).
With an RTS such as DoW3 or SC2, the skill and knowledge floor is quite high. So not only do you have to do a lot of learning and practicing to git gud, but you have to git pretty gud before you're even beating the AI. Then it's a whole other leap to even challenge other players. Further, RTS games have very little overlap in skill sets since the build orders, the mechanisms for building, the resource systems, and the objectives can be completely and totally divergent. So even coming from an RTS like SC2, going into DoW3 is a challenge. I was playing at Diamond 1v1 Zerg in SC2 when DoW3 came out. Not the best, but decent. I tried to apply those same skills to DoW3 and it failed horribly. Most of getting to that level in SC2 is Macro skill (making sure you have enough worker saturation, making sure you have enough production, larva injecting, keeping the supply cap ahead of you, etc.). But DoW3 is mostly micro and a very specific sort of micro. Further, knowing WHEN to do the macro things in DoW3 (such as add generators or upgrade nodes) is completely different.
It's an order of magnitude more complex.
And yes, intermittent reward systems are great in these games like how if you're on a losing streak in most of these games they will drop your MMR much further than normal so you get matched against people WAY worse than you to have a nice win pick-me-up. Unfortunately, DoW3 never fielded the player numbers for a system like this to work. The skull system was a neat idea but should only have applied to skins and paint colors. Applying it to gameplay affecting doctrines and elites was a huge misstep imo since even if they are all balanced, limiting them limits player choice in how they play the game and what strategies they can execute. That's bad design.
ReubenUK
They probably flocked to games like Dark Souls.
Dullahan
I never understood the complaints about the Skull system honestly. It was just a forced learning curve that didn't give you too many toys to play with until you started to understand the default ones. I played campaign and some multiplayer and I had all the Elites unlocked within 23 hours. Doctrines not much longer than that. Sounds like a lot but just using each Elite once is 9 games minimum, realistically 20-30. And doctrines even more games than that to even have the opportunity to use them all. The only thing that takes significant time to unlock is the ability to use Elite Commands as regular doctrines but that isn't essential.