What Is RTS?
RTS is an acronym for Real Time Strategy, which is sub-genre for video games where players compete simultaneously rather than turn-based. This sub-genre is classified as having a few main principals;
- Base building or structures
- Maneuvering units
- Securing and holding map positions
- Destroying opponents’ units and structures
- Resource management
- Technological Progression
Some popular and well known RTS series are Age of Empires, Warcraft, Starcraft, and Command and Conquer.
Game Concepts - to Write
- Squad based units or individual.
- Produce many units or few. - Grand wars or strategic battles
- Hero and Champion units
- Unit variance and straight upgrades. Archer vs Crossbowman problem
Info Dumps
Resource Management
Inspo - Age of Mythology breakdown video essays
Being one of the core pillars of the RTS genre, resource management is quite pivotal to how well you do in a match. This often appears as workers of some kind harvesting a resource deposit. Some games have caravans that travel between markets and accumulate gold. Those same markets may offer trading to the player, exchanging goods for other goods.
Natural Method Age of Empires goes the route of establishing a village where workers navigate around the map to harvest naturally generated resources. Such as cutting down trees, harvesting berries from bushes, mining from stone deposits, or constructing farms to plow fields. Resources must either be placed strategically by map devs or have variables in random map generation. This can result in players having access to some resources at the start and force to expand to other areas where a resource is abundant or needed. A player may start with only food and sparce trees, forcing quick exploration outward to find quarries for stone and gold. I want to point out a noticeable difference between this and Field Method. Natural is how resources realistically work. You have a forest of trees, as you harvest them it depletes permanently. The Field Method has set fields that deplete from player harvesting and then regenerates at a set slow pace.
Set Method In other games, like Starcraft and Red Alert, the player must locate set resource deposits throughout the map. There is no locating multiple resources. You build your harvesting structure next to the resource and your workers quickly go back and forth. This method is usually part of eSports viable games, as the player sets their harvesting and can largely leave it alone when it hits max efficiency. Allowing more agency to focus on combat and expansion.
Field Method The mainline series of games for Command and Conquer, Tiberium series, takes the approach of Tiberium. A resources heavily involved with the lore that grows in large fields at set locations throughout the map. This allows map designers to strategically place resources but also adds more depth than a single deposit. Rather than harvesting one set deposit at a location, fighting your opponent over it, the fields grow outwards large enough for multiple players to harvest from it. Additionally, Tiberium has a mechanic where it is toxic to human life. This forces the players to navigate around the fields unless they’re harvesting it.
Supply Method This method is primarily an addition on top of the other systems, supplementing the Natural Method. Used in games like Age of Empires and Age of Mythology, caravans can be used to navigate endless loops between markets to produce small amounts of gold. Establishing and defending trade routes becomes quite important as it’s a universal exchange currency at the market. Market distance, having them as far away from one another as possible, determines gold yield. Forcing players to explore then hold that map position as the map design allows. Attacking the opponents caravan line is quite important and becomes a primary strategy to combat. Maybe you send a small force to the market line to draw attention away while your primary force attacks your true target. Simultaenously disrupting their economy and progressing through the map.
- Natural Method: Depth vs. chaos (AoE).
- Set Method: Efficiency for eSports (StarCraft).
- Field Method: Scalability with depth (Tiberium).
- Supply Method: Strategic trade routes (AoM).
Resource Tiers As you progress through the game and research better technology you should also unlock new resources adjacent to that new tech, which are also present within the core-gameplay loop. In Age of Empires, the Natural Method, you progress through the ages. Going through stone, copper, bronze, iron, etc. When you start, the focus may only be on stone, wood, and food. Then shifting to harvesting copper, then bronze, and so on. Going from the abstract of research progression to becoming tangible. You put in harvested resources to provide your units and structures with benefits, in an effort to outpace your opponent. For more sci-fi like games, Starcraft, and Tiberium Series, you harvest a base mineral like crystals. As you progress you may start to harvest gases or more rare minerals. Both the Set and Field Methods benefit from providing additional tiers of resources as variants on the base or a much rarer option throughout the map. Whereas the Natural Method benefits from having many resources throughout the map to progress with - The other methods thrive on less is more with more intent put into the advanced resources.
Unique Resources These resources are different from standard ones that would match the world design. A fantasy setting has a resource like wood or mithril is standard. In sci-fi, alloys or gases are standard. Unique resources refer to more abstract systems, ones that do not progress the primary core loop but instead progress another system or give access to another system. For Age of Mythology, you gain favour which allows you access to god powers and mythological units. Diplomacy Is Not An Option provides Mana which exclusively is used on spells. Ultimately, these systems can be ignored and are not required. This could additionally be a faction specific resource.
