Відео

You did a good job onboarding me to this vid, at one point i wondered how long this vid was thinking i had watched 20 mins. It was actually at 48 mins. Alot of good information for someone like me who wishes to get into RTS but have found the genre to be quite overwhelming. I've played some games in sc2 vs AI, but i'll try out some different games now as well for flavor and fun

What an awesome fucking video.

I have always wanted to get into rts, and your video helped me finally take that step. Thank you!

you answered the questions that has been messing with me everytime i try RTS. i really wanna get in but frustrated with the apm and repetition based playing really quick and quit before seeing what you show. anyway, thanks a lot for this most useful bible for the RTS community. 🙏🙏

Really appreciated the part about APM. As someone who used to play competitive RTS at a high level, my APM was frequently a lot lower than very good players I would beat. The fact is most "actions" are just straight up spam. Much like in sports, as soon as APM became a metric people cared about, you started seeing people gaming it. No where is it more obvious than watching people in the early game just spam clicking building waypoints and orders to their handful of workers/scout. Of course when confronted, they would claim they are "warming up". Right... Learning the game, practicing, and just being honest with your own mistakes is really 95% of the journey to becoming a good player. And no you don't need 10,000 hours. Plenty of people who have absurd amount of playtime continue to suck, while some people with fairly modest playtime improve rapidly. It's mostly just a matter of the quality of your practice and willingness to be self-critical. I can't emphasize enough how many people stay bad because their ego can't handle self-criticism. They will instead just fall back to blaming balance, cheese, or their teammates.

It looks like a lot of work got put into this video and i really appreciate all of it, thank you

I think that the biggest barrier to entry might be "autism" in video games. No offense, but I'm serious; isn't it about time we stopped optimizing the hell out of absolutely everything?

I completely agree with yout title. Also, back in my teen years I prefered TotalA to Starcraft, and ironically games like Starcraft, pandering to the "competitive scene", are what killed the genre. Competitive my balls, let games be FUN.

I disagree on the competitiveness not ruining RTS point. There's a difference between trying to improve and wanting to win which is fine and healthy for a game, and being an utter loser about it. The overly competitive nature of games nowadays in general is killing gaming in general not just RTS. And in a silly turn of events its the bad players that are hyper-fixated on the competitive aspect and winning because they are bad at the game. For example the people that complain about skill based matchmaking in call of duty claiming it makes every lobby full of sweats are the same people that would be at the bottom of the leaderboard if it wasn't for it because the actually good players would just dunk on them. IMO, It comes down to a false matter of perspective thinking getting higher in ranking systems like elo in age of empires for example equates to winning or doing the objective. The issue with RTS and modern gaming isn't the competitiveness in general, its the fact that competitiveness is the Objective nowadays. In reality *THE ONLY PUROPOSE* of these ranking systems is to pit you with and against people close enough to your level that its not too hard but still rewarding. So in my opinion everything would be fixed if all this information was hidden and was just a parameter for what server/lobby you join instead of the only reason for you to play. You might not even like the game deep down and just want a higher rank or elo to feel accomplished. It would return the purpose of games back to having Fun instead of ranking up. And from a game design perspective it means the games wont be balanced towards pro players and equality where no fun is allowed cuz everyone has to have the same chance at winning. Especially in most RTS games, every faction has pros and cons but theyre very muted to keep the game "balanced" when the devs should instead make them as uneven as they can. And although your experience hasn't been fully negative, its really difficult for people nowadays to snap out of this cycle of focusing too much on elo feeling bad cuz its not improving, becoming sweats still losing elo and feeling bad again becoming even more hyper focused and sweaty and so on when this has been the norm for most PVP games for a decade now. You being shown red negative numbers saying you just got more sucky after every game you lose is demoralizing and isnt good for keeping people on board.

You...fucking...NAILED IT! I'm going to stream AoE thanks to you.

"Bats of the Republic" - NGL, as one of "the queers", living in a city populated entirely by other queer people sounds pretty nice lol

What a great video in fact I would like this for all genres. I never heard of the term APM but it was definitely something that puts me off most games. Getting older you just assume everyone is better because of there reflex skills and APM. You've inspired me to return to AOE cheers.

