Methods of Real-Time Strategy Games

[Axolotl]

This document describes the basic gameplay of Real-Time Strategy games for the benefit of aspiring game designers. It provides a framework in which to understand the decisions that players make.

===========================================================

In a typical Real-Time Strategy game, a player raises, manages, and commands an army to combat his opponent. The game is a contest to have the stronger army and to capitalize on this by attacking and destroying the weaker player. Throughout the game, each player tries to "get ahead" - accumulate small advantages to improve the strength of his own army relative to his opponent's. The Methods of getting ahead available to each player form the strategic core of the game.

A player chooses the Methods that he judges more likely to get ahead based on his perception of the game-state. A player's strategic skill is some combination of the accuracy of his judgment and his correctness of perception.

Most Real-Time Strategy games include the following general Methods: building a larger army; building a more developed army; making favorable trades; acquiring and denying information; and managing an army. Many specific Methods don't fall neatly into one of these categories, but can usually at least be described in these terms. Most Real-Time Strategy games will have these Methods available, and most game mechanics can be understood through the lens of how they affect these Methods. "Balance" is always a fuzzy concept, but a powerful definition can be structured around Methods: if a particular Method is almost always correct (or never correct), then that Method is imbalanced.

Example: "My opponents always expand early, and nothing I do is able to punish them for it. If I don't expand early myself, I just lose."

===========================================================

Here's a detailed rundown of these Methods:

To build a larger army simply means to spend more resources on it. This is achieved either by diverting resources from other projects or acquiring more resources. The former is refered to as a "timing play" - if the player does not use the temporary advantage quickly enough to obtain a permanent dividend, then the advantage is lost. The latter is refered to as the "macro game". If the player does not profit from his focus on resources long enough to repay the initial sacrifice, then the advantage is never realized.

Starcraft example: "I saw my opponent make an early expansion, so I did a double Gateway rush to kill him before he out-macroed me."

To build a more developed army means to access new units and abilities for a more versatile army. (I prefer to exclude simple improvements, such as unit-stat upgrades, from this category. Those play more like the macro game.) This versatility grants new options that force an opponent either to change his play or suffer a large disadvantage. This often wins free kills if the opponent is unprepared.

General example: "I teched to quick air units, forcing my opponent to switch to an anti-air capable unit. I got in for some free kills before he could chase me away. Also, the threat of my air units harassing his base kept him contained and defending instead of attacking me."
Starcraft example: "I got Siege Mode Tech and put Siege Tanks on my cliff. They easily prevented attacks on my natural, so I could expand safely. Since he couldn't attack, my opponent also expanded, but mine finished first."

To trade means to destroy assets of your opponent while he destroys some of yours. This can be direct combat or each army attacking something defenseless. Determining if a trade is favorable or not is entirely situational. One-for-one resource attrition can be favorable if a player has a superior macro game, or if the asset destroyed has situational value beyond its resource cost.

Starcraft example: "I sacrificed 9 Zealots to kill his first 3 Siege Tanks. This delayed his attack timing enough for my extra expansion to take over the game."

To acquire information means to definitively see what the opponent is doing, rather than guess. To deny information is to prevent the opponent from doing the same. Since a player's judgment is predicated on his understanding of the game-state, it is very valuable to have confidence in this understanding. Consequently, it is very common for a player to send a scouting unit to his opponent's base with no serious intention of doing damage or even bringing it back alive. The goal is to determine what the opponent is going to do. If the information narrows down the opponent's possible plans to an actionable number, then the player can prepare against those plans preemptively.

Starcraft example: "I saw my opponent make an early expansion, so I did a double Gateway rush to kill him before he out-macroed me."

Army management means to issue detailed commands to combat units in order to maximize their effectiveness. This category is broad. "Micro" refers to small adjustments during combat, such as manually selecting targets (focus-fire), rotating injured or high-value units out of the line of fire, alternating Attack and Move commands to effectively shoot while moving (kiting), casting combat spells, and others. "Maintenance" refers to small adjustments that need to be made just prior to combat, such as keeping combat units together and keeping a proper formation. "Tactics" refers to large movements, such as flanking, moving to favorable terrain, maneuvers across the map (including harassment), and of course, attacking and retreating.

Example: "My army was definitely stronger, but my opponent had a solid concave around a choke-point. I backed off and attacked an expansion to force him to come out."

===========================================================

Engineer the available Methods to sculpt the strategy of your game. Find what is fun and interesting and highlight it. Find what is boring and brainless and eliminate it.

[Forboding Angel]

I don't understand the point of this post...

[zwzsg]

I hate you with all my heart for picking exemples only from Starcraft.

[Das Bruce]

Yeah more variety would be nice. At the moment it's like you've written a treatise on the entirety of art after only looking at the mona lisa.

[Sucky_Lord]

I dont understand why a starcraft newb guide has been posted on the spring forums :S

[JohannesH]

I don't understand why it matters so much which game the examples are from

[PicassoCT]

Its the current Copyright Infringment fashion, no longer do we need excact clones of Halo or CC, no we need to make a StarkShaft clone. Why cant you understand, that the one having the most hyPeRspeed and biggest fanboinumbers is automatically the most awesome? Instead you sit there an ComPlane about a superior game. Spring im dissapoint.

[Karl]

...

*Sign*

Yeah not all games that are popular that could concurrenze some random ach sooo important super stars is Not automaticaly "Awesome" there gives other underrated games that is good and not just only that is awesome and got many hype...
when a game got much lesser fanboi the game sucks now or what?
are we on Hollywood or what?

oh and by the way

Mod that for you self if you want it so badly
with Lua you can nearly do everything on Spring!

even a bacteria simulation!

[Gota]

even a bacteria simulation!

That would be interesting..

[bobthedinosaur]

who cloned halo?

[Karl]

For spring none

but NEVER try to make a Halo clone
else you will get sued all up in your ass

there where some team making a Halo mod for Generals i think
and got sued badly or well atleast they got an email or so saying that they should take it down or else i dont know

[PicassoCT]

my mod will infringe hl┬│ so, according to the Scrolls of ugly TrAditions of Spring, i shall make thy proud

[Axolotl]

The strategy in strategy games comes from the choices available to the players. I described the most common types of choices to help understand why strategy games play out the way they do. With that, it is easier to design your game from the ground up, rather than make a fork-but-with-gimmick-X-and-tech-tree-Y.

I think my examples were broad enough to be widely understandable. All but two can be directly translated to BA, at least. Anyway, if you aren't at least passingly familiar with the premiere RTS games ever made, you have no business making your own.

For game design in general, I recommend reading Mark Rosewater's design column. He designs a strategy game wholly different from TA and Starcraft. Much of it is not applicable to RTS games. Look for articles on design in general.
http://wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Archi ... 0Rosewater

[MidKnight]

Everyone's criticisms do apply, but, that said, thanks for the post! It's nice to get stuff like this every once in a while!