<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Sunday Papers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/03/01/the-sunday-papers-58/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/03/01/the-sunday-papers-58/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 02:28:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: A-Scale</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/03/01/the-sunday-papers-58/comment-page-2/#comment-153519</link>
		<dc:creator>A-Scale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 19:09:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=8536#comment-153519</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote cite=&quot;&quot;&gt;One time I had the bright idea of turtling the enemy’s base in Starcraft. We typically didn’t expand very fast, so rather than building bunkers around my own base, I built them around the enemy. He was very surprised when he sent his first SCVs out to look for new mineral patches.

Like this example, turtling can be an aggressive strategy. It’s essentially a way of gaining battlespace access - you grab land and then hold onto it, rather than rushing an amorphous enemy. The Terrans in Starcraft are an inherently turtle race, with tanks that become more powerful when they’re static, and bunkers that protect otherwise weak troops, but you still have to be dynamic to win. The walking barrage, with two lines of siege tanks moving forwards one after the other, was one of my favourite tactics against the AI.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

That&#039;s called towering, and it is a well established and hated practice in games such as Warcraft 3.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote cite=""><p>One time I had the bright idea of turtling the enemy’s base in Starcraft. We typically didn’t expand very fast, so rather than building bunkers around my own base, I built them around the enemy. He was very surprised when he sent his first SCVs out to look for new mineral patches.</p>
<p>Like this example, turtling can be an aggressive strategy. It’s essentially a way of gaining battlespace access &#8211; you grab land and then hold onto it, rather than rushing an amorphous enemy. The Terrans in Starcraft are an inherently turtle race, with tanks that become more powerful when they’re static, and bunkers that protect otherwise weak troops, but you still have to be dynamic to win. The walking barrage, with two lines of siege tanks moving forwards one after the other, was one of my favourite tactics against the AI.</p></blockquote>
<p>That&#8217;s called towering, and it is a well established and hated practice in games such as Warcraft 3.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gap Gen</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/03/01/the-sunday-papers-58/comment-page-2/#comment-152875</link>
		<dc:creator>Gap Gen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 12:50:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=8536#comment-152875</guid>
		<description>One time I had the bright idea of turtling the enemy&#039;s base in Starcraft. We typically didn&#039;t expand very fast, so rather than building bunkers around my own base, I built them around the enemy. He was very surprised when he sent his first SCVs out to look for new mineral patches.

Like this example, turtling can be an aggressive strategy. It&#039;s essentially a way of gaining battlespace access - you grab land and then hold onto it, rather than rushing an amorphous enemy. The Terrans in Starcraft are an inherently turtle race, with tanks that become more powerful when they&#039;re static, and bunkers that protect otherwise weak troops, but you still have to be dynamic to win. The walking barrage, with two lines of siege tanks moving forwards one after the other, was one of my favourite tactics against the AI.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One time I had the bright idea of turtling the enemy&#8217;s base in Starcraft. We typically didn&#8217;t expand very fast, so rather than building bunkers around my own base, I built them around the enemy. He was very surprised when he sent his first SCVs out to look for new mineral patches.</p>
<p>Like this example, turtling can be an aggressive strategy. It&#8217;s essentially a way of gaining battlespace access &#8211; you grab land and then hold onto it, rather than rushing an amorphous enemy. The Terrans in Starcraft are an inherently turtle race, with tanks that become more powerful when they&#8217;re static, and bunkers that protect otherwise weak troops, but you still have to be dynamic to win. The walking barrage, with two lines of siege tanks moving forwards one after the other, was one of my favourite tactics against the AI.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tei</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/03/01/the-sunday-papers-58/comment-page-2/#comment-152851</link>
		<dc:creator>Tei</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 11:59:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=8536#comment-152851</guid>
		<description>@marilena: you think in multiplayer terms. And about games that have not victory conditions for turtles. Say... building a superweapon, or enough points. Also, simply building a base could be fun for some people.   Don&#039;t say &quot;is not fun&quot;, because seems fun for some people.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@marilena: you think in multiplayer terms. And about games that have not victory conditions for turtles. Say&#8230; building a superweapon, or enough points. Also, simply building a base could be fun for some people.   Don&#8217;t say &#8220;is not fun&#8221;, because seems fun for some people.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: phil</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/03/01/the-sunday-papers-58/comment-page-2/#comment-152843</link>
		<dc:creator>phil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 11:41:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=8536#comment-152843</guid>
		<description>On the Indelicates - The last time I saw them they refused my request to play Valdimir on the grounds no one could remember it, I&#039;ll still buy a T-shirt but it will be a bitter, bitter purchase.

