@Heldentod said:
What defines both DoW and relic RTS has been dicussed aswell. If elements only found in relic RTS are being replaced with elements from other games, than it is absolutely reasonable to say that DoW III has lost much of it's appeal as part of this series. People expect certain traits connected to an IP, to a name. That's what I expressed before and which was labeld a subjective take on the matter, when it's not. The Moba elements this game adopts, the less it is a RTS yet it's supposed to be the sequal to relics famously unique RTS series named DoW.
What defines both DoW and Relic RTS may have been discussed. But this is everyones personal opinion, not a fact like we will all die one day. So i asked for your personal opinion.
The apologists on the other hand pretend it's just a new, unqiue relic approach and it's "not Dota" since there are still 40k elements left. Black and white... that doesn't make it any better or entirely different. If f.e. 60% of the game are taken from SC or Dota etc I can point that out and dislike it saying it's not DoW while you can "not mind" that. Doesn't make me objectively wrong about the "close to" part. And I can certainly criticize people for denying these similarities - it's not the same as disliking their indifference of even support of this all "new" cough approach of relics.
"Objectively" youre totally wrong about the "close to" part, because we would have to totally disassemble every game mechanic that has ever been invented and define who came up with the original idea. Now that i think of it, Starcraft is kind of close to Tetris and Pong. Also still very much waiting for the answer about similarities to Starcraft.
If "smoke and grass" were everything id be kinda disappointed.
Clue:
"It's not a personal opinion when there are so blatanly obvious elements of several different RTS and Moba games"
PogChamp! Breaking News: Evolution happens! How dare it.
@Heldentod said:
Oh don't pretend you are actually asking seriously when I quoted the dude who sais " He has no facts" and then go " oh yeah I can see the similarities". It's not a personal opinion when there are so blatanly obvious elements of several different RTS and Moba games being put in while other defining factors of the DoW are being removed in return (Cover, Sync kills etc). All of these have been discussed ad absurdum. Same goes for the starcraft-y things like the smoke and grass cover, the general visual appearance etc. The trend is perfectly clear, the intention of relic very obvious - to jump on the badn wagon. And I can critize that. Me hating that is a personal opinion but the existence of said elements is not.
What defines both DoW and relic RTS has been dicussed aswell. If elements only found in relic RTS are being replaced with elements from other games, than it is absolutely reasonable to say that DoW III has lost much of it's appeal as part of this series. People expect certain traits connected to an IP, to a name. That's what I expressed before and which was labeld a subjective take on the matter, when it's not. The Moba elements this game adopts, the less it is a RTS yet it's supposed to be the sequal to relics famously unique RTS series named DoW.
The apologists on the other hand pretend it's just a new, unqiue relic approach and it's "not Dota" since there are still 40k elements left. Black and white... that doesn't make it any better or entirely different. If f.e. 60% of the game are taken from SC or Dota etc I can point that out and dislike it saying it's not DoW while you can "not mind" that. Doesn't make me objectively wrong about the "close to" part. And I can certainly criticize people for denying these similarities - it's not the same as disliking their indifference of even support of this all "new" cough approach of relics.
You really nailed... I'm shocked by the amount of Relic things they have removed, Squads leaders, squads personalisation, cover, game mode( totally original by dow1-2 and a very praised one ) etc.. and they have introduced a lof of other game elements from sc2, lol and dota, it is ok if you take some elements from other games but keeping the soul of the game untouched, but let's be realistic here.. I don't think the people who made the best rts ever DOW1-COH1 work anymore at relic, so they don't understand those mechanics and they have to copy other popular game mechanics so Im not going to judge them at least they tried...
But for the love of god give me other mode than the moba one thanks... As and old RTS player I will be grateful
@Heldentod said:
What defines both DoW and relic RTS has been dicussed aswell. If elements only found in relic RTS are being replaced with elements from other games, than it is absolutely reasonable to say that DoW III has lost much of it's appeal as part of this series. People expect certain traits connected to an IP, to a name. That's what I expressed before and which was labeld a subjective take on the matter, when it's not. The Moba elements this game adopts, the less it is a RTS yet it's supposed to be the sequal to relics famously unique RTS series named DoW.
What defines both DoW and Relic RTS may have been discussed. But this is everyones personal opinion, not a fact like we will all die one day. So i asked for your personal opinion.
The apologists on the other hand pretend it's just a new, unqiue relic approach and it's "not Dota" since there are still 40k elements left. Black and white... that doesn't make it any better or entirely different. If f.e. 60% of the game are taken from SC or Dota etc I can point that out and dislike it saying it's not DoW while you can "not mind" that. Doesn't make me objectively wrong about the "close to" part. And I can certainly criticize people for denying these similarities - it's not the same as disliking their indifference of even support of this all "new" cough approach of relics.
"Objectively" youre totally wrong about the "close to" part, because we would have to totally disassemble every game mechanic that has ever been invented and define who came up with the original idea. Now that i think of it, Starcraft is kind of close to Tetris and Pong. Also still very much waiting for the answer about similarities to Starcraft.
If "smoke and grass" were everything id be kinda disappointed.
Clue:
"It's not a personal opinion when there are so blatanly obvious elements of several different RTS and Moba games"
PogChamp! Breaking News: Evolution happens! How dare it.
And thanks for proving my point - no point in discussing this. What you are doing is the perfect example of semantics in the underlined passage . There's a very objective way of comparing elements and you just deny it because ... of origin? Like that matters in this discussion.
Let's stick with the MP since it's the most recent example. Now tell me if you are capable of a rational comparison, is that MP mode closer to any other of the recent RTS games or Dota? Does CoH have turret defense, lane-like attack corridors or a core? Does C&C ? IF not, it is as a matter of fact CLOSER TO DOTA than any other RTS that actually deserves to be called one. Actually if we take an average of all games summarized under that name it's questionable if it is even a RTS at all. There are objective defining features. And 40k is a visual feature, not a defining one for an RTS.
Newsflash: being snarky and dismissive doesn't make you right and change is not on principal evolution and most certainly not good by default. This is not even evolution in the first place, it's copying the existing design of a more popular competitor - the death of niché, of diveristy.
Edit: what you, and I'm assuming on purpose; ignore is the core of a product. 40k alone is not DoW, there are plenty of other games in the same universe. If you say it's DoW as long as there as spacemarines f.ex. than I can name almost a dozen other games that are DoW by that defintion.
You weigh every feature equally when some are way more important than others.
