 |
| |
|
|
Triphosphatase
|
|
RoN is a straight forward RTS. RoN does not invent a new genre, revolutionize a genre or other wild things. RoN is a plain and simple RTS clone.
Sure, it may have borders, but it is only an added mechanic to a RTS.
Trade routes? They were in AoM.
Research? Every RTS has research.
Diplomacy? Give me a break. The diplomacy in RoN is a joke.
Long games? Nope, not anything like that in here. On a Big Huge map with Research at Very Expensive and Very Slow with 6 other nations, the battle only took 2 hours to complete. The speed at which all research is conducted is quite odd. Since technology comes so fast at even the "Very Slow" setting, all of the units fly by without any notice given to them.
Don't get me wrong, I can't be critical of the entire game yet as I have not explored the RTS aspect of the game, but all of this hype of RoN being unique is complete silliness. I don't understand why Apolyton is hosting RoN at all, considering RoN has no Civilization aspect to it what-so-ever.
Frankly, from my first impression, Empire Earth has done a better job at RTS than RoN. RoN is still practically rock-paper-scissors but the combat model is rather bland and de-emphasizes personal strategy. Not to mention that the graphics is completely unengaging compared to EE. To add insult to injury, RoN's technical performance is abysmal considering its lack of graphical detail. EE ran much more smoothly than this and looked better and sounded better.
I do have to mention that the UI in RoN is impressive, but I won't go as far as saying it is excellent. Also, a thumbs up to the musical department as Big Huge Games chose quiet classical music for this game which is much less intrusive than loud annoying songs or music.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Solver
|
|
Apolyton Duke Of Something
|
 |
Latvia, Riga
Sep 2000
time: 07:28
|
|
quote:
Sure, it may have borders, but it is only an added mechanic to a RTS. |
Actually, it's that of giant importance - borders have a ROLE in the game.
quote:
Trade routes? They were in AoM. |
AoM trade routers are late-game, and not always used. RoN trade routes are absolutely critical.
quote:
Research? Every RTS has research. |
Oh, really? Every RTS game just has some unit upgrading and age advance, nothing even similar to this research model. And does any other game have a Knowledge resource?
quote:
Diplomacy? Give me a break. The diplomacy in RoN is a joke. |
Give ME a break. In other games, it's a pure either war or peace diplo state. 95% MP games are played either 1v1 or with preset teams, so diplo is ZERO.
quote:
Long games? Nope, not anything like that in here. On a Big Huge map with Research at Very Expensive and Very Slow with 6 other nations, the battle only took 2 hours to complete. The speed at which all research is conducted is quite odd. Since technology comes so fast at even the "Very Slow" setting, all of the units fly by without any notice given to them.
|
Speed is just fine, and you say 2 hours isn't long? For RTS, it's very long. AoM games take about 15-20 minutes, normally. 1v1 game over 30 minutes is VERY long and rare.
Gee, you actually played the game  ?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
One_Dead_Villy
|
 |
Toronto, Canada
May 2002
time: 00:28
|
|
Well it seems the original poster had the idea that RoN was a TBS game or something, where you sit there an play for a day save it and come back and play for another day. I would have thought it was clear from the many postings and feedback from BHG that RoN is an RTS. it borrows IDEAS from TBS like CIV and AC (although apparently he cant see beyond the surface how ideas from those games have been integrated into RoN), but it never claimed to even be anything but an RTS. So it seems strange the poster said he was lied to, more like he misunderstood what the game was about to begin with.
But anyways maybe he should try that CTW campaign, that should take him a while.
Last edited by One_Dead_Villy on 10-05-2003 at 19:38
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Triphosphatase
|
|
The flames from the fanboys! The best course of action for them would be to sit on their hands and nod to what I say.
Diplomacy is zero in RoN. Forging an alliance is only reliant on a simplistic formula for the required tribute. Making a proposal to every nation, I found out that all nations require the exact same amount of tribute for the agreement. How silly.
quote:
Actually, it's that of giant importance - borders have a ROLE in the game. |
READ my POST again PLEASE. Don't YOU LOVE random CAPITALIZATION?
quote:
Oh, really? Every RTS game just has some unit upgrading and age advance, nothing even similar to this research model. And does any other game have a Knowledge resource? |
Ah! The game has a Knowlege resource! I am sure RoN would have been a better game if it also had fish, meat, barney, rice, clay, coal, iron, gold, silver, fir, cedar, pine, and cabbage resources!