On Street Fighter - I agree with Gwyn; You can pick up and button mash successfully in five seconds flat, specials make sense in a few minutes and you can get the basics of cancels, parries, ultras and the rest within twenty minutes, then it becomes a question of easy to pick up, hard to master. Considering most game tutorials last at least ten to fifteen minutes, I don&#039;t think it&#039;s fair to claim it&#039;s crawlled up its own arse, it&#039;s more honed it&#039;s arse over two decades to a razor sharp weapon of balanced perfection.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On the Indelicates &#8211; The last time I saw them they refused my request to play Valdimir on the grounds no one could remember it, I&#8217;ll still buy a T-shirt but it will be a bitter, bitter purchase.</p>
<p>On Street Fighter &#8211; I agree with Gwyn; You can pick up and button mash successfully in five seconds flat, specials make sense in a few minutes and you can get the basics of cancels, parries, ultras and the rest within twenty minutes, then it becomes a question of easy to pick up, hard to master. Considering most game tutorials last at least ten to fifteen minutes, I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s fair to claim it&#8217;s crawlled up its own arse, it&#8217;s more honed it&#8217;s arse over two decades to a razor sharp weapon of balanced perfection.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: marilena</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/03/01/the-sunday-papers-58/comment-page-1/#comment-152817</link>
		<dc:creator>marilena</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=8536#comment-152817</guid>
		<description>I always imagined that successful turtling is cause by a design oversight of some sort, or by a weak opponent. It doesn&#039;t make any sense for turtling to be the advisable path - both players could potentially take it and then it would lead to a boring stalemate.

The player who moves forward and grabs the map always wins in an RTS as far as I know, and why would it be any different?

Also, &quot;I love to turtle&quot; has always meant &quot;I can&#039;t play an RTS properly&quot; to me. You kind of like building stuff, but don&#039;t have the speed or tactical prowess to play at a normal level, so you just play a more simple and static game. 

Though I guess most people mix things up a bit - no need to be an extreme rush-er, turtler, boomer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I always imagined that successful turtling is cause by a design oversight of some sort, or by a weak opponent. It doesn&#8217;t make any sense for turtling to be the advisable path &#8211; both players could potentially take it and then it would lead to a boring stalemate.</p>
<p>The player who moves forward and grabs the map always wins in an RTS as far as I know, and why would it be any different?</p>
<p>Also, &#8220;I love to turtle&#8221; has always meant &#8220;I can&#8217;t play an RTS properly&#8221; to me. You kind of like building stuff, but don&#8217;t have the speed or tactical prowess to play at a normal level, so you just play a more simple and static game. </p>
<p>Though I guess most people mix things up a bit &#8211; no need to be an extreme rush-er, turtler, boomer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gap Gen</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/03/01/the-sunday-papers-58/comment-page-1/#comment-152809</link>
		<dc:creator>Gap Gen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:49:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=8536#comment-152809</guid>
		<description>One thing about TA is that its economy is very different from SupCom&#039;s. In TA, you were forced to expand to capture resources, whereas in SupCom a successful late-game base can be a dense cluster under shields. This is partly compounded by bonuses for building a power plant next to a factory. Personally, I preferred TA&#039;s sprawl as it was unlike other things in the genre at the time, which centred on clustered bases. The turtle was still catered for, but in that case you&#039;d build small defensive clusters around each part of the base, rather than just a tiny, bristling single base.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One thing about TA is that its economy is very different from SupCom&#8217;s. In TA, you were forced to expand to capture resources, whereas in SupCom a successful late-game base can be a dense cluster under shields. This is partly compounded by bonuses for building a power plant next to a factory. Personally, I preferred TA&#8217;s sprawl as it was unlike other things in the genre at the time, which centred on clustered bases. The turtle was still catered for, but in that case you&#8217;d build small defensive clusters around each part of the base, rather than just a tiny, bristling single base.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Catastrophe</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/03/01/the-sunday-papers-58/comment-page-1/#comment-152807</link>
		<dc:creator>Catastrophe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:35:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=8536#comment-152807</guid>
		<description>If you played TA online you would find out Turtling gets you killed promptly. It works well against the AI but with a player that spreads out, gathering all resources and piling you with a continuous attack of Kbots and Vehicles, your &quot;impenatrable defenses&quot; are crushed under the might.