Like said MP: the very core of a strategy game is how the players compete with each other, which mechanics the game contains. Most prominent: by destroying each other aka DEATHMATCH. To remove that particular mode alone is enough to say that DoW III is not an RTS anymore, because it lacks a core feature found in every other RTS game in existence! That's an objective comparison!
"This is not even evolution in the first place, it's copying the existing design of a more popular competitor - the death of niché, of diveristy."
Aren't you countering yourself here? I think combining new elements is very much not the death of diversity.
The point is mostly everything has been done already in another game. Its not like DoW1 or 2 were special snowflakes, totally unique and niche. THAT was what im trying to point out.
"being snarky and dismissive doesn't make you right"
"DoW III is like a butcher selling veggy goods but labeling them 100% meat...."
Well..dude,do i need to say even more? The whole point of me arguing with you is not trying to change your opinion but they way you come across here. Looks like you are able to discuss reasonable, so lets try again, ok?
I interpretate what you have written so far as:
Relic copies core elements of Dota and Starcraft and dismisses its own identity more than it keeps. You dont like that and you think we (who more or less defend it) are too biased to see that.
That is what i understand. I and many other people just have a different opinion. I dont think Relic or DoW loses own identity, because i define what makes DoW for me differently than you do.Your mentioned Cover system, squadleader/sqad personalisation is totally different in DoW 1 and 2. So these fall kind of flat as defining pillars of DoW as a FRANCHISE. They are at the very most somewhat defining for the respective title. But not really , because Squad personalization has been in Warcraft 3 before, with gear and talents. So DoW2 already was a blatant copy of WC3 then? Was DoW1 a ripoff of C&C? For cover first thing coming to my mind is XCom, but that probably doesnt count for you , because TBS. And before you pull again the MOBA-Joker, Mobas are also very much a RTS subgenre.
Anyhow, no facts but opinions here. If you want to define these things as trademarks for DoW, its all good. But you cant label these as fact. This is why i asked you what defines DoW for you.
So classic rts itself is defined in the way that players build their resources, defend their bases and launch attacks while knowing that the opponent is scrambling to do the same things, correct? Main part of the game. Then they added "moba elements" on top as another layer but that doesnt change the fact its an rts. Classic RTS with a twist maybe. Doesnt matter if i destroy a "Ancient Core" or a "Main Base Building".
Fun fact: Destroying the "Main base building" is still possible.
Edit: Just remembering an rts with covermechanics: Commandos
Its entirely possible though to boil it down to a common consensus what defines Dawn of War. And that is atleast the design philosophy. And i haven't played the game yet so i cant judge it, but i neither cant say its not a DoW anymore.
Also why not be more constructive about it, wether you like what you see or not.
@Shardex said:
"This is not even evolution in the first place, it's copying the existing design of a more popular competitor - the death of niché, of diveristy."
The point is mostly everything has been done already in another game. Its not like DoW1 or 2 were special snowflakes, totally unique and niche. THAT was what im trying to point out.
"being snarky and dismissive doesn't make you right"
"DoW III is like a butcher selling veggy goods but labeling them 100% meat...."
Well..dude,do i need to say even more? The whole point of me arguing with you is not trying to change your opinion but they way you come across here. Looks like you are able to discuss reasonable, so lets try again, ok?
I interpretate what you have written so far as:
Relic copies core elements of Dota and Starcraft and dismisses its own identity more than it keeps. You dont like that and you think we (who more or less defend it) are too biased to see that.
That is what i understand. I and many other people just have a different opinion. I dont think Relic or DoW loses own identity, because i define what makes DoW for me differently than you do.Your mentioned Cover system, squadleader/sqad personalisation is totally different in DoW 1 and 2. So these fall kind of flat as defining pillars of DoW as a FRANCHISE. They are at the very most somewhat defining for the respective title. But not really , because Squad personalization has been in Warcraft 3 before, with gear and talents. So DoW2 already was a blatant copy of WC3 then? Was DoW1 a ripoff of C&C? For cover first thing coming to my mind is XCom, but that probably doesnt count for you , because TBS. And before you pull again the MOBA-Joker, Mobas are also very much a RTS subgenre.
Anyhow, no facts but opinions here. If you want to define these things as trademarks for DoW, its all good. But you cant label these as fact. This is why i asked you what defines DoW for you.
So classic rts itself is defined in the way that players build their resources, defend their bases and launch attacks while knowing that the opponent is scrambling to do the same things, correct? Main part of the game. Then they added "moba elements" on top as another layer but that doesnt change the fact its an rts. Classic RTS with a twist maybe.
Ok I accept the fact that there are no clear boundaries, or more precisely, that elements from different genres might overlap. But there's a a main focus in every game, and that one defines how it get's classified. The emphasis on a certainly playstyle is one of them. If I were to describe the DoW MP mode, without mentioning the name, just what you can choose from, or not, in this case and how it is made up. If I just said there's two bases defended by turrets and the objective is to choose a lane and attack them, weaken them and destroy a core to triumph. What would people call that if I asked them which type of game I'm refering to?
Moba might be an offspring of the RTS gerne but as you can see, a lot of people prefer either one or the other, at least on this board they see a clear difference. I'd call that a widely agreed upon defining feature. At some point you transition from one genre to another, though I admit it's not always a clear line you are crossing. But if DoW is supposedly and RTS I do see a line, a certain expectation, that apparently many people share. Like chess and go. Both are very similar when looked upon from the outside but people would riot if you sold a game under the name of chess but it's in fact 'go' inside the package. And I feel the need to mention that this is the point where subjectivity ends. You can define DoW for yourself in whatever way you want BUT that doesn't mean that everyone can define everything by themselves. I can complain about such a discrepancy and it's not just my personal view at that point. There is such a thing as general defintion of things based and shared core features.
** There is an objective, albeit somewhat fluent and vague definition of RTS. If there wasn't, people wouldn't f.ex. differ between RTS and Moba in the first place.**
In other words, it's not about there being elements of other games, or overlapping mechanics but about the degree of these similarites. There was always change in DoW or Relic RTS but this is the first time where they both get rid of elements that were very prominent in their previous games (instead of just adding something on top) _and _the adoption of major elements featured in recent RTS build by other companies. That's the staw that broke the camels back.
I see where youre coming from, but you just seem to focus so much on the "moba" aspect that you dont see the classic rts.
First off there ARE no lanes. What is a lane. Using moba terminology this is the path creeps walk from one base to the other.And where the heroes mostly level etc.