Have you actually played the game? The research model in RoN is still similiar to other RTS games. Instead of clicking a button to upgrade to a higher epoch, now I have to click five buttons. The added strategy!
As for my dissapointment, it stems from the utter overhype present in this game. I should have been told outright that this is a plain EE clone.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Solver
|
|
Apolyton Duke Of Something
|
|
Latvia, Riga
Sep 2000
time: 07:28
|
|
Hmm, actually I have written the beta preview for this game...
No offense, but you sound like a complete newbie, not someone with many years of gaming experience. RoN and EE have very little in common, except for on the surface, but they are very, very different games. EE just tried to bring strategy into RTS, but it was still all about clicking faster than the opponent. RoN is not, and if you fail to see that, you just don't understand the game at all.
If you want a game with lots of diplomacy, play Civ. RoN doesn't try to become a TBS. It just brings TBS ideas into RTS, and now that is what is done very well. At least you use those diplomatic options sometimes...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Triphosphatase
|
|
When in doubt, say newbie!
Do you play RTS games at all? If clicking faster than my opponent won games in any RTS game, I must have been living under a rock.
Ah clicking faster! I think I play all RTS games better already.
Why is a RoN site hosted on apolyton?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Solver
|
|
Apolyton Duke Of Something
|
|
Latvia, Riga
Sep 2000
time: 07:28
|
|
quote:
Solver,
Is 2 hours your experience as well for a very drawn-out game? I know from previous discussions that I play RTS at about 1/4 the speed of you, so if so, I should be able to manage some 8 hour games |
Yeah, I was pretty amazed at your speeds . I haven't played RoN in multiplayer, but in my experience, 2 hours is pretty long for a game. Most games I have played lasted for about an hour, with me actually attempting to keep things pretty slow. I have, though, tried to see if I can get quick games, and the answer is surely yes.
And players like you will probably be able to score 4-5 hour games .
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Triphosphatase
|
|
Warcraft 2
C&C
Total Annihilation
Starcraft
AOE
C&C Tiberium Sun (Ugh)
AOK
EE
C&C Generals
AOM (Ugh)
Warcraft 3 (This game doesn't even belong on this list)
And some minor games that are irrlevant (Earth 2150 was it?)
The only RTS out of that bunch that had any merit was Total Annihilation. Six years later after its release, not a single RTS played like it. Having only one useful offensive unit and one useful defensive structure on a land map will seem to play like a simple game, but the strategy and concentration required is unprofounded.
All future games employ the rock-paper-scissor model which is a uncreative design to force unit diversity.
TA had near a hundred mobile units to choose from, and only one was useful. Was the game a drab? I certainly didn't think so. The developer of TA did not intentially design the game to be played in this manner. This 'mistake' of unbalanced units turned the game into simply the best game that I have ever played. I still enjoy a match online playing a six year old game.
Why am I praising TA? Must be because I had to list the RTS games that I have played and have been sorely dissapointed by every single one that I listed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
One_Dead_Villy
|
|
Toronto, Canada
May 2002
time: 00:28
|
|
In that case, I think you should stick to what you like. No one is forcing you to play a new game...you have your opinion, and many dont agree with it. It seems your opinion is more reactionary then any kind of objective view of the game, simply cause it wasnt what you were expecting.
although saying a game having unbalanced units, and only one useful unit out of hundred made it a great game...one can only say that your criteria for a good game doesnt match much of the gaming industry or anyone's concept of a well designed game.
