Is the no rush countdown needed now

It seems like a good idea to formalize a no-rush agreement in the game - it takes minimal resources and encourages good communication and sportsmanship (even if, personally, I prefer to play balls-out go-for-the-throat vicious matches).

Actually if you time it right you can hit aircraft with it, especially if they are gunships or slow moving.

NO RUSH TIMER EVER

^+1

Don't have a problem with including a rush timer.

Personally I never used the thing in SupCom 2, but I understand why people would want it, even played with people who did want to use it.

It's just one more option, and not a big deal to implement. So sure, why not.

There's nothing wrong with NR games. Not my personal cup of tea, but nothing wrong with it.

Is it just me or are the people who don't like no rush very uptight. And the people who see it as one more option are a lot calmer.

I think the general issue people have with the concept is that while the no-rush timer is a bit more friendly to new/casual players, it introduces bad habits in their strategic game. Those players become accustomed to sitting back and building, so when they decide to play a standard game, they are unable to cope with the standard early-game strategic choices their opponent is making. As a result, they tend to eschew standard games in favor of no-rush games.

This wouldn't be all that big of a problem, except that it reduces the number of new players playing the standard game, effectively splitting the community. If you take a look at FAF, this seems to be a bit of an issue. Additionally, the no-rush concept favors longer, drawn out games, and if it becomes popular enough, the game earns the reputation of taking too long to play. Since not everybody has long hours to devote to gaming, game adoption can be affected.

Also, from the game-design perspective, leaning on something like a no-rush timer reduces the incentive to balance out the early game. The purpose of the early game should allow the player to get right to the meat of the game: strategizing. If a player has to build extensively to make the game interesting, then that time building is time wasted for a gamer.
Let's compare some strategy games. Vanilla TA and Starcraft (1 and 2) both took about 5 minutes to start producing combat units and utilizing them in the field. Supreme Commander does a bit better with about 1.5-2 minutes. Zero-K wins it with about 30 seconds. (My times aren't exact, but I'm pretty sure I'm within the correct range.) In any of these cases, what does the player do before those units are produced? More often than not, it's the same build order, with very little variation. (Except probably ZK.) So why not cut that out and get straight to the meat of the game? This is, in fact, what Neutrino has said they want to do several times, which is a good sign.

So going back to the no-rush concept, if the game is being made to encourage a fun early game, why cut it out? In this case, players end up robbing themselves of a good portion of the gameplay. (And there should be no excuse about how casual players may not want to be so devoted to the early game, preferring to ease themselves in. If that's the case, playing that style will naturally end up putting them in the same ranks as those that play similarly. But they will have the freedom to learn and advance, instead of getting into the no-rush rut.)

To top it off, since PA can take place on multiple planets the no-rush concept ends up getting implemented naturally.

That said, while I really think that the no-rush concept throws gameplay out the window, I do think that players should play the game the way they enjoy. So I wouldn't oppose adding some feature like that to PA, though I would hope those players would be encouraged to expand their strategic horizons.)

(Note that I'm considering a no-rush player to prefer to build to higher tech for gameplay, rather than preventing cheesy zerg-rush tactical styles, as the latter has rarely been an issue in TA style games, once properly balanced.)

In my experience from no-rush games in SupCom are all but drawn out. You eco for 20 minutes and when the no-rush timer ends you have a 5 minute battle and one player comes out ahead and wins.
You couldn't scout the enemy with no rush enabled so whatever strategy or unit combo you chose was pretty much a blind guess to what the enemy was doing.
Made a lot of bombers while the enemy had more fighters than you? You just lost all bombers. You made a nuke while the enemy made an anti-nuke and an experimental? Good luck stopping that experimental.
Made a bit of everything? Well if your enemy put everything into air he can kill your fighters and bomb everything without adequate AA coverage.

Didn't match the enemy economic growth? You just didn't eco fast enough.
Ecoing is just playing against yourself. A no rush game in SupCom typically involves playing against the economy for 20 minutes and then fighting the opponent 5 minutes. If you start on separated planets in PA I expect you to at least be able to scout your opponent fairly well while it would pretty much play as a no rush game in Sup Com.
No rush can probably work in FFA as you are not likely to be able to dedicate all of your resources to attack 1 player because if you do another player can easily take you out in turn.
Otherwise good points sylvesterink.

I honestly haven't touched no-rush outside of casually trying it against AI, but all of that sounds horrible! People enjoy this? How is it strategy?

Perhaps it would be better if this were only a mod. :|

I think it comes down to how complex the economy was in SupCom and that people wanted to play with big armies and experimentals. If you play a regular game you have to adapt to the enemy and can't just do whatever you want and expect to reach experimentals tech. You might win before that or your opponent might as well win before you reach that stage of the game.
Since economy was so complex it took a lot of learning to maximize and micromanage. In no rush the player doesn't have to focus on what the enemy is performing and can just put his or her attention on maximizing the economy.
Once the no rush timer reaches zero the player finally reaches the climax of the game as he can unleash his forces and start fighting. All of his time spent managing economy leads to this usually short climax where the player attacks the enemy, defeat the enemy bombers or launch that nuke that goes right through and destroys the enemy base. There isn't really much micromanagement of troops as the players can usually just engage the main bulk of the enemy forces without worrying too much about keeping expansions safe.
Once the player losses or wins he or she can isolate the outcome of the battle to a few factors:
Did I eco fast enough?
Did I make the right counter to the enemy attack?

Even if the player is unable to be prepared to counter all possible strategies and losses he might conclude that he or she didn't eco fast enough.

I'd argue that is similar in Starcraft although on a much faster timescale.
You wall of your entrance, makes some more harvesters and then perform your timing attack.
Although in Starcraft you can still scout the enemy so you get a metagame surrounding canned strategies.

It has nothing to do with strategy. It's just a way of basking in the eye orgy of huge battles.

NR games are not meant to be serious.

Ai teams with multiple human teams on lan with the 16 player mod is nice!


P.S. no rush on.

Isn't the counter to rushing just scouting your enemy? If you can prepare and defend against the rush you will be far ahead because of your superior economy.

Locking players into an area for 20 minutes of macro, just seems weird to me. Wouldn't the winner be decided based on pure luck? You can macro like a god and still lose because you built the wrong units.

I don't really have a problem with this as a feature, if I can turn it off in my games. But to me it just seems like a bad solution, as reacting to your enemies should be a very important part of any strategy. I want to win because I did something right, or because my enemies played worse than me, I do not want to win because of a coin flip.

POTATO
No need to argue, just make it a little option that almost no one can see, so you don't have a split community, and if you can see it you can no-rush all you want.

I think I made my point.

The point is the no rush allows you to go up against super sorian ai cheaters. Without it the ai will roast most people if not all.

Clearly that's a weakness in the AI. It needs to be able to handle a no-rush option so it can kill players just as easily either way. :lol:

sorian ai still kill people striaght after the 20 mintues.

Just learn to play better then.

not me you