There are no creeps in DoW3 nor hero lvls. There are chokepoints,yes, common thing in rts games.
@Heldentod said:
In other words, it's not about there being elements of other games, or overlapping mechanics but about the degree of these similarites. There was always change in DoW or Relic RTS but this is the first time where they both get rid of elements that were very prominent in their previous games (instead of just adding something on top) _and _the adoption of major elements featured in recent RTS build by other companies. That's the staw that broke the camels back.
DoW2 got rid of soooo many DoW1 elements, people were just as hardcore ranting. Almost no base building , just a few units, mechanics etc. And they added components previously seen in aforementioned Commandos, XCom and Warcraft3.
@Shardex said:
I see where youre coming from, but you just seem to focus so much on the "moba" aspect that you dont see the classic rts.
First off there ARE no lanes. What is a lane. Using moba terminology this is the path creeps walk from one base to the other.And where the heroes mostly level etc.
There are no creeps in DoW3 nor hero lvls. There are chokepoints,yes, common thing in rts games.
@Heldentod said:
In other words, it's not about there being elements of other games, or overlapping mechanics but about the degree of these similarites. There was always change in DoW or Relic RTS but this is the first time where they both get rid of elements that were very prominent in their previous games (instead of just adding something on top) _and _the adoption of major elements featured in recent RTS build by other companies. That's the staw that broke the camels back.
DoW2 got rid of soooo many DoW1 elements, people were just as hardcore ranting. Almost no base building , just a few units, mechanics etc. And they added components previously seen in aforementioned Commandos, XCom and Warcraft3.
If you have seen the last trailer, there are actually lanes. Before relic offered huge maps with no "blind spots" now they offer a maze like structure of lanes with holes in it where pretty lava flows or similar crap like that, but the actual fighting takes places in straight, flat and utter boring lanes of open space (similar to SC in that regard).At least the maps in the previous titles had obstacles, buildings and partly destuctable at that which made them feel natural.
They shrank DoW I and reduced the Base building massively but they kept the core mechanics intact and added elements of Coh which were very unique to the RTS genre. Now they remove more than they add plus what they add isn't derived from their own RTS nor from an RTS itself. What you attribute to Commandos and co was largely seen and refined in CoH but at least these were actualy RTS features.
@Heldentod said:
Before relic offered huge maps with no "blind spots"
It has never been true in Dawn of War in my knowledge.
now they offer a maze like structure of lanes with holes in it where pretty lava flows or similar crap like that, but the actual fighting takes places in straight, flat and utter boring lanes of open space (similar to SC in that regard).
At least the maps in the previous titles had obstacles, buildings and partly destuctable at that which made them feel natural.
I agree they could try and make them less "artificially straight", and add some props to make it a bit more alive. But it doesn't change the fact that there were lanes in DOW II too - they just weren't perfectly straight.
They shrank DoW I and reduced the Base building massively but they kept the core mechanics intact and added elements of Coh which were very unique to the RTS genre.
I feel like the striked and the bold parts contradicts: CoH structure gameplay is so vastly different from the "classic" RTS games of before it's not really possible to play them the same way - hence the lot of DoW2-haters.
Now they remove more than they add
Compared to DoW II, absolutely not.
plus what they add isn't derived from their own RTS nor from an RTS itself. What you attribute to Commandos and co was largely seen and refined in CoH but at least these were actualy RTS features.
And why does it matter if the new features aren't RTS features, as long as the game doesn't play like a MOBA?
And no, the fact that you fight your armies for objectives on lanes isn't sufficient to say it plays like a MOBA - if it was the case, you could qualify DoW II a MOBA too, and maybe SC II too, - and hell, many other RTS games had at least one campaign mission with this kind of objectives. The fact that they make it the "main" multiplayer game mode doesn't make the game a MOBA. Yes, it takes some ideas from it (the lane-based map not even being one of them, it was in SC way before that), but it plays like a full-blown RTS with a few extras (elite selection for example), and as such, is an RTS game.
Now the fact it is the only multiplayer mode at launch is another matter, and is a shame indeed in my opinion.
The base building was prob the most disappointing part as it relates to the space marines they removed so many buildings and upgrades to shoehorn in the "Elite" system and passive system in a PRE GAME PICK SCREEN. I mean I understand from a monetary perspective why they would want to make it seem like a MOBA pick screen to get that crowd or an ARTS pick screen for that crowd but ++heresy redacted++ me that idea is so far removed and antithesis to everything rts and everything Dawn of War. The idea that a good portion of your hand in terms of strategy is displayed to your opponent in a pick screen along with the fact that they "limit" the "Elites" to 3 a ++heresy redacted++ game is mind blowing. I really wanted this game to succeed because what have I had to look forward too rts wise? Halo Wars 2? Its such a dry market that I was looking forward to this game and Relic has disappointed me at every turn... Well at the very least Total Warhammer was a decent game.
@AlternativeIV said:
The idea that a good portion of your hand in terms of strategy is displayed to your opponent in a pick screen along with the fact that they "limit" the "Elites" to 3 a ++heresy redacted++ game is mind blowing.
And how is that different from any RTS ever? I mean, if you know the game well you know what units your opponent have, and how he may use them. If anything, this pick before the game may keep the game and its meta from becoming stale, as it is probable the optimal strategy won't be the same against someone who takes Angelos/Jonas/Solaria + defensive "doctrines", or against someone who plays Killteam/Assault Terminators/classic Terminators and offensive doctrines. (This is an example, I have no idea how those "elite-combo" play.)
That second image is from a heavily-modded version of Dawn of War. Hardly a fair comparison, even if it's just an example.
The first image is very comparable to what apparently exists in DoW III. I haven't seen evidence of Mines, and I haven't seen (buildable) Turrets. The Orbital Relay appears to be built into the Space Marine HUD. That's about it. Power Generators exist, just in more of a DoW II format.
So no, they haven't removed "so many" buildings as per your initial claim. And the Elite system has absolutely nothing to do with the base-building system, so I'm unsure why you're blaming it.
@AlternativeIV said:
The idea that a good portion of your hand in terms of strategy is displayed to your opponent in a pick screen along with the fact that they "limit" the "Elites" to 3 a ++heresy redacted++ game is mind blowing.
And how is that different from any RTS ever? I mean, if you know the game well you know what units your opponent have, and how he may use them. If anything, this pick before the game may keep the game and its meta from becoming stale, as it is probable the optimal strategy won't be the same against someone who takes Angelos/Jonas/Solaria + defensive "doctrines", or against someone who plays Killteam/Assault Terminators/classic Terminators and offensive doctrines. (This is an example, I have no idea how those "elite-combo" play.)
