|
| quote: | Originally posted by saluyamo
Well then tell us since its clear you know just how great the game is |
for those in the cheap seats that missed this the first, second, or third time around. im back with a repeat. yee-har!
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
What makes this the epitome of RTS strategy games?
tactical and strategic depth
The most important criteria for ANY strategy game. How many ways are there to win? How many different strategies does the game allow for and reward? With the scope of the game and the sheer number of versatile and diverse units, FA offers more depth than any other RTS. Include in this all the different strategic buildings and you have a wealth of play styles, and a wealth of tactical options.
For instance:
Let's say you are being harassed by a Tier (T) 1 bomber. What can you use to counter it?
You have: T1/T2/T3 fighters. T1/T2 Anti Air (AA) ground units. T1/T2/T3 static AA defenses. And 2-4 naval units that come equipped with AA defenses. that's 10-14 different units to combat that particular unit. No other game allows for such versatility. Sure some are better than others (as you would want and expect) but that's the strategy- what are your goals going into the mission and how do you achieve that goal with the units you have at your disposal? there are simply a million different ways to play with the combination of units. No other RTS has the same freedom, especially since they all use "hard counters" of 1 or 2 units.
simulation
It is rare to find an RTS that is a simulation, indeed the only other big name is total annihilation (I know there is one other but I do not know the name of it). never EVER underestimate the gains in gameplay dynamics that you receive from playing a simulation. If someone doubts the veracity of the argument that a simulation improves gameplay, they simply do not understand how much of a difference it really makes. If your aircraft flies too close to artillery, there is a (small) chance it could get taken out by a shell intended for somewhere else on the map. I saw an amusing video recently where a player flew his fighters too close to his flying experimental unit, and when the experimental fired, it managed to hit half his supporting fighters- you simply cannot get this type of dynamic in the purely maths-based rules you find in all other games. If units walk in front of other units they will get hit instead of the unit that is now behind.
What does this all mean?
DYNAMIC battles. They are unpredictable. There is no more "oh I have 5 footmen he has 4 grunts, im going to lose". A unit might simply be microed behind a legde so that unit X cannot fire on it. Not because there's an arbitrary rule stating "units in area of X get +50% to armour bonus" -unit X cannot be hit simply because there is something in the way. This allows for real strategy when placing buildings too. Put your static defenses in a "ditch" and artillery will have a harder time hitting it, again, not because of any bullshit rules. Bubble shields are great for protecting those IN the bubble, but ALSO those that are stationed BEHIND the bubble, because enemies firing at them will hit the bubble first. You cant get that kind of dynamic without a simulation.
This also changes balance. Any unit that can hit any other unit will hit that unit, no penalty! There are no silly rules to remember "oh, magic does extra damage to heavy armour". What this means is that you don't get ridiculous things happening, like in empire at war where an ATAT had been coded to be useless against ground troops. I mean, we all saw them tear humans up in empire strikes back didn’t we? It means enough of unit X will beat unit Y, no matter how powerful. This adds to tactical variety "oh, he's got that super duper unit, but if I mass enough of my average unit I might just get over the top of him".
It allows for artillery to be useless against units, as well as being AWESOME againt units AND buildings. How? Simple. Artillery projectiles are relatively slow, meaning a good player can micro his troops out of the way. BUT, if the artillery still manages to hit, then it does its full, regular damage. No need for bonus damage against buildings and reduced damage to units. It just happened NATURALLY and fluidly, and again, makes sense!!!
It means real tactics come into play and you get real rewards- forcing a well-executed pincer on an opponent works because dynamically. Again, there are no "if you execute a pincer you get +50% to attack rolls", it works because you have come into behind (or to the side) of an opponent, and it takes valuable time for the unit's TURRET and/or DIRECTION to shift to face the new threat. It means that if a group of units such as aircraft retreat, they can no longer fire on you because their turret's rotation is limited.
Again, all of this rewards a player that can use their troops well, and makes it more of a its how you use your units rather than what units you have moreso than any other RTS available.
freedom
This kind of ties in with the other two topics, but what the hell. Because of its rich tactical nature and the fact that it is a simulation, there are no hard and fast rules to victory. In many other RTS's its all about buildings heaps of troops and sending them to your opponents base. Repeat. But in FA you really need to be aware and prepared for anything. Tactical missile strikes, hidden bases behind your lines of defense, troop drops behind enemy lines, stealthed fighter-bombers, mobile bombs, navy bombardment, having your bases captured and used against you, amphibious units sneaking up on you unprotected etc etc etc. I have watched dozens of replays and I rarely see the same tactics twice. Thus intel plays more of a role than any other game that has come before, which is cool because you then have to worry about jamming, stealth, and cloaking! If you lose the information war you'll probably lose the game. Again, this really rewards sound strategy.
The diversity of all the new units makes play really interesting, and adds more to the tactical depth and the freedom of how you choose to play. If you found map control unimportant in supcom, you will be VERY pleased with how important map control is in forged alliance. It means you are fighting over the entire map for the majority of the game! The action is better than anything ive played or seen. Hundreds and hundreds of versatile, diverse units all shooting the shit out of each other. And because there's no bullshit hard-counter rules, it is MUCH more satisfying.
build templates
Ok, this might not appeal to some but I think it is fantastic.
Load a sandbox game (testing to just play with yourself).
Build any combination of structures. Save.
Load a multiplayer game and BINGO! There's your saved group of structures ready to be built in the order you originally built them. no more fucking around in your base building economy or defenses. You simply load a saved template and you're away! I love this because it really allows for some creative, sexy & functional base designs and forward firebases without you having to spend the time designing them!! It saves SO much time! And that's more time you get for moving your troops around.
Nobody says you have to like FA more than other titles in the RTS genre, but I am simply stating that FA is easily the best in the categories I have briefly outlined. Tactical/strategic depth, simulation & freedom are the most important aspects of a strategy title however, and there can be no argument that FA wins hands down in these departments. Make no mistake, FA is the strategy title for adults that want as much freedom from their gameplay as possible. And gameplay > all.
Pick up the standalone expansion for about $30US and try it for yourself.
5 massive massive armies out of 5
 |
___________________
|
but i hear its tits.