Last edited by One_Dead_Villy on 11-05-2003 at 06:20
|
|
| |
|
|
|
One_Dead_Villy
|
|
Toronto, Canada
May 2002
time: 00:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by SMIFFGIG
and if this game follows the current trend of 90% of released games today and if it plays anything like it looks ,then im afraid this guys right
. |
depends on what you mean by right. It seems to me, he was expecting a different game then what he thought it was. I dont think BHG ever said the game played like anything but an RTS. Althought the CTW campaign does indeed add a quasi turn based, risk like game over an RTS. Saying that the 4 research track as merely just more buttons to click, simply shows the lack of understanding how it changes gameplay, especially in competitive play. Purhaps the subtlety of it is lost in his disillusionment that RoN is more an RTS, then it is like CIV. (at least the apparent objection to RoN being hosted here seems to imply this).
also some people dont want that much of a departure from other RTS's with RoN, yet some say RoN is too much of a departure from past RTS, although apparently we have someone here who thinks its not enough of a departure. Well that just shows u one thing, you cant please everyone.
quote:
Originally posted by SMIFFGIG
oh and all this stuff youve heard about the game, just remember to take into account that a tiny percentage of it has been from actual players and its mostly from the company itself. |
mostly? most of the people I see on here posting, I dont think are working for the company. There's maybe 3 people from BHG that frequent and posts. The rest are just fans. Of course the people posting only can get info from what game preview sites has published or what the developers chooses to say. But I dont think its a fault of them, or the fan community, if he didnt ask the right questions about the game, and ended up thinking it was one thing when it was another.
Last edited by One_Dead_Villy on 11-05-2003 at 06:47
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bridger
|
|
RoN is unique for it's gameplay, how do you not see that? Are you playing RoN exactly like you would play age? I don't see how, as each has totaly seperate economic requirements. In Age or any other RTS you can build anywhere on the map (save C&C), including right next to the enemy base. In RoN you can only build in your territory and next to a city and only one of each economic building. Plus there's infinate resourses, 4 seperate research trees, 18 very different but not seemingly imbalanced. The strategy invovled in the research and economic aspect of RoN is double that of any other RTS i can think of. Choosing which path you should upgrade next is a huge stratetic decision, in other games you don't have this kind of situation with 4 equally critical upgrades.
This poster really sounds like somebody expecting to play the single player like a Civ game. "All the computer players offered me the same ammount of tribute," wtf? It's a MULTIPLAYER GAME first, and single second, that's how every RTS in the last 2 years has been. Why would you judge diplomacy based on the AI? Maybe if you didn't have a modem...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Triphosphatase
|
|
One_Dead_Villy: Have you actually played Total Annihilation frequently online?
Bridger: Have you played RoN yourself? If you had, you would realize that the game plays very closely with AOE.
Explain how the strategy involved in research and economic aspects of the game is double of any other RTS released.
Place Woodcutter's beside trees, place mines beside mountains, lay a few farm... Snore.
Click on tiny icons at the bottom of the screen to research and advance in a predetermined order... Snore.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
One_Dead_Villy
|
|
Toronto, Canada
May 2002
time: 00:28
|
|
I wasnt the one touting that TA, is the best designed game, cause it has unbalanced units. TA maybe a good game, but having unbalanced units is NOT what makes it a good game.
Since I am here first I'll answer for Bridger, he has and have played the beta version. So it is an informed opinion, and has as much validity (if not more so then) as anyone else. As far as RoN playing like AOE, I think thats a great complement, that game is a classic.
Since you asked how the research and strategy in RoN is more then other RTS. In old RTS's, its simple villager production, , so that u can have a continuous stream of villagers being produced. It is completely reduceable to rate of villager production that determines how well your economy will be. Besides rushing, you also have to boom in all past RTS's to be truly competitive. So its a simple matter of being able to create enough farms to create a continuous villager production out of all your Towns. Whoever has the highest rate of villager production will have the better economy. All resources are equal, and all you have to do is pile on as many villagers in one spot to gain the production. EE does limit the number of workers on certain resources (and adds garrisoning in addition to tech upgrades but this is essentually the same as investing in tech upgrades). The older RTS's doesnt even have this garrisoning, and only has tech upgrades.
In RoN you have resources that yield different amounts of resources determined by where you place your collection points (which limits how many workers you can have on a resource) which mean its important where and which resource you exploit, not just a matter of placing them close to the resource to minimize walking distance. The commerce cap also prevents you from mindlessly producing villagers to boom your economy. You have to actually preplan your research, so that you arent producing villagers unnessarily and therefore incurring opportunity costs. You have to micro and plan your villagers to put them into resources that not only are what you are lacking, but also determined by your commerce capacity. (this latter point is not even in any of the other RTS, as their is no limit to the rate you can collect if you have the villagers to do it). Also the fact that you can only have ONE collection point per resource area (and in particular one mine per mountain), means that who ever gets to a mountain will have a big advantage, you cant just have two people share at one resource. and also makes your initial choices of where to place collecting points even more important. This makes these terrain features strategically important. With farms, in other RTS's there's no limit to the number of farms you can make, so all u need to do to boom is to just lay out as many farms as you feel you need. With a limited number of farms slots, you are forced to consider your food production capacity and capability (two separate things) in producing your army, and how you expand your empire. None of this needs to be considered in past RTS's since there is no such limit.
