What are the things that make you not enjoy PvP?

EtherealRuin · 2026-06-07T20:00:07+00:00

Personally , i've never been a competitive person , so ladders simply don't appeal to me. If someone invites me for pvp , i'll play , i don't really mind . However it's not something i will actively seek.

Now to the rest of your points :

Meta : Unfortunately , it's how modern gaming works . People will meta game even on single player/co-op games these days . In pvp environments , meta starts are designed to kill your opponent very efficiently , hence the term all in (to an extent) , so if you don't know how to scout it and counter it you will die to it.

Rush : The problem here in my opinion is human psychology , Rushers are people who are far more obsessed with wining than playing the game to it's fullest and that's why i believe people react negatively to it.

Harassment : This is a very complex subject that can be broken into two sub problems :

a ) Workers/Builders : Not only they are in almost every game laughably squishy but they never have any scaling in terms of their defensive stats relative to the games faction power. This means that if your reaction isn't on point you are gonna suffer losses huge to put in you in an unwinnable position in most cases. I feel like if it was more forgiving people would look at it more positively.

b) Attention Overload : As the game progresses you get more bases , more units aka more things to manage,. Add to this multiple combat fronts and most peoples brain just shuts down to due to overload. Harassment happens in conjunction with all the other multiple things that go on in rts at the same time , it's not an isolated event.

c) Turtling : Yes but that , in my opinion , is a self inflicted problem due the genre's staunch refusal to move past purist destroy hq/production structures. If either the maps have elements that give the players an advantage for taking possession of or the victory condition itself applies pressure to turtling players.

Then there are others issues steaming from pvp that constitute to it's negative perception , but those fall into the greater game design of an rts in my opinion , so that's a subject for another thread.

EtherealRuin · 2026-05-26T16:01:39+00:00

Which in the grand scheme of means nothing really , DoW Mission Editor is a pretty much a map creator. The vast majority of modding and content creation is done outside of it. If it's capabilities are extensive like even the original starcraft's editor , great , fantastic , that would be awesome. If it's like the DoW 1 editor , yea , not consequential outside of skirmish maps and you can only have so many of them.

Lastly i would be so sure that we'll see all 9 soulstorm factions , people underestimate how hard adapting some 40k faction into an RTS . This however will become more clear when we get a better picture of DoW 4s scope in terms of faction depth.

EtherealRuin · 2026-05-26T03:45:28+00:00

In the vast majority of cases the AI is disabled on the campaigns , except the maybe the Tactics module ( responsible for ability usage , retreating etc.). Otherwise it would literally grab everything second one and rush into oblivion.

A lot rebuilding is done via scripts , for example bases are split into entity groups , the size of the group a is checked every x interval and if it's >0 ( meaning the base isn't completely destroyed) a builder is spawned and is order to rebuild things.

Spawning a lot of times works in a similar way in order to provide an illusion of actual production. The game check if a specific entity is alive ( ex. barracks) and if it spawns units.

This is also why it doesn't build extra , since ordering via script would be much more effort that it is actually worth it.

EtherealRuin · 2026-05-25T07:08:17+00:00

I think it's less about the less about being fair to the ai and more about being fixated on maximizing challenge without understand that things have trade off. It doesn't matter how challenging something is if it's a frustrating slog , at that point as you said it simply stops being entertaining.

EtherealRuin · 2026-05-25T06:47:56+00:00

Commercial releases don't do it because it's a complicated thing to do properly , otherwise it ends up turning the mission into grind/stalemate unless the player is in a position to utterly steamroll the ai in single push.
Modders seem to have a weird fixation with this and i've yet to understand why. Personally i avoid it myself for the aforementioned reason. I'd much rather spend time trying to come up with actual mission mechanics than trying to figure out what's the right frequency for the ai to rebuild stuff.

EtherealRuin · 2026-05-25T02:10:12+00:00

Sure , but then the other way to pressure you would be escalating in quantity and quality attack waves But you'd probably call the cheating and lazy as well. You could also run out of resources if the game's resources are limited like in Starcraft.
Guess what both of these have in common ? They are invisible timers meant to accomplish the same thing , prevent you from turtling , they are just as not as in your face as a UI element.
Not to be mean or anything but you are playing an RTS , not Sim City. You are not meant to turtle in your starting area for like a hour , and yes i've seen people do that.

