How do you play RTS offensively or defensively?

this is such a false dichotomy
you need to attack, otherwise no one will destroy your enemy for you, and you need to defend your resources and industry so that you are able to maintain the military output
you need to employ both defense and offense during a match, trading favorably, retreating when needed, pushing where the enemy is weaker, getting and keeping map control
you need, you know, Strategy

Attached: 1636626199823.jpg (555x556, 71.01K)

Losingly

Attached: 1527593736056.jpg (487x432, 27.53K)

Defensively. I turtle way too hard.

the only RTS that didn't punish me for building up an army was Dawn of War 1 so that
I can let my squad of space marines roam the map and kill everything as I upgrade all my shit before building more units

t. never played supreme commander

>war 2 ignored by blizzard
>source code for ps1 port leaked
>widescreen patch posted online.
Hope it keeps being ignored.

Seductively ;3

I'm a turtle, which is to say I never win

K

ive never played DoW what do you mean by "didnt punish me for building up an army" ?

by playing offensively or defensively.

I unlock all units and upgrades, build a massive base to cap, and then uninstall

Speaking of, I want to play Battle for Middle-earth 2 again. Is Age of the Ring the best mod available for it?

yeah

>only play campaign
>stay in my base all game to build up units
>once I reach the unit cap, steamroll the AI

this, so much this

>offensively
You put pressure on the opponent, either preventing him from getting more resources or by rushing certain units that give you massive "power spike" for a small window of opportunity.
>defensively
You try to avoid building as many units as possible, focusing more on resource gathering so you can build a bigger, more advanced army faster than your opponent ever could.

>supreme commander
>total annihilation
I'm not sure which it was I and my friends were playing but we had some house rules going that map-wide artillery was banned.
So, of course, the host which brought up the rule was the first to break it after his airforce simply couldn't penetrate any defenses.
In the end, the entire minimap was filled with 'projectiles' flying from one base to the next, until us other 3 guys targeted him together to stop the goddamn cannon fire.
Guy left the game, and as the host, the entire game died. Ever since he's been ostracized from hosting and all he ever says to that is "The Game, you lost".

Attached: 1526353978115.gif (230x237, 754.31K)

nothing false about it, though it is dichotomous. you can engage your enemy and destroy their ability to remain in the game, which is offensive, or you can concentrate on making your enemy lose more on attacking you than you spend on repelling them, which is defensive.
you dont have to destroy their shit to win, only outlast them.
in games like supreme commander with unlimited resources the outlasting part is of course the point where they have spent more on ineffectual attacks on you than you have spent on your infrastructure so your ability to simply outproduce them becomes clear, usually in the form of an experimental.
nothing wrong with that if you are playing a game that doesnt openly favor one strategy.

your 4 mexus pd creep strategy wont hold up to someone grabbing all the mass spots and overwhelming you with spam and arty

Attached: robot.jpg (1025x734, 114.16K)

>AoE2
>Black Forest
>massive map size
Where my turtle bros

>Build walls
>Static defenses and artillery
>Slowly creeping towards the enemy base
What other games than AoE, EE and IC allow me to do this?

Dawn of War, no walls though
Try Red Alert 2 skirmishes, maybe Tiberian Sun if you don't mind getting zapped out of nowhere
it annoys my turtle autism

dead genre

Attached: 1644579443239.png (604x604, 490.23K)

>literally used the word creep without mentioning Creeper World

Attached: 1598315181125.gif (520x293, 1.01M)

>we're some 30 years into RTS game development
>non military win conditions (e.g. research, culture, religion, political etc.) still aren't standard

MOBAs are the natural evolution of the RTS genre without the tedious base building and resource gathering.

Attached: 1550502986725.jpg (622x647, 50.13K)

MOBAs are glorified Diabloclones on a small map in pure multiplayer.

Attached: sexposting.png (643x406, 189.59K)

Almost based
The correct conclusion is too play RTT games, not MOBAs

>Actual RTS can't really be played defensively
It's just most of them are designed in such a manner.

Attached: 1651461594481.jpg (640x477, 164.19K)

Out of all the RTS spinoff genres, I wish Nexus Wars/autobattlers with bases was what took off. I used to love Footman Frenzy and that one WC3 map where you played as kids and built like action figures and tanks which came to life and went down the lanes to attack.

king

Attached: 1645767920587.jpg (500x647, 57.39K)

Fuggg

I always liked defensively back in the day especially tiberium sun and red alert 2.
Warcraft II though I preferred offensively.

