With so many new real-time strategy games launching, like Tempest Rising, I find myself reminiscing about the classic base-building elements of games like Red Alert. While most RTS games stick to the traditional resource management and base-building framework, there are a few that adopt a different approach, like what I’ve dubbed the ‘Myth’ formula, which focuses more on direct army control with little emphasis on building bases. I’m curious about everyone’s take on this—especially from the hardcore RTS fans. Do you believe that base building is a crucial aspect of the genre? Or would you rather see more adventure-style gameplay without extensive base management?
5 Answers
I’m all for the model used in Total War. The world map lets you fine-tune your armies while the battles focus entirely on command strategy. It strikes a great balance for me!
The Wargame series has my heart for this reason. The lack of base building makes the pacing slower, which is great because you don’t need lightning-fast APM to succeed. It’s more about planning and executing your strategy.
I definitely lean towards base building! There’s just something satisfying about starting from scratch and expanding your base, plus rallying a massive army to crush the enemy feels amazing. That said, I can enjoy RTS titles without it too, but I really think having a mix gives players the best of both worlds.
Honestly, I prefer RTS games that skip base building altogether. Titles like Warno and the upcoming Broken Arrow are what I’m really excited about. Less focus on building means more strategy and tactical decisions.
I appreciate campaigns like in World In Conflict that really emphasize strategy without the base-building micromanagement. It makes the gameplay feel more direct and focused on tactics rather than just resource grind.