Turtling on TA was only really effective on a map like Metal Heck where all the floor was Metal - one of the resources. 

Then you could compete with the Rushers army - but still need an army of your own to compete, as if you have enough of an army, you can literally walk straight through their defenses, losing some units, but many making it through, weakening the turtler.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you played TA online you would find out Turtling gets you killed promptly. It works well against the AI but with a player that spreads out, gathering all resources and piling you with a continuous attack of Kbots and Vehicles, your &#8220;impenatrable defenses&#8221; are crushed under the might.</p>
<p>Turtling on TA was only really effective on a map like Metal Heck where all the floor was Metal &#8211; one of the resources. </p>
<p>Then you could compete with the Rushers army &#8211; but still need an army of your own to compete, as if you have enough of an army, you can literally walk straight through their defenses, losing some units, but many making it through, weakening the turtler.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jalf</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/03/01/the-sunday-papers-58/comment-page-1/#comment-152747</link>
		<dc:creator>jalf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 05:13:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=8536#comment-152747</guid>
		<description>Imperial Guard was awesome in DoW. And not just because of the tanks. Lines of little wimpy dudes with hardly any armor, trying to stand up to enemies 3 times their size was just sweet! And the commisar makes up for any cool points lost by not having dreads. :p

I have a weak spot for any leader who&#039;ll shoot his own men before the enemy does it. :D

Also basilisks were just pure overkill.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Imperial Guard was awesome in DoW. And not just because of the tanks. Lines of little wimpy dudes with hardly any armor, trying to stand up to enemies 3 times their size was just sweet! And the commisar makes up for any cool points lost by not having dreads. :p</p>
<p>I have a weak spot for any leader who&#8217;ll shoot his own men before the enemy does it. :D</p>
<p>Also basilisks were just pure overkill.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lim-Dul</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/03/01/the-sunday-papers-58/comment-page-1/#comment-152735</link>
		<dc:creator>Lim-Dul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 04:04:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=8536#comment-152735</guid>
		<description>Hey, I recalled another game with epic base-building and unlike Perimeter 2 it&#039;s not rubbish - however, it&#039;s also old. =)
There was this one RTS called NetStorm in which you had to attack your enemy with... buildings. And buildings only (with specific firing arcs, weaknesses etc.). :-D
The nice thing is that the game still seems to have an active community and even online play - not to mention the fact that it&#039;s free to download now.

