why do people rush all games?

win or lose, i hate a rushed game. i like planetary annihilation because its a bunch of giant robots at war and you get to command loads of awesome wars around the galaxy and see the epicness of explosions and slow pushes. what i really HATE is when i play against or with someone who thinks that ending the game ASAP is the primary objective. its not so stop. when i play with my friends we let it last at least an hour and we plan it all out and have a really awesome session of giant armies at war across a planet. its so cool to watch! rushing a ranked match i can understand but normal games... why?

if youre going to play planetary annihilation you may as well enjoy the game or not even own it. and if you rush every single game, youre an idiot. you dont enjoy things if you try and get them out of the way as soon as you can.

then host your own games and write in the lobby name, that you want no rush or something. But the "regular" way to play any kind of game is to win. And most of the time you win, if you play agressively.

"It isn't if you win or lose, it's how you play the game"

Well I think if you play against someone of equal skill, games can last a long time irrespective of 'rushing'. For example I played a 1 v 1 against @lapsedpacifist recently on a medium sized custom ice map (clopse bridges I think) and it went on for nearly an hour as we were able to counter everything the other player did

That included lots of early aggression and raiding. The issue your describing results from playing unbalanced games, which is what the matchmaking system in the 1 v 1 ladder tries to adjust. I think PA would benefit from a team balancing system similar to what's available in TA:Spring. That way you could host a lobby and the system would arrange the teams to get as balanced a game as possible so you don't get stomped in 10 minutes flat

but ....like......


you're capable of comprehending that you have a different perception of what fun or "the goal" is, so why are you categorical about something that's just your opinion?

you're not going to convince anyone that way.

on a contrary note I have an idea of what you actually mean or rather I have beliefs that line up quite nicely with yours.

I like battles that last longer (albeit where you ARE trying to end it ASAP 100% of the time) ...but longer that you can savor better.

so here are a number of threads in that regard and that you are free to consult and bump at your own discretion mods : with this I'm as unrelated to said acts and as innocent as can possibly be, no?
https://forums.uberent.com/threads/poll-paper-units.53458/
https://forums.uberent.com/threads/scale-megathread.48650
https://forums.uberent.com/threads/...lips-and-the-general-approach-to-intel.49424/
https://forums.uberent.com/threads/iterate-on-the-gate-teleporter.62599/
https://forums.uberent.com/threads/two-sun-solar-system.53246

refrain from using such insults ... feel free to play in what ever way you think is best for yourself but respect that other players play differently and with a different motivation than you ...
also consider that you often play people with different worktimes that rather like to enjoy more small matches than a single large one ..

Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.

I enjoy the games most where I rush hard, my opponent rushes hard as well and our rushes kinda counter each other and the game goes on until we throw nukes at each other.
You just need a very balanced setup for that: If one player is playing better the player will quickly win.

I love funny rushes, i.e. not pack of tanks/dox, but something more creative.

I.e. I wouldn't be mad if someone rushed combat fabbers and surrounded my base with walls and mines.

I never get games like this I'm finding it hard to find good match ups. You really need to find the people who are on your level and give you good games.

And in all seriousness @gunhammer, you need to organise the games you want yourself, because you're going against the grain. Most people are striving to win and will play to that effect. What you want is a mutual ceasefire until a certain amount of time has passed. This is common when playing with friends but you need to organise it for online games - you can't just join a game and expect people to play the way you want them to.

I don't understand OP's intention for this post. OP already has a judgement laid down for people who play differently than he does and refuses to accept people different from himself. What's the point of this topic other than being a hate message?

@OP While I do agree watching massive invasions or nukes or halleys are pretty epic, you can't deny the fact that this is a strategy game where people strive to win and annihilation of the enemy commander, regardless of the tactic, is the primary objective.

with the new update i hope to see people using vanguard or infernodrops again aswell as a juggernaught composition including infernos and combatfabbers ...

I'd say that PA is a rushy game, but as mentioned above, it's not necessarily over because of a rush.