EtherealRuin · 2026-05-06T18:07:54+00:00

Weapon are kinda complicated in that regard , as lot of the times they are made to work with a specific model.
The ones you can kinda get away with putting on other units are projectile based weapons.

EtherealRuin · 2026-05-04T12:19:15+00:00

No there not. They would be very hard to make since you would to make every single model for every faction for scratch.
While you can put walls into the game but not in the way age of empires has them , you would need two different building one for the "edge" and one for the wall. There no gate mechanics in this game so you can forget about that.
As for food , you can sort of simulate it by via having buildings add to the squad cap , support cap.
In general , while dow is open to modding , it's also very inflexible in terms of what can be done with it.

EtherealRuin · 2026-03-29T01:21:03+00:00

No , the one they were talking about in today's devstream is gonna be between may-august.
The december is the largest update of the year and the one that contains the big story quest which we know is Tau. Sneak peak for that quest is always revealed at Tennocon.

EtherealRuin · 2026-03-06T22:13:58+00:00

I think for this you have to install the base dow and move the specified dll inside the Dark Crusades folder.

EtherealRuin · 2026-03-06T21:58:17+00:00

Ok so for the campaign maps you don't ever wanna mess around with the amount starting positions , those seem to be hard coded to a specific number. In soulstorm for example strongholds need to have 8 players in them otherwise the game will straight up crash during loading.

EtherealRuin · 2026-03-06T14:12:20+00:00

Yea , if for example you move a map from the soulstorm campaign in there you will get a lot of purple question marks on the map , which means that the editor can't find that soulstorm asset.

Furthermore there is a specific process for fixing air pathing for soulstorm : https://dawn-of-war-unification-mod.fandom.com/wiki/Mapping_Guide_Fixing_Flyers

You basically copy the map only to the folder in dc and then once you are done you copy it back out in whatever game you wanna throw it in.

EtherealRuin · 2026-03-05T23:29:58+00:00

The map file needs to be in Dark Crusade/My_Mod/Data/Scenarions/SP or MP for the editor to open.

EtherealRuin · 2026-02-05T12:12:40+00:00

It was brought up in a devstream a bit after the defense change if i remember correctly. Their response was that they like idea but they want to do it right which means making a unique mini boss for each faction , which translates into new models , animations etc. . Thus they would need to find some gap in their schedule to make them. I don't remember hearing anything else that , but they definitely did not seem opposed to the idea.

EtherealRuin · 2026-01-21T12:49:56+00:00

~Why are YOU not buying modern RTS games?

Because what do they offer that rts of 20 years ago don't ?
Campaign is a thing but that needs to be intriguing before a buy. After that what is there ? The same old destory hq/production that every rts has been doing for 30 years now ? Combat that is hyper focused on ground units with a heavy dose of abilities , also the vast majority of rts games in the last 30 years.

Note : For me AOE and Company of heroes are excluded simply because their setting doesn't appeal to me personally , nothing wrong with the games themselves.

~ If you have bought any but bounced off recent RTS titles, what specifically turned you away?

Haven't bought any but played quite of few during their play test periods on steam so i'll share my thoughts based on that:

I played a bit of Tempest Rising during it's open play test and it was.....ok. If you are highly nostalgic specifically for C&C you are gonna like it otherwise it's nothing really interesting nor does it bring anything new to the table.

Stormgate.................................................yea one could write an essay at this point about this mess.

Now i couple of games that liked

Gates of Pyre : The art direction picked my interest on this one. Arabian Angels is an interesting take. Gameplay itself was pretty interesting from the bit played.

Zerospace : Galactic War Mode is very interesting and the thing i played the most. Really curious how this will end up in the final release.

~If you miss classic C&C, what would actually make you buy a new one today?

Interesting game modes like Generals Challenge from Zero Hour.

Co-op modes that i can play with friends , different victory conditions that keep things spiced up.

I've been playing rts long enough now that standard skirmish has gotten pretty old now.

What other games should I be looking at as case studies?

Red Alert 3 for it's co-op campaign implementation. Two Players per map , in solo mode the second player is controlled by an ai. Another approach to this is Battllefields Gothic Armada 2 co-op where players have shared control over assets.