51:00 this is, in a nutshell, why I think the 40k setting is perfect for strategy games. Most strategy games have the player doing stuff that would be pretty messed up IRL in order to win, which makes having a hero faction feel dissonant. 40k solves this by making every faction some kind of evil in lore so said horrors fit with the setting

You are right, not every RTS needs high APM, company of heroes is a great example of one that focuses much more on strategy but it's an outlier in the RTS genre. Obviously every persons experiences are different but when I tried getting into AoE 2 definitive edition multiplayer, I got stomped every fucking game and never saw any "new" people playing. One other point about APM that your being disingenous about is not needing high APM to play. No shit, you can play with garbage APM but you need high APM to actually win games. Even in the screenshots you showed of the games you played, the players with higher APM had higher K/D ratios and higher production. No ones saying you need 200 APM to just play the game. People are saying you need 150-200 to start winning them.

Multitasking alone is extremely high barrier to entry, because having to completely divide our attention for several equally important tasks at once is very stressful and exhausting. I played multiple RTSs in my childhood (battle of middle earth, AoE1 and 2, Warcraft 2 and 3 + many more) and loved them all, but the only one i played semi-competetive multi was Settlers 7, because you didnt have to minmax at all and had a lot of downtime to asses what is going on (there was no fog of war, so you could study enemy strategy and movement, while planning your next move). Not much battle managment (just ordering your general to go to fight), being able to start constructions without resources for the building (allowing for much longer planning at once) and no worker/unit managment (they appear once you build production building and they operate autonomously). Finally you could think of a strategy instead of constantly sweating, if you play optimally or being forced to adapt every 15 seconds, because enemy switched his own tactic in response to your own switching.

I might check this out. It almost reminds of Jack London’s “The Call of the Wild.” Awesome video.

Total Annihilation was the last good RTS.

Out of curiosity, how long does it often take for your friends to progress in skill? I chose to start with Beyond All Reason and I've been playing in the big team games (8v8) for about a week. It's tough, and the only consolation I can give myself is that while I feel like I'm struggling, I may actually not be that bad because so far my team's won 5/7 matches (yes, that's not all me and often despite of me, but still). I'm having fun and will stick with it, I'm watching lots of UA-cam replays in addition to my own, but it's a tough process.

If anyone is put off by long game times of RTS, maybe you will like Age of Empires 3 DE. It is a faster paced game, with many unique (and arguably better) mechanics.

I think RTS multiplayer DOES feel more competitive than FPS multiplayer. Most FPS multiplayers have many partecipants, and dying causes you to respawn in a few seconds. The majority of RTS multiplayer is 1vs1, and in the very best cases, it's 4v4. It feels way more competitive than a casual battle killing anything you see. The APM factor depends heavily on the game. You focused on AoE, which in my opinion is the most strategic-based game out there, but even there, you will not go anywhere above 1600ELO without a good APM, and some at least good micro. ...1600 ELO being *very* far from competitive, as the tournament-kind of players are sitting at 2500. To be honest, I hate auto-match based on ELO, as it forces me to always play at my maximum ability, turning every game into a very stressful competition, but sometimes I just prefer to play a little more chill, and the only option for that is AI. In RTS I never had this feeling, they have always felt waaaay more casual and less competitive.

This is by far, the greatest video i've watched about age of empires (or even rts), you really captures the how-tos and the fun of rts especially at the lower level. Back to the topic of "carried knowledge", the knowledge from this video can actually be applied to other rts games like warcraft, rise of nations, empire earth, or especially to other aoe games. Good job man.

i havent watched a whole 1.5h video in ages. this was actually really good and the "plottwist" at the end saying u review books was a curveball that i did not see coming haha. You should create a channel dedicated to Video Games! I was looking into RTS games and wondered for a while if I should start playing them and which one.. started downloading AOE4 around 50 min into the video :) i come from FPS games so we'll see if actually enjoy it but i'll give it a try!

It's very similar to FPS (counter-strike as a prime example) or MOBA (League of Legends) games, there's the casual players and then there's the competitive professionals. The skill ceiling is super high for these games and I'd argue more so than RTS.