Its different in the sense that there is a thing called fog of war which has been an element in rts throughout and getting information about opponent and dealing with Fog of war is one of the more interesting mechanics in an rts. Getting information on Warcraft 3 Hero choices while creeping, looking at farm numbers and lumber mill in both Empire Earth and Age of Empires. Determining the unit progression in all of the command and conquer franchises, Generals, Tiberium Wars and Red Alert. Sending scout corsairs and interceptors in Homeworld getting information on the opponent is one of the most important parts and being able to react to that information in real time is what makes an rts. Now in Dawn of War this information is presented to you on a silver platter in a pre game screen literally fed to you with no work needed and you know exactly how to react since Elites play a massive role on how you are going to play. Its like seeing starting items in dota with a sunstrike which surprisingly takes more effort to deal with fog war than this game and finally League where its equivalent to hitting tab to see items and summoners and determining exactly what your opponent is going to do and how to play which might work well in those games but when you take away the Fog of War element in an rts you might as well remove it all together and just have the game as a footies warfare type of game like from Warcraft 3 rofl.
That second image is from a heavily-modded version of Dawn of War. Hardly a fair comparison, even if it's just an example.
The first image is very comparable to what apparently exists in DoW III. I haven't seen evidence of Mines, and I haven't seen (buildable) Turrets. The Orbital Relay appears to be built into the Space Marine HUD. That's about it. Power Generators exist, just in more of a DoW II format.
So no, they haven't removed "so many" buildings as per your initial claim. And the Elite system has absolutely nothing to do with the base-building system, so I'm unsure why you're blaming it.
No the reason i linked both of those pictures was to ask for a building and unit progression in Dawn of War 3. I want to know what buildings are needed to build what units and what buildings you need to build to perform research to build certain units, or is that not a thing in this Dawn of War 3? Base building and unit production go hand in hand and the creation of the Elite system removed complexity of the building and research progression since you dont need to do either and there are no buildings or research to create said units. That is how they relate and that is how they comparable contrary to what you are saying about the Elite system having no influence on the simplification of macro and base building.
We don't have a concrete set of information on the contents of Dawn of War III yet, because the game hasn't been released. So there isn't going to be a comparable image.
Which means you can't claim that base-building has been cut back, so why claim it in the first place?
That second image is from a heavily-modded version of Dawn of War. Hardly a fair comparison, even if it's just an example.
The first image is very comparable to what apparently exists in DoW III. I haven't seen evidence of Mines, and I haven't seen (buildable) Turrets. The Orbital Relay appears to be built into the Space Marine HUD. That's about it. Power Generators exist, just in more of a DoW II format.
So no, they haven't removed "so many" buildings as per your initial claim. And the Elite system has absolutely nothing to do with the base-building system, so I'm unsure why you're blaming it.
No the reason i linked both of those pictures was to ask for a building and unit progression in Dawn of War 3. I want to know what buildings are needed to build what units and what buildings you need to build to perform research to build certain units, or is that not a thing in this Dawn of War 3? Base building and unit production go hand in hand and the creation of the Elite system removed complexity of the building and research progression since you dont need to do either and there are no buildings or research to create said units. That is how they relate and that is how they comparable contrary to what you are saying about the Elite system having no influence on the simplification of macro and base building.
I can't speak to exactly what there is as it was back at PAX Aus when I played the game, but there was a lot going on with every buildings command card when select being mostly full. Which to me suggest that we will have a tech tree at least as full as DoW1.
I personally happy to see the return of base building and also hope that is stays a small part of the game, only taking a small amount of my time so we can focus on our armies.
@AlternativeIV said:
Its different in the sense that there is a thing called fog of war which has been an element in rts throughout and getting information about opponent and dealing with Fog of war is one of the more interesting mechanics in an rts. [...]
The fog of war mechanic is still there in DoW III, and as I previously said, even if you know what elite units your opponent has, you can't predict how, when and in which order your opponent will call them - so the only thing you know are its doctrines.
You still have to check if your opponent is going full infantry or mechanized, how many barracks he made, what is his army composition, etc.
Determining the unit progression in all of the command and conquer franchises, Generals, Tiberium Wars and Red Alert
Nitpicking and not really interesting to say but it's not true for Red Alert if I recall well, at least not with 1 and 2 where once you've scouted once you can see the whole map.
@Gorb said:
We don't have a concrete set of information on the contents of Dawn of War III yet, because the game hasn't been released. So there isn't going to be a comparable image.
We actually saw quite a lot in the recent gameplay videos displayed, so I guess it could be possible to do such an image now, by watching all those videos and adding pieces of information together.
That second image is from a heavily-modded version of Dawn of War. Hardly a fair comparison, even if it's just an example.
The first image is very comparable to what apparently exists in DoW III. I haven't seen evidence of Mines, and I haven't seen (buildable) Turrets. The Orbital Relay appears to be built into the Space Marine HUD. That's about it. Power Generators exist, just in more of a DoW II format.
So no, they haven't removed "so many" buildings as per your initial claim. And the Elite system has absolutely nothing to do with the base-building system, so I'm unsure why you're blaming it.
No the reason i linked both of those pictures was to ask for a building and unit progression in Dawn of War 3. I want to know what buildings are needed to build what units and what buildings you need to build to perform research to build certain units, or is that not a thing in this Dawn of War 3? Base building and unit production go hand in hand and the creation of the Elite system removed complexity of the building and research progression since you dont need to do either and there are no buildings or research to create said units. That is how they relate and that is how they comparable contrary to what you are saying about the Elite system having no influence on the simplification of macro and base building.
I can't speak to exactly what there is as it was back at PAX Aus when I played the game, but there was a lot going on with every buildings command card when select being mostly full. Which to me suggest that we will have a tech tree at least as full as DoW1.
I personally happy to see the return of base building and also hope that is stays a small part of the game, only taking a small amount of my time so we can focus on our armies.
I mean if you don't like the macro element of the game or the unit creation aspect which im assuming with the statement "I personally happy to see the return of base building and also hope that is stays a small part of the game, only taking a small amount of my time so we can focus on our armies." what do you think about just removing it all together and just using the card like system used in Total War or World in Conflict or Wargame?
That second image is from a heavily-modded version of Dawn of War. Hardly a fair comparison, even if it's just an example.