Last edited by One_Dead_Villy on 11-05-2003 at 10:58
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Solver
|
|
Apolyton Duke Of Something
|
|
Latvia, Riga
Sep 2000
time: 07:28
|
|
Triphosphatase, I think that also the problem of EE was a bit too many units and balance problems, don't you think so? Nukes couldn't do more than destroy a few closely packed buildings. Good cybers are so good that they make infantry wasted, etc. And quite some useless units in it, too.
You're saying RoN plays closely to AoE. Well, in the terms of the basics and interface, it's just that for an AoE player it's easy to pick up. You can play RoN the same way as you play AoE, but you will lose to the better players.
Again, look at EE. I was an AoE veteran when I got that, and, of course, I could immediately play it, using the many similarities. However, first I tried playing much the same way and using the same strategies, but only then I learned that it's not efficient, for the games are different. For example, a tower rush/push won't do you nearly as much good in EE as AoE.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Alex
|
 |
Brasil
Mar 1999
time: 02:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by SMIFFGIG
i think dismissive comments like
quote:
Really? Next, please |
and calling him a n00b just because he has opinions you dont like to hear is riduculous quite frankly
|
My comment was a reaction to the fact that he apparently was just disappointed because RoN didn't fancy him.
He wasn't offering any objective comments about the game, just disillusioned remarks like "this has been done before, this other doesn't mean nothing to me, oh god I want something different". Fine, he has every right to dislike the game... I just think that his comments were not adding anything new to me.
I'm not a fanboy, certainly not a BHG fanboy. I didn't play RoN and I don't like RTS very much, but I plan to give RoN a try because it seems to have some novel things in it. Maybe our chemical guy is right, maybe I'll hate RoN after playing it for a while, who knows? But, right now, our lovely chemical guy is just the first in a group of people that will not like RoN. It happens. Me? I want a good analysis of the game. Not anything like "I don't like it because I don't like it".
No hard feelings. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bridger
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Triphosphatase
One_Dead_Villy: Have you actually played Total Annihilation frequently online?
Bridger: Have you played RoN yourself? If you had, you would realize that the game plays very closely with AOE.
Explain how the strategy involved in research and economic aspects of the game is double of any other RTS released.
Place Woodcutter's beside trees, place mines beside mountains, lay a few farm... Snore.
Click on tiny icons at the bottom of the screen to research and advance in a predetermined order... Snore. |
Seems to me you don't even like RTS's, so why even bother to post a review about one?
And researching in a predetermined order? I've had ot change my research path order countless times when playing depending on the resourses i've found, the ammount of tension i'm feeling over militery vs. economy, and if i feel i need to age up yet or can maybe get my commerce cap up first. Those 4 research tree's are all critical and depending on the situation in the game your going to want to upgrade in a different order. This is the strategy. Do i upgrade my science so that my age research will be cheaper and take a risk or should you age now? Should you go for civics to get another city up for increase the commerce cap first?
Those are not predetermined, they can't posibly be, not like any other RTS game i know.
Last edited by Bridger on 11-05-2003 at 21:17
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ACEofHeart
|
 |
Bear, DE
Apr 1999
time: 05:28
|
|
well, I was intially scratching my head why a RTS game was on Apolyton.
Because virtually every RTS game I have ever played the "S" in RTS did not stand for strategy", it stood for "speed". It always came down to how "fast" you gather resourses, how "fast" you went to the next age..how fast you cranked out units,, how "fast" you can scroll the map in battle, how fast .. well....blah,, blah,, blah... you get the idea.
hmmm,,,was it put on Apolyton just because of Mr Reynolds ? 
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:28.
Apolyton Time is 00:28. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-05-2003 14:21
. And, if so you wish, I shall play you at any of the Age games anytime you wish.
|