Gamereplays Article: The History of Real Time Strategy

Not new-news as such, but I wanted to point readers and RTS nerds to this fantastic article by a fellow going by the pseudonym ‘Phantom’, over at gamereplays.org. However, it’s also an open document, that is, it is open to editing and contributions by anyone interested in RTS. It’s an ongoing project to document the history of the genre. So go check it out!

A snippet from the introduction:

Types of Balance

Balance is a complex subject for any game, and it is especially so in strategy games where the space of possible strategies is (typically) so large.  However it is critical for any symmetric, competitive strategy game that the tools available are perfectly equal in utility.  Still, balance is perhaps the most discussed, and the most badly mangled, discussion topic for any strategy game.  I think we need to raise the quality of all balance discussions.  In this post I am going to attempt to separate the different principles of balance, which are sadly used interchangeably in most discussions of game “balance” to the detriment of the discussion.

Warning:  Wall of text inbound.  Brace yerselves ‘gainst the mast o’ yer ship, me hearties!

Asymmetric Warfare

Modern strategy games are, at their core, quite simple games.  I consider Starcraft and a variety of other games as fundamentally derived from the game of chess.  You start the game with the same types of basic pieces, you make more pieces (added to the chess formula), and you move those pieces around the board.  The ultimate objective is to checkmate your opponent by making them unable to move.  However in a game where you can make more pieces the main way to do this is to eliminate your opponent’s ability to make additional pieces.

There are some philosophical underpinnings to this model that most players have seldom considered as maxims of game design.  For example, the idea of “game balance” is hotly discussed for any mainstream game on every corner of the internet.  While the discussions range from thought-provoking to positively inane, everyone seems to agree that the game must be “balanced.”  This is the main principle behind symmetric games.  However many players don’t seem to realize there is any other way you might make a game at all.  Asymmetric games are rife with possibilities, almost certainly more possibilities than the entire space of symmetric wargames, begging to be explored.

Starcraft 2 Patch 1.4 PTR (Luke’s Thoughts)

First off, this is by far the best SC2 patch to date. It seems to address with little ambiguity some of the biggest concerns voiced by the SC2 community to do with balance issues and gameplay dynamics. It is a bold and daring patch, and Blizzard, in my opinion, should be commended for listening to the players, filtering reasoned criticism from the noise, and then patching the hell out of their precious RTS baby.

Nerfs and buffs a plenty!

Logistics

In this article, I’m going to cover a topic that most RTS games designs won’t touch, and this ‘fifth rail’ of strategy games actually has an immense amount of potential to improve the genre.  I am referring to logistics.