I'm a le honorable macro games chad like our guy artosis

For me, it's compstomps

Attached: 1608904278282.png (445x559, 185.73K)

I love Warcraft 3 specifically because it was designed to punish defensive play. Every terran player was seething and dilating at the realisation that they can't towersiege their way into victory anymore

>build a vast economy to support your war machine, amass huge army and march it into the enemy land for a decisive atta-
>LOL SORRY PLAYER 2 HAS BUILT ENOUGH STATUES TO ACHIEVER CULTURAL VICTORY SORRY BUCKO NEXT TIME
I never understood the appeal of 4x

Allowing players to camp with infinite resources is terrible design.
Red alert 2 and as mentioned earlier Warcraft 3 are great because they force you to skirmish for resources

You can play defensively, but playing defensively=/=turtling.

If you turtle, your opponent can literally do whatever the fuck he wants. You WILL lose if he doesn't suck ass. He can tech up to the best units asap and just roll over you after he does. He can take the entire map with additional bases and get to pop limit incredibly fast and then crush your much smaller economy.

Playing defensively just means you're not actively intending to attack but playing defensively is NOT playing passive. You need to have a goal when you are playing defensively, which is things like...
- You are trying to not die while teching up to late game units asap, in order to then attack your opponent with some timing thing
- You are trying to not die while playing super greedy so that you can then crush your enemy with an economic advantage like 10 minutes later

And you still have to keep tabs on your enemy. If they're playing even greedier in response, you go out with what little you have and punish them.

Attached: 1574905778130.png (411x428, 229.23K)

If someone can spread its resources to defend himself and at the same time build objectives he's clearly better and it gives game more variety

Reminder that turtling has never worked in a single RTS game at skill levels beyond "total shitter". The basis of turtling strategy is essentially giving up the initiative and waiting for the opponent to fuck up, the possibility of which obviously goes quickly to zero as you climb ranks.

>Reminder that turtling has never worked in a single RTS game at skill levels beyond "total shitter".
Wrong

Cossacks and Stronghold

Defensively. Havent played RTS in a long time, though. I remember my Rise of Nations runs taking like 7 hours or more. HOMM3 too.

Offensively, sending your troops in mass numbers to one place only to die all at once is fun.

Attached: Angry_Mob_1.jpg (600x420, 98.03K)

>RTS singeplayer/campaign: super comfy, I got this. Fuck, this game is loads of fun! Awooo~~
>jump on multiplayer: what. the. fuck you all, I hate this.
every single time. And what do devs do? Instead of working on their AI, so it's fun to play against the computers, they see a way out of this by giving you shit AI and just promoting MP super hard, AI basically outsourced to you pajeets who do it for free. RTS are fucking dead until the AI stinky linky singularity happens.

its interesting how most people have a tendency to turtle. i guess theres something really hard about actually going to apply pressure. its just not what we instinctively do.

i like turtling until i have a death ball and throw it against the other guy's death ball

I just find it satisfying as fuck to let towers do the work, setting up fortified walls while quietly building a massive army and managing resources behind said walls.
AoE2 is good for that, but only in skirmish mode, fuck online. Min-maxing isn't fun for me and never will be. I play leisurely.

isn't this just that good old psychology thing going on, where people don't like the lose what they already have, so much, they don't see the chances to gain, so they missbalance/-judge the whole thing into being a defensive little bitch. There's probably a name for this jewmindtrick, but I wouldn't know.

>Min-maxing isn't fun for me and never will be. I play leisurely.
For me, it's the roleplaying element. The computer stays "in character" (hopefully) and that's how you have a good match and fun game. Online everyone is just an asshole. And it all falls apart, reduced to abused game mechanics that aren't even that good to begin with.

>build base up
>progress the tech tree
>unlock everything
>build the composition of strongest top upgraded units
>fill up the unit limit
>go out from the base for the first time
The only way

Agreed, I like to play to an army's character; same with AoE2, Warband, Dawn of War, Total War games
When I played WH40k twenty years ago I loved to keep the character of my army, I swear I bought more termagants than anything
And I did the same in the games, or rather DoW Tyranid mods hehe, I'd spam cheap swarm units instead of saving resources for the massive insta-win ones

Meta
If you arent Meta, ypu lose.

No offense
No defense

Just whatever step in the list you are at, if enemy is X race, do Y defensive maneuver if they pressure but continue from step 2 to step 3 as indicated. If you aren't at Step 4 by minute Z, just stop game altogether, you have lost, accept defeat.

Process game again against new opponent #28263729 and repeat Team Liquid scenario #82625-J10 since that is new Meta

That is why i hate getting any good at fucking RTS.

There is a way to play your race and a WAY TO PLAY YOUR RACE.

Most RTS are played for singleplayer/campaign, and for the most part turtling is only natural there because usually you start with nothing against a full base and army of the enemy.
When it comes to multiplayer, I suppose the natural responce to not knowing what to do is to get the defences up and prepare for the worst.
And lastly for me personally, I don't play RTS to "win". I don't care about winning or losing, I just enjoy building bases, controlling units, playing my own rules and scenarios and finding ways to get things done with minimal losses.

Attached: 1621241433614.jpg (409x409, 22.43K)