Take StarCraft 2 for example, it's a game where you can either play greedy or rushy. PA isn't like that, you can start building factories straight away and pump out units from the get-go, and if you don't you will probably have fewer units than your opponent and lose.

I don't think you can really talk about rushing in PA, because that is just how to play the game. I occasionally get people who complain about me 'rushing' them, but I just call it building units, as opposed to not building units and dying because I don't have anything with which to defend.

The cool thing about PA vs StarCraft, is that it isn't over at the end of the rush, unless there is a massive skill gap. In StarCraft 2, generally if your rush fails, you may as well gg, and if it succeeds your opponent may as well gg. In PA, so long as you defend the rush reasonably well, you have a chance of counter-attacking, or gaining some ground in the terrain battle. There can be a lot of back and forth between opponents who play well, but I think to get to that level you need to play a lot of short games first, in which it will be over because neither of you are good at defending or attacking.

Starting on a different planet is a good way to not get rushed

You'd be surprised just how fast you can rush somebody on another planet. If you know what you're doing (and there's enough eco available on hand) you can be knocking on their door remarkably quickly.

That said, while I generally play FFAs to see how many people I can kill (rather than be the last person left standing), I think it's important to recognise the fact that PA, more than many strategy games, is open to some rather sandboxy-style play, and I think it's pretty cool that people get to enjoy it in different sorts of ways by adding in a few extra rules that makes it the game they want. For me, playing competitively is usually more interesting, and more revealing (both about the game and about the people I'm playing with) but I know how much fun messing about really is - it can be creative, and enjoyable.

Somtimes, I don't rush people and go straight for the Annihilaser. Sometimes.

I know, but it's better than playing for less than a minute and dox already shooting at your fabbers

Look man, its part of the game. If someone has the ability to crush you early on, especially in the early game when there are more people, they are probably going to do it. It keeps you out of their hair so they don't have to worry about you when it comes to the bigger battles, and if its only you, then by getting you as fast as they can to get to other games faster. Most players want to do good and win.

As colin and cdrkf commented, rushing at the beginning doesn't preclude the game going on for an hour. As they said, with balanced teams the rushing can be countered and both teams will just lose and rebuild bits of eco until one teams finally gets the advantage needed to break the deadlock.

One of the main reasons for the style of play is PA's design. It is very very difficult to turtle in PA because of the ability to go round the planets, unlike supcom or other flat map RTSs where you could block of a corner base with relative ease. PA also forces you to expand becuase metal is the limiting resource, if you turtle the enemy will just build 10x the eco you do and you have no chance (see CULTs first few clan wars games if you need examples). The only way to win if the game is at all competitive (ranked games are not the only ones people want to win) is to build up your own eco while making constant attacks to limit your opponents expansion. I will agree that getting boombot sniped 2 minutes into the game sucks though.

If you want a specific type of game you need to play with friends, or explicitly list the game as such and make sure people know how you want to play, but even then you're relying on people's willingness to follow arbitrary (and unenforced) rules of play. Maybe you should grab the system sharing mod and pick up some of the custom built maps such as fields of Isis, clopses bridge, etc. These maps allow you to turtle more easily and have proper sieges rather than open randomly generated maps with attacks coming from any direction.

tl;dr; - if you're going to play multiplayer you have to learn to play the way everyone else does. You can't ask everyone else to change.

Tbh, the meta right now is rush rush rush rush, so don't expect much more unless you specify in the beginning of the match.

Until they fix that part of the balance, it will remain so.

Assuming there is anything to 'fix'? I quite like the fast pace of the early game.... That said there's nothing against having a gentleman's agreement in the lobby for some build time or whatnot. If I joined a game like that I'd stick to the agreement- it would be quite interesting to plan a large scale invasion and build up for it

If in future we get scripting abilities for mods, then we can probably make a 'build time' mod (they did something like this in Spring, where a forcefield divided the map in 2 preventing units attacking until the end of the timer).