The first image is very comparable to what apparently exists in DoW III. I haven't seen evidence of Mines, and I haven't seen (buildable) Turrets. The Orbital Relay appears to be built into the Space Marine HUD. That's about it. Power Generators exist, just in more of a DoW II format.
So no, they haven't removed "so many" buildings as per your initial claim. And the Elite system has absolutely nothing to do with the base-building system, so I'm unsure why you're blaming it.
No the reason i linked both of those pictures was to ask for a building and unit progression in Dawn of War 3. I want to know what buildings are needed to build what units and what buildings you need to build to perform research to build certain units, or is that not a thing in this Dawn of War 3? Base building and unit production go hand in hand and the creation of the Elite system removed complexity of the building and research progression since you dont need to do either and there are no buildings or research to create said units. That is how they relate and that is how they comparable contrary to what you are saying about the Elite system having no influence on the simplification of macro and base building.
I can't speak to exactly what there is as it was back at PAX Aus when I played the game, but there was a lot going on with every buildings command card when select being mostly full. Which to me suggest that we will have a tech tree at least as full as DoW1.
I personally happy to see the return of base building and also hope that is stays a small part of the game, only taking a small amount of my time so we can focus on our armies.
I mean if you don't like the macro element of the game or the unit creation aspect which im assuming with the statement "I personally happy to see the return of base building and also hope that is stays a small part of the game, only taking a small amount of my time so we can focus on our armies." what do you think about just removing it all together and just using the card like system used in Total War or World in Conflict or Wargame?
That's a lot of assuming you're doing there, and ignoring the part where I say "happy to see the return of base building" I do like the other systems you mentioned but not for a game like this. I'm still like the elements of managing unit production I just don't want it to get in the way of a battle. Not to say I don't like the idea of a faction doing that I just don't want that to be the games overarching theme.
I'm also looking forward to not being restricted to where we can build bases, the element of building forward buildings will hopefully make room for a wide variety of tactics.
@AlternativeIV said:
Because we have seen gameplay and I have seen basic unit progression and creation in the plethora of beta gameplay videos?
So surely there's nothing stopping you making one? I'm a bit confused as to what you're getting at, here.
You initiated this conversation with this
"I believe Silk has been over this, but they didn't exactly remove many buildings at all. Unless you've got a real hankering for Power Generators." I asked for a tech tree to compare and contrast all aspects of Base building which do include unit creation and tech research, I also present examples of the tech tree I was asking for and since you seemed to have this complete understanding of the subject by your original statement I guess I just expected you to have one since you seem like you speak from a position of authority on the matter of base building? So how do you make this statement later on in the thread "We don't have a concrete set of information on the contents of Dawn of War III yet, because the game hasn't been released. So there isn't going to be a comparable image.Which means you can't claim that base-building has been cut back, so why claim it in the first place?", while making this statement earlier on "but they didn't exactly remove many buildings at all. Unless you've got a real hankering for Power Generators" Seems really contrived when you know about as much as us?
I literally listed the buildings they removed. Ergo, every other building is presumably present, unless the information I'm going on has been superceded by recent videos I haven't had the time to watch.
You made the initial claim. You have to back that up. You're the one who claimed base-building has been cut back. You have to prove that.
I was attempting to disprove that statement, by my knowledge of what has been revealed by the videos thus far (and again, I haven't watched all of them).
Are you being real right now my original statement was "The base building was prob the most disappointing part as it relates to the space marines they removed so many buildings and upgrades to shoehorn in the "Elite" system and passive system in a PRE GAME PICK SCREEN. I mean I understand from a monetary perspective why they would want to make it seem like a MOBA pick screen to get that crowd or an ARTS pick screen for that crowd but ++heresy redacted++ me that idea is so far removed and antithesis to everything rts and everything Dawn of War. The idea that a good portion of your hand in terms of strategy is displayed to your opponent in a pick screen along with the fact that they "limit" the "Elites" to 3 a ++heresy redacted++ game is mind blowing" It might have been hyperbolic in some portion, but they did remove buildings, they did change upgrades to passives in a pick screen, they did move characters and units from being things you create in game using research and resources to pre game picks that are limited to 3 choices so you dont get all possible units on the field at any given time and fine if you havent seen any of the plethora of beta videos even though you speak as i said before from a position of authority here his the burden of proof you have requested.
Christ I didnt expect you to be so obtuse about this argument rofl.
You can't say "my original statement was that Relic removed so many buildings" and then complain about me asking you to prove that they removed so many buildings. If you were being "hyperbolic", then your claims are false. Exaggeration doesn't help the situation.
I wasn't debating any of the other parts of your post. I would've liked to, but considering how long we've spent discussing your claims about the buildings Relic has removed, it could take too long!
@AlternativeIV said:
Are you being real right now my original statement was "The base building was prob the most disappointing part as it relates to the space marines they removed so >many buildings and upgrades to shoehorn in the "Elite" system and passive system in a PRE GAME PICK SCREEN.
They removed 1 building to "shoehorn in the "Elite" system and passive system in a PRE GAME PICK SCREEN".
I mean I understand from a monetary perspective why they would want to make it seem like a MOBA pick screen to get that crowd or an ARTS pick screen for that >crowd but ++heresy redacted++ me that idea is so far removed and antithesis to everything rts and everything Dawn of War.
A monetary point of view? Surely this had made the game more complex and tactical. You have to plan what perks and passives you have and elites. I would think this would help make each game unique, tactical and more exciting. It's not been seen before in an RTS no, but that doesn't mean its " far removed and antithesis"... they are trying to do something different...
The idea that a good portion of your hand in terms of strategy is displayed to your opponent in a pick screen along with the fact that they "limit" the "Elites" to 3 a ++heresy redacted++ game is mind blowing"
Why is it mindblowing??? You knew exactly what units other players could create in all other DOWs...You see what opponents have so you can build against them and play tactically vs their loadout, instead of just being countered by luck.
It might have been hyperbolic in some portion, but they did remove buildings, they did change upgrades to passives in a pick screen,
they did move characters and units from being things you create in game...
pretty sure you still build units in game...
using research and resources to pre game picks that are limited to 3 choices so you dont get all possible units on the field at any given time
But why is this bad!? We get YOU personally don't like it... but what is your larger point, if you have one?
and fine if you haven't seen any of the plethora of beta videos even though you speak as i said before from a position of authority here his the burden of proof you have requested.
Pretty sure Gorb, being a moderator, wouldnt shitpost hollow opinions without proof/basis... he frequently scolds people for doing so
Christ I didnt expect you to be so obtuse about this argument rofl.