Resource Concepts
- A ritual site that generates a resource at an incremental pace based on worshippers assigned. supplymethod
- Farm production increases based on fertility of the soil naturalmethod
Analysis
Graves and Death Management
In the game, Diplomacy Is Not An Option, there is a mechanic where if a unit of yours dies and the body is left not buried it has a chance of coming back as a zombie. To manage this you must build a Gravediggers Hut and a Cemetery, to dispose of the body. To prevent the dying, you can build First Aid Huts or produce Healer units. If a zombie is created, it will act as an enemy unit and attack the nearest allied structures. Each of the units and structures mentioned has a set radius. Now that the base mechanic description is out of the way here are my thoughts. First of my intuition says this is a terrible mechanic. You must invest valuable resources into a system that passively occurs at a very rare rate alongside progressing other systems. This feels like wasting time and focus on making sure my people don’t get sick or a zombie isn’t created. Despite having invested in these systems a tiny amount, zombies were still a slight problem. Though my military management kept units throughout my region, anytime a zombie formed it was dealt with. This completely negates the established system and lets me invest those resources into military. Usually, in city builder games they have a feature of respecting the dead by providing proper burial. “Diplomacy Is Not An Option” is many things but takes most after “They Are Billions”. To me, this sub-genre is a survivor-horde take on Age of Empires. You start by building out your village, expanding, and exploring to find resources, build walls for protection and cutting off the map for control. You build units and align with build orders. Then as you progress you prepare for waves of enemies that attack you. Though it’s less like a tower defense as those give enemies clear lines to their goal post, whereas here you obstruct the goal post. Anyway, Death Management feels like an extra tacked on system that does not benefit the core gameplay loop and ultimately steals away resources. I do not recommend this mechanic in my “perfect RTS”.
Archer Vs Crossbow Problem
The Archer vs Crossbow Problem refers to an issue that occurs naturally as mechanics are built out to support technological progression. Age of Empires is a prime example of this issue. Once you unlock crossbows you can forget about archers all together. In its essence, why keep archers around if you have crossbows? Crossbows hit harder, sometimes with pierce effects or increased projectile speed.
Should progression make prior units obsolete? Should they upgrade to support that new tech, replacing the unit entirely? Should both be supported viable options?
- Obsolete units can lead the player to want to kill off their preexisting units to produce new units. Having a dead unit production and upgrade options might push the player to want to speedrun their desired progression system and nothing else. If I only progress the crossbow systems and no other military unit, now my resources don’t feel wasted on something like a spearman. Unsuspecting players who invested in early tech trees may be caught off guard by more technologically advanced units from the opponent. They may feel bad about progressing the archer systems upon finding out they like crossbows more. The frustration of realizing you’ve wasted resources on a unit that’s now outclassed is a real player pain point, yet most games ignore it.
- An archer upgrading into using crossbows and then the player can only produce crossbows must also be supported by a universally applying progression. Such that my archer upgrades should be effective for archers during their time but also be applicable to crossbows. This type of system can have tiers for different unit types with their built-in counters, weaknesses, and strengthen each one. Replacing their prior lesser versions.
- This can only be done if archers are given their own progression alongside unlocking and starting to use crossbows. Perhaps archers have shorter fire range but shoot faster, while crossbows have to reload but hit harder and with higher crit chance. If both options are balanced out now you’re presented with a new problem. There are 2 ranged units options which don’t offer much gameplay variety between them. AoEO (Age of Empires Online) suffers from this problem as well. Because you can build and gear individual unit types, you can push a crossbowman to heavily out damage an archer. Eventually, the player can just produce crossbows and nothing else.
- A 4th option exists, not having archers turn into crossbows but instead committing to only have one of them as a basic ranged unit. Include units that work well together and play off each other in combat. Provide upgrade options and progression for this unit type which are relevant throughout the match. This results in building armies that consist of multiple unit types to counter the opponent, and stay relevant. Feature creep can still be a problem here. Reducing the available options down to just unit types cuts easy content, and it may feel like you should add more to make up for it. Don’t add too many types.
This reveals a tension in game design: technological progression should reward players for exploring depth, not force them to abandon past investments. Solutions must balance obsolescence, player agency, and combat variety.
The Archer vs Crossbow Problem can also manifest in games like Command and Conquer. Early game you have a barracks that produces infantry, mid game you have a war factory to produce tanks. Those tanks have a built-in mechanics to be able to drive over infantry, instantly killing them. Infantry are naturally bad at destroying tanks, unless they’re an RPG trooper. Thus is the problem, why build infantry when you can rush a war factory? It not only obsoletes a unit but an entire unit class, building, and tech tree. To further the problem, players are also able to build air units at an airfield. Planes and helicopters are much faster, can traverse any terrain, and can only be attacked by units capable of shooting up at them. So then why build a war factory for slow moving tanks when you can rush an airfield?
Resource Saturation and Fertility
The Fertile Crescent has a mechanic where farm plots can become more or less fertile depending on positioning to water tiles. The more it overlaps with water tiles, the more fertile it becomes until a full saturation point. You also have to either pick between using the fertile land as farm land for food over time or consuming the land tile for bricks.
1 Villager harvests a resource and then has travel time to deposit then return and start up again. 2 Villagers reduces time between harvesting within that cycle, the more villagers results in less downtime and more continuous stable income.
Reviews
This section is to review and give thoughts about each game in particular as it relates to my opinions and feelings around the RTS genre.
Godsworn
Buildings focus more on military production with little options for defense. This tends to push the player to use their military as their offense and defense in a balanced manner. Houses, and resource harvesting structures feel like they are built as a foundation to support the army and to be left alone. Resource nodes are throughout the map at set locations, Set Method. Player constructs the appropriate harvester then for the most part leave it. There is wood, food, wealth, faith Natural: Wood Set: Food, Wealth Unique: Faith
Due to how the resources are distributed and structures play, the focus is clear on managing the military.