The reason the RTS genre is dying is because it has become far too macro intensive years ago you would have very little hotkey and ctrl + 1 to create groups now RTS has like 40 hotkeys different group typings you basically have to be a pro at the game just entering the game to remotely compete. This is what they need to do with RTS reduce the macro because when you compare AOE 2 to AOE 4 you can tell a clear difference.

Zampanic or whatever

My jaw dropped when I learned that there is such a thing as shift-command. I'm half with through the video and you blew my mind

my first RTS game was Dune 2

You should also try Heroes of Might and Magic III and it's genre of RPG turn based strategy games, they're very good

RATTEN REICH MENTIONED

I'm only 23 minutes in and this video is great.

my first rts was Empire Earth 2 in my childhood❤❤

The answer is always, something, something Dark Souls.

As an rts vet i can tell you that apm is built on game knowledge and sense. The better you know what you are capable of, the better your apm will be. In a game like tw warhammer 3, apm means a lot, if you cant keep up with your op, you will die

boost more must learn

almost every other skill in RTS will result in higher APM naturaly. so focusing on apm is pointless. this statement is true weather or not you value APM

5:14 WHO WANTS SOME🗣🗣🗣🗣🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥

You do need apm or your gonna be silver at best

Great vid

I think it was killed moreso because we're all tired of getting our asses beat and getting hardstuck in gold

House of Leaves was more of a game than a book for me. I'm a huge extrovert and I was literally looking forward to going home to "play" my book.

I mean, for StarCraft 2, the pvp definitely feels like this. 2:50

I am traversing through this video by my own choice, comming back and forth.

Bungie's Myth:The Fallen Lords was the best online RTS game experience I ever had. It totally dumped any reliance on APM and Micro in the base management side of things, and just focused entirely on the tactical command side of things. May the series RIP

I have an idea for a concept, each page of one book is randomly mailed to someone around the world so each person just gets one page and they all have to find each other to complete the book.

Its actually funny to watch some videos of people playing with 'High' apm. and 90% of that apm is just spamming buttons with random actions for the sake of inflating their apm count and have nothing to actually do with their tactics or whatever.

Well done!

Y'know onboarding actually made me think of when I was having so much trouble with another game I really wanted to try, I almost quit because I couldn't grasp it. Counterstrike. While not an RTS game, obviously, the issue of "getting people to stick around through the learning curve" stuck with me because the main reason I dropped counterstrike was because I just plain simply didn't understand anything period. Then, a youtube video explained it in the most simple way to actually make your guns WORK, I tried it, and.. it opened up the game for me. Lower your sensitivity if you want to, and stop moving when you shoot, that's it. Every single other tutorial was an information overload that was like "oh, don't do this, but do this, and this, and this, this does this, etc-" but that was so simple it got me onboard quick. I feel like because of how complex RTS games can be, most community tutorials are from the views of people who HAVE played that. People who know what buildings do what, what types of UNITS do what, what types of support tools do what, etc. For example, when starting out in Company of Heroes, if you've played an RTS before, sure you know the basics, but.. WTF is cover? WTF is reinforcing? Why is it more focused on abilities instead of.. actual troops fighting? WHAT ARE THESE VEHICLE EFFECTS??? WHY ARE MGS SO OP!? Most tutorials are either boring, because of how long they are, or are trying to pack so much information into a reasonable timeframe they burn you out. People usually play the campaigns first or any offline modes they can to train themselves, and then when they're able to be competent against the AI they think "oh, I can play online now!" and proceed to get absolutely curb stomped. This is also the reason I just flat out don't play RTS multi because of how competitive it feels, pretty much in ANY RTS game. I've seen so many people want to get into RTS or really like playing them, but outright avoid multiplayer because they get curb stomped. I've been playing RTS games since the original Command and Conquer on the computer at under 8yo, Warcraft 3, AoE2 and Star Wars GB, but I avoid multi because it feels like I never properly get a chance to learn. People need an environment they can learn the game against other players in WITHOUT getting curb stomped. Then, information needs to be more compact and easy to understand from a starter perspective.

In no universe are MOBAs equally or more complicated than the RTS games that spawned them... That's a ridiculous statement to be honest. The video does make some solid points about RTS games though.

I love, love, looooove this video!!

Playing in high APM could lead to long-term health issues in your hands, like carpal tunnels and nerve damage.