It would be a very quick way to get demoted, that's for sure!
I can only recommend to treat me as any other poster, and report me if you think I'm breaking the rules. I'm only acting as a moderator when I finish my posts with a moderator-related footer, but by my badge I'm always a (volunteer) representative of Relic. So do absolutely hold me to constructive standards.
Menu
Comments
Shardex
What defines both DoW and Relic RTS may have been discussed. But this is everyones personal opinion, not a fact like we will all die one day. So i asked for your personal opinion.
"Objectively" youre totally wrong about the "close to" part, because we would have to totally disassemble every game mechanic that has ever been invented and define who came up with the original idea. Now that i think of it, Starcraft is kind of close to Tetris and Pong. Also still very much waiting for the answer about similarities to Starcraft.
If "smoke and grass" were everything id be kinda disappointed.
Clue:
"It's not a personal opinion when there are so blatanly obvious elements of several different RTS and Moba games"
PogChamp! Breaking News: Evolution happens! How dare it.
Shardex
You know what? Its probably his fault:
g0ll0
You really nailed... I'm shocked by the amount of Relic things they have removed, Squads leaders, squads personalisation, cover, game mode( totally original by dow1-2 and a very praised one ) etc.. and they have introduced a lof of other game elements from sc2, lol and dota, it is ok if you take some elements from other games but keeping the soul of the game untouched, but let's be realistic here.. I don't think the people who made the best rts ever DOW1-COH1 work anymore at relic, so they don't understand those mechanics and they have to copy other popular game mechanics so Im not going to judge them at least they tried...
But for the love of god give me other mode than the moba one thanks... As and old RTS player I will be grateful
Heldentod
And thanks for proving my point - no point in discussing this. What you are doing is the perfect example of semantics in the underlined passage . There's a very objective way of comparing elements and you just deny it because ... of origin? Like that matters in this discussion.
Let's stick with the MP since it's the most recent example. Now tell me if you are capable of a rational comparison, is that MP mode closer to any other of the recent RTS games or Dota? Does CoH have turret defense, lane-like attack corridors or a core? Does C&C ? IF not, it is as a matter of fact CLOSER TO DOTA than any other RTS that actually deserves to be called one. Actually if we take an average of all games summarized under that name it's questionable if it is even a RTS at all. There are objective defining features. And 40k is a visual feature, not a defining one for an RTS.
Newsflash: being snarky and dismissive doesn't make you right and change is not on principal evolution and most certainly not good by default. This is not even evolution in the first place, it's copying the existing design of a more popular competitor - the death of niché, of diveristy.
Edit: what you, and I'm assuming on purpose; ignore is the core of a product. 40k alone is not DoW, there are plenty of other games in the same universe. If you say it's DoW as long as there as spacemarines f.ex. than I can name almost a dozen other games that are DoW by that defintion.
You weigh every feature equally when some are way more important than others.
Like said MP: the very core of a strategy game is how the players compete with each other, which mechanics the game contains. Most prominent: by destroying each other aka DEATHMATCH. To remove that particular mode alone is enough to say that DoW III is not an RTS anymore, because it lacks a core feature found in every other RTS game in existence! That's an objective comparison!
Shardex
"This is not even evolution in the first place, it's copying the existing design of a more popular competitor - the death of niché, of diveristy."
Aren't you countering yourself here? I think combining new elements is very much not the death of diversity.
The point is mostly everything has been done already in another game. Its not like DoW1 or 2 were special snowflakes, totally unique and niche. THAT was what im trying to point out.
"being snarky and dismissive doesn't make you right"
"DoW III is like a butcher selling veggy goods but labeling them 100% meat...."
Well..dude,do i need to say even more? The whole point of me arguing with you is not trying to change your opinion but they way you come across here. Looks like you are able to discuss reasonable, so lets try again, ok?
I interpretate what you have written so far as:
Relic copies core elements of Dota and Starcraft and dismisses its own identity more than it keeps. You dont like that and you think we (who more or less defend it) are too biased to see that.
That is what i understand. I and many other people just have a different opinion. I dont think Relic or DoW loses own identity, because i define what makes DoW for me differently than you do.Your mentioned Cover system, squadleader/sqad personalisation is totally different in DoW 1 and 2. So these fall kind of flat as defining pillars of DoW as a FRANCHISE. They are at the very most somewhat defining for the respective title. But not really , because Squad personalization has been in Warcraft 3 before, with gear and talents. So DoW2 already was a blatant copy of WC3 then? Was DoW1 a ripoff of C&C? For cover first thing coming to my mind is XCom, but that probably doesnt count for you , because TBS. And before you pull again the MOBA-Joker, Mobas are also very much a RTS subgenre.
Anyhow, no facts but opinions here. If you want to define these things as trademarks for DoW, its all good. But you cant label these as fact. This is why i asked you what defines DoW for you.
So classic rts itself is defined in the way that players build their resources, defend their bases and launch attacks while knowing that the opponent is scrambling to do the same things, correct? Main part of the game. Then they added "moba elements" on top as another layer but that doesnt change the fact its an rts. Classic RTS with a twist maybe. Doesnt matter if i destroy a "Ancient Core" or a "Main Base Building".
Fun fact: Destroying the "Main base building" is still possible.
Edit: Just remembering an rts with covermechanics: Commandos
Shardex
Its entirely possible though to boil it down to a common consensus what defines Dawn of War. And that is atleast the design philosophy. And i haven't played the game yet so i cant judge it, but i neither cant say its not a DoW anymore.
Also why not be more constructive about it, wether you like what you see or not.
Heldentod
Ok I accept the fact that there are no clear boundaries, or more precisely, that elements from different genres might overlap. But there's a a main focus in every game, and that one defines how it get's classified. The emphasis on a certainly playstyle is one of them. If I were to describe the DoW MP mode, without mentioning the name, just what you can choose from, or not, in this case and how it is made up. If I just said there's two bases defended by turrets and the objective is to choose a lane and attack them, weaken them and destroy a core to triumph. What would people call that if I asked them which type of game I'm refering to?
Moba might be an offspring of the RTS gerne but as you can see, a lot of people prefer either one or the other, at least on this board they see a clear difference. I'd call that a widely agreed upon defining feature. At some point you transition from one genre to another, though I admit it's not always a clear line you are crossing. But if DoW is supposedly and RTS I do see a line, a certain expectation, that apparently many people share. Like chess and go. Both are very similar when looked upon from the outside but people would riot if you sold a game under the name of chess but it's in fact 'go' inside the package. And I feel the need to mention that this is the point where subjectivity ends. You can define DoW for yourself in whatever way you want BUT that doesn't mean that everyone can define everything by themselves. I can complain about such a discrepancy and it's not just my personal view at that point. There is such a thing as general defintion of things based and shared core features.