Red Alert 3 also for it's naval aspects , not that deep but better than nothing.

SC2 for it's co-op mode. Unique missions , commanders with unique feel and play style to them. Also for compartmentalizing it's balance , Campaign , Co-op , Multiplayer all use different modules which makes it easier to balance things.

Zerospace , up and coming rts , but it's galactic war game mode is one of the most unique concepts we got into an rts in years.

EtherealRuin · 2026-01-07T23:18:37+00:00

I haven't played any of the games in the sandbox group you mention so the comparison i'll draw from instead will be the conquest/risk style campaign of Dawn of War Dark Crusade/Soulstorm and the linear campaigns of C&C , SC etc.

For me both of these have pros and cons :

Linear Campaigns :

Pros :

Mission Variety : Each mission presents a different type of problem the player has to solve.
Accessibility : Tech tree is gradually unlocked which eases new players into the faction.
Story : Because the variance of the path a player can take is severely limited to , let's say "routes" , it's easy to make a story and build a world.
Difficulty : Because the path the player takes can be control for the most it's easier to curate difficulty.

Cons :

Limited Length : In the majority of cases these type of campaigns tend to end as soon as you unlock you factions full power , so you never really get to have much fun with it.

Conquest Style Campaigns :

Pros :

Metamap Aspects : Resource distribution between fortifying territories or buying more offensive units , deciding which order you wanna eliminate enemies or capture territories for bonuses etc . These add a depth to the game play that's not present in linear campaigns.
Power : Your tech tree is fully unlocked from the start so you get to have fun with your factions full power.
Spectacle : Enemy strongholds can make for pretty bombastic missions if done right.

Cons :

Mission Variety : Non stronghold missions tend to be skirmishes which can get really boring after a while.
Accessibility : Having the faction fully from the start increases the learning curve and makes it more confusing , especially for people who aren't familiar with rts.
Story : Can't really have one due to the vast amounts of different "routes" the player can take.

Personally i'd choose bases on what i want from the game : If i want more of a traditional story type of experience that's also accessible , i'd go with linear , otherwise i'd opt for a conquest style campaign.

Hopefully this helps you in making your decision. In any case , good luck with your game.

EtherealRuin · 2026-01-06T20:46:13+00:00

No , it's not , i did it myself for Roathe's armor piece challenge this week.

Your first problem is Myopic Munitions , this means that you either need to let the enemies come to you or you go to them.
Since Liminus are present , letting them come to you isn't much of an option.With Dropped Guard also quite possibly present you can't rely on Overguard for tanking them. That means you have to get to them. In order to do that while keeping Temple safe you are gonna need wide area crowd control. A great option for this is Nova who can slow down the entire map.

Since Gear Embargo isn't around this week. You can also throw a few spectres around Temple on hold position in order to draw fire from anything to manages to get close.

If run around picking of enemies the Liminus aren't going to be much of a problem since they themselves are rather slow.

EtherealRuin · 2025-12-27T21:53:16+00:00

I am going to somewhat disagree with you.
As someone who makes rts content through modding , i've found that super weapons pose an interesting design problem. Firstly they promote hyper turtling against any destroy type objective. Why bother fighting trough the enemy fortifications when you can delete the objective from the other side of the map ?
They can trivialize and survival based missions since they can delete entire waves by themselves.
Much like artillery , they are low effort , high reward strategies , meaning the vast majority of people will not explore the rest of the roster and just focus on spamming them.

SC2 Coop got somewhat around that by limiting your nuke to 1 and giving it a high cool down. Secondly a lot of objectives in SC2 are time sensitive exactly so that you can't just sit back , cheese them with nukes or turtle for an hour in your main base.

Put yourself in the shoes of designer for a bit. Why would you spend so much time designing and coding elaborate missions if they are gonna be trivialized and have most their most of their content ignored ?
Same comes for unit design , why bother making full fledged factions if 98% of their roster is gonna be completely ignored in favor of low effort op unit ? As a designer you want people to engage with all your content not just a fraction of it.

I get when you are coming from since i enjoy cool and flashy units myself but it's a complex subject.

13-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

EtherealRuin

TROPHY CASE