** There is an objective, albeit somewhat fluent and vague definition of RTS. If there wasn't, people wouldn't f.ex. differ between RTS and Moba in the first place.**
In other words, it's not about there being elements of other games, or overlapping mechanics but about the degree of these similarites. There was always change in DoW or Relic RTS but this is the first time where they both get rid of elements that were very prominent in their previous games (instead of just adding something on top) _and _the adoption of major elements featured in recent RTS build by other companies. That's the staw that broke the camels back.
Shardex
I see where youre coming from, but you just seem to focus so much on the "moba" aspect that you dont see the classic rts.
First off there ARE no lanes. What is a lane. Using moba terminology this is the path creeps walk from one base to the other.And where the heroes mostly level etc.
There are no creeps in DoW3 nor hero lvls. There are chokepoints,yes, common thing in rts games.
DoW2 got rid of soooo many DoW1 elements, people were just as hardcore ranting. Almost no base building , just a few units, mechanics etc. And they added components previously seen in aforementioned Commandos, XCom and Warcraft3.
Heldentod
If you have seen the last trailer, there are actually lanes. Before relic offered huge maps with no "blind spots" now they offer a maze like structure of lanes with holes in it where pretty lava flows or similar crap like that, but the actual fighting takes places in straight, flat and utter boring lanes of open space (similar to SC in that regard).At least the maps in the previous titles had obstacles, buildings and partly destuctable at that which made them feel natural.
They shrank DoW I and reduced the Base building massively but they kept the core mechanics intact and added elements of Coh which were very unique to the RTS genre. Now they remove more than they add plus what they add isn't derived from their own RTS nor from an RTS itself. What you attribute to Commandos and co was largely seen and refined in CoH but at least these were actualy RTS features.
Silk
It has never been true in Dawn of War in my knowledge.
now they offer a maze like structure of lanes with holes in it where pretty lava flows or similar crap like that, but the actual fighting takes places in straight, flat and utter boring lanes of open space (similar to SC in that regard).
I agree they could try and make them less "artificially straight", and add some props to make it a bit more alive. But it doesn't change the fact that there were lanes in DOW II too - they just weren't perfectly straight.
I feel like the striked and the bold parts contradicts: CoH structure gameplay is so vastly different from the "classic" RTS games of before it's not really possible to play them the same way - hence the lot of DoW2-haters.
Compared to DoW II, absolutely not.
And why does it matter if the new features aren't RTS features, as long as the game doesn't play like a MOBA?
And no, the fact that you fight your armies for objectives on lanes isn't sufficient to say it plays like a MOBA - if it was the case, you could qualify DoW II a MOBA too, and maybe SC II too, - and hell, many other RTS games had at least one campaign mission with this kind of objectives. The fact that they make it the "main" multiplayer game mode doesn't make the game a MOBA. Yes, it takes some ideas from it (the lane-based map not even being one of them, it was in SC way before that), but it plays like a full-blown RTS with a few extras (elite selection for example), and as such, is an RTS game.
Now the fact it is the only multiplayer mode at launch is another matter, and is a shame indeed in my opinion.
AlternativeIV
The base building was prob the most disappointing part as it relates to the space marines they removed so many buildings and upgrades to shoehorn in the "Elite" system and passive system in a PRE GAME PICK SCREEN. I mean I understand from a monetary perspective why they would want to make it seem like a MOBA pick screen to get that crowd or an ARTS pick screen for that crowd but ++heresy redacted++ me that idea is so far removed and antithesis to everything rts and everything Dawn of War. The idea that a good portion of your hand in terms of strategy is displayed to your opponent in a pick screen along with the fact that they "limit" the "Elites" to 3 a ++heresy redacted++ game is mind blowing. I really wanted this game to succeed because what have I had to look forward too rts wise? Halo Wars 2? Its such a dry market that I was looking forward to this game and Relic has disappointed me at every turn... Well at the very least Total Warhammer was a decent game.
Gorb
I believe Silk has been over this, but they didn't exactly remove many buildings at all. Unless you've got a real hankering for Power Generators.
AlternativeIV
Are there any Tech tree pictures out there Gorb to compare equivalent building progression, research and unit production? Like these
http://i.imgur.com/K4WerUB.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/IDlOAff.jpg
Silk
I did indeed, in this thread.
And how is that different from any RTS ever? I mean, if you know the game well you know what units your opponent have, and how he may use them. If anything, this pick before the game may keep the game and its meta from becoming stale, as it is probable the optimal strategy won't be the same against someone who takes Angelos/Jonas/Solaria + defensive "doctrines", or against someone who plays Killteam/Assault Terminators/classic Terminators and offensive doctrines. (This is an example, I have no idea how those "elite-combo" play.)
Gorb
That second image is from a heavily-modded version of Dawn of War. Hardly a fair comparison, even if it's just an example.
The first image is very comparable to what apparently exists in DoW III. I haven't seen evidence of Mines, and I haven't seen (buildable) Turrets. The Orbital Relay appears to be built into the Space Marine HUD. That's about it. Power Generators exist, just in more of a DoW II format.
So no, they haven't removed "so many" buildings as per your initial claim. And the Elite system has absolutely nothing to do with the base-building system, so I'm unsure why you're blaming it.
AlternativeIV
Its different in the sense that there is a thing called fog of war which has been an element in rts throughout and getting information about opponent and dealing with Fog of war is one of the more interesting mechanics in an rts. Getting information on Warcraft 3 Hero choices while creeping, looking at farm numbers and lumber mill in both Empire Earth and Age of Empires. Determining the unit progression in all of the command and conquer franchises, Generals, Tiberium Wars and Red Alert. Sending scout corsairs and interceptors in Homeworld getting information on the opponent is one of the most important parts and being able to react to that information in real time is what makes an rts. Now in Dawn of War this information is presented to you on a silver platter in a pre game screen literally fed to you with no work needed and you know exactly how to react since Elites play a massive role on how you are going to play. Its like seeing starting items in dota with a sunstrike which surprisingly takes more effort to deal with fog war than this game and finally League where its equivalent to hitting tab to see items and summoners and determining exactly what your opponent is going to do and how to play which might work well in those games but when you take away the Fog of War element in an rts you might as well remove it all together and just have the game as a footies warfare type of game like from Warcraft 3 rofl.
AlternativeIV
No the reason i linked both of those pictures was to ask for a building and unit progression in Dawn of War 3. I want to know what buildings are needed to build what units and what buildings you need to build to perform research to build certain units, or is that not a thing in this Dawn of War 3? Base building and unit production go hand in hand and the creation of the Elite system removed complexity of the building and research progression since you dont need to do either and there are no buildings or research to create said units. That is how they relate and that is how they comparable contrary to what you are saying about the Elite system having no influence on the simplification of macro and base building.
Gorb
We don't have a concrete set of information on the contents of Dawn of War III yet, because the game hasn't been released. So there isn't going to be a comparable image.
Which means you can't claim that base-building has been cut back, so why claim it in the first place?
AlternativeIV
Because we have seen gameplay and I have seen basic unit progression and creation in the plethora of beta gameplay videos?
Incitatus
I can't speak to exactly what there is as it was back at PAX Aus when I played the game, but there was a lot going on with every buildings command card when select being mostly full. Which to me suggest that we will have a tech tree at least as full as DoW1.
I personally happy to see the return of base building and also hope that is stays a small part of the game, only taking a small amount of my time so we can focus on our armies.
Silk
The fog of war mechanic is still there in DoW III, and as I previously said, even if you know what elite units your opponent has, you can't predict how, when and in which order your opponent will call them - so the only thing you know are its doctrines.
You still have to check if your opponent is going full infantry or mechanized, how many barracks he made, what is his army composition, etc.
Nitpicking and not really interesting to say but it's not true for Red Alert if I recall well, at least not with 1 and 2 where once you've scouted once you can see the whole map.
We actually saw quite a lot in the recent gameplay videos displayed, so I guess it could be possible to do such an image now, by watching all those videos and adding pieces of information together.
AlternativeIV
I mean if you don't like the macro element of the game or the unit creation aspect which im assuming with the statement "I personally happy to see the return of base building and also hope that is stays a small part of the game, only taking a small amount of my time so we can focus on our armies." what do you think about just removing it all together and just using the card like system used in Total War or World in Conflict or Wargame?
Incitatus
That's a lot of assuming you're doing there, and ignoring the part where I say "happy to see the return of base building" I do like the other systems you mentioned but not for a game like this. I'm still like the elements of managing unit production I just don't want it to get in the way of a battle. Not to say I don't like the idea of a faction doing that I just don't want that to be the games overarching theme.
I'm also looking forward to not being restricted to where we can build bases, the element of building forward buildings will hopefully make room for a wide variety of tactics.
Gorb
So surely there's nothing stopping you making one? I'm a bit confused as to what you're getting at, here.
AlternativeIV
You initiated this conversation with this
"I believe Silk has been over this, but they didn't exactly remove many buildings at all. Unless you've got a real hankering for Power Generators." I asked for a tech tree to compare and contrast all aspects of Base building which do include unit creation and tech research, I also present examples of the tech tree I was asking for and since you seemed to have this complete understanding of the subject by your original statement I guess I just expected you to have one since you seem like you speak from a position of authority on the matter of base building? So how do you make this statement later on in the thread "We don't have a concrete set of information on the contents of Dawn of War III yet, because the game hasn't been released. So there isn't going to be a comparable image.Which means you can't claim that base-building has been cut back, so why claim it in the first place?", while making this statement earlier on "but they didn't exactly remove many buildings at all. Unless you've got a real hankering for Power Generators" Seems really contrived when you know about as much as us?
Gorb
I literally listed the buildings they removed. Ergo, every other building is presumably present, unless the information I'm going on has been superceded by recent videos I haven't had the time to watch.
You made the initial claim. You have to back that up. You're the one who claimed base-building has been cut back. You have to prove that.
I was attempting to disprove that statement, by my knowledge of what has been revealed by the videos thus far (and again, I haven't watched all of them).
AlternativeIV
Are you being real right now my original statement was "The base building was prob the most disappointing part as it relates to the space marines they removed so many buildings and upgrades to shoehorn in the "Elite" system and passive system in a PRE GAME PICK SCREEN. I mean I understand from a monetary perspective why they would want to make it seem like a MOBA pick screen to get that crowd or an ARTS pick screen for that crowd but ++heresy redacted++ me that idea is so far removed and antithesis to everything rts and everything Dawn of War. The idea that a good portion of your hand in terms of strategy is displayed to your opponent in a pick screen along with the fact that they "limit" the "Elites" to 3 a ++heresy redacted++ game is mind blowing" It might have been hyperbolic in some portion, but they did remove buildings, they did change upgrades to passives in a pick screen, they did move characters and units from being things you create in game using research and resources to pre game picks that are limited to 3 choices so you dont get all possible units on the field at any given time and fine if you havent seen any of the plethora of beta videos even though you speak as i said before from a position of authority here his the burden of proof you have requested.
Christ I didnt expect you to be so obtuse about this argument rofl.
Gorb
You can't say "my original statement was that Relic removed so many buildings" and then complain about me asking you to prove that they removed so many buildings. If you were being "hyperbolic", then your claims are false. Exaggeration doesn't help the situation.
I wasn't debating any of the other parts of your post. I would've liked to, but considering how long we've spent discussing your claims about the buildings Relic has removed, it could take too long!
Nautiloidor
They removed 1 building to "shoehorn in the "Elite" system and passive system in a PRE GAME PICK SCREEN".
A monetary point of view? Surely this had made the game more complex and tactical. You have to plan what perks and passives you have and elites. I would think this would help make each game unique, tactical and more exciting. It's not been seen before in an RTS no, but that doesn't mean its " far removed and antithesis"... they are trying to do something different...
Why is it mindblowing??? You knew exactly what units other players could create in all other DOWs...You see what opponents have so you can build against them and play tactically vs their loadout, instead of just being countered by luck.
pretty sure you still build units in game...
But why is this bad!? We get YOU personally don't like it... but what is your larger point, if you have one?
Pretty sure Gorb, being a moderator, wouldnt shitpost hollow opinions without proof/basis... he frequently scolds people for doing so
Take a look in the mirror...
Gorb
It would be a very quick way to get demoted, that's for sure!
I can only recommend to treat me as any other poster, and report me if you think I'm breaking the rules. I'm only acting as a moderator when I finish my posts with a moderator-related footer, but by my badge I'm always a (volunteer) representative of Relic. So do absolutely hold me to constructive standards.