http://www.netstormhq.com/

Check it out - I play it from time to time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, I recalled another game with epic base-building and unlike Perimeter 2 it&#8217;s not rubbish &#8211; however, it&#8217;s also old. =)<br />
There was this one RTS called NetStorm in which you had to attack your enemy with&#8230; buildings. And buildings only (with specific firing arcs, weaknesses etc.). :-D<br />
The nice thing is that the game still seems to have an active community and even online play &#8211; not to mention the fact that it&#8217;s free to download now.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.netstormhq.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.netstormhq.com/</a></p>
<p>Check it out &#8211; I play it from time to time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Arathain</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/03/01/the-sunday-papers-58/comment-page-1/#comment-152732</link>
		<dc:creator>Arathain</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 03:49:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=8536#comment-152732</guid>
		<description>I dunno.  I kind of like the concept of a bunch of ordinary guys with standard weapons and a lot of guts (that the Commissar will spill if you run) standing up to the big guys.  It&#039;s an underdog thing.  Anyway, even in a universe of demons and dead guys in robot suits, tanks are always cool.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I dunno.  I kind of like the concept of a bunch of ordinary guys with standard weapons and a lot of guts (that the Commissar will spill if you run) standing up to the big guys.  It&#8217;s an underdog thing.  Anyway, even in a universe of demons and dead guys in robot suits, tanks are always cool.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: malkav11</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/03/01/the-sunday-papers-58/comment-page-1/#comment-152694</link>
		<dc:creator>malkav11</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:32:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=8536#comment-152694</guid>
		<description>The Imperial Guard has more defensive options but Dawn of War is specifically designed to force you out to gather resource points and such, so they may be slightly more turtly than the rest but there&#039;s no viable turtle game there, not really.

And to trade all the shiny cool of deep striking Terminator squads and drop-podding Dreadnoughts or the Avatar of Kaela Mensha Khaine, or the Bloodthirster of Khorne, or the Squiggoth for some men with tanks? Pfft.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Imperial Guard has more defensive options but Dawn of War is specifically designed to force you out to gather resource points and such, so they may be slightly more turtly than the rest but there&#8217;s no viable turtle game there, not really.</p>
<p>And to trade all the shiny cool of deep striking Terminator squads and drop-podding Dreadnoughts or the Avatar of Kaela Mensha Khaine, or the Bloodthirster of Khorne, or the Squiggoth for some men with tanks? Pfft.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gwyn</title>
		<link>http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/03/01/the-sunday-papers-58/comment-page-1/#comment-152682</link>
		<dc:creator>Gwyn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 00:35:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=8536#comment-152682</guid>
		<description>The article on SFIV is a bit crap - SF3 wasn&#039;t unpopular because it was complex, it was unpopular because it was on the Dreamcast which nobody owned, and only had 2 recognisable characters. Its major change was the parry system, which was awesomely accessible as all you had to do was tap forward when your opponent attacked. If you had a thumb, you could parry. Some claim two-button throws were too complex, but given how easy it was to do throws by accident in SFII it&#039;s hard to see it as a bad thing. Pretty much all the super art combos were two quarter circles and a button away, which is as intuitive is it gets short of just having a &#039;win button&#039;.

SFIV on the other hand is enormously complicated, with timing-based focus attacks, focus armour, focus cancels, armour breaking EX attacks, two inversely proportional power bars, and (most confusingly) all the old characters with completely different balancing, so now Guile&#039;s crap and Dhalsim&#039;s amazing (the opposite of the original SF2 order).

It&#039;s always been folly to suppose that fighting games became too complex to play. At the end of the day, it&#039;s just two guys trying to knock each other out using as much or as little technique as they fancy. Despite the huge tactical and technical depth of SFIV (more than any other series entry by far) you can still beat the arcade mode using only sweep kicks if you want.

2D fighters never got complex, they just lost their casual audience when Tekken appeared and made them look old hat. From there it became clear that only the fans were buying them, so the fans were catered to. Somewhere along the line this became non-fan journalists proclaiming that the genre was up it&#039;s own arse. Maybe it was, but if it was then SFIV is carrying on a proud tradition.

SFIV is an absolutely brilliant game though, of course. If it wasn&#039;t then I wouldn&#039;t care enough to point out when people are talking rubbish about it. Hopefully arcade sticks will be back in stock bu the time the PC version is released!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The article on SFIV is a bit crap &#8211; SF3 wasn&#8217;t unpopular because it was complex, it was unpopular because it was on the Dreamcast which nobody owned, and only had 2 recognisable characters. Its major change was the parry system, which was awesomely accessible as all you had to do was tap forward when your opponent attacked. If you had a thumb, you could parry. Some claim two-button throws were too complex, but given how easy it was to do throws by accident in SFII it&#8217;s hard to see it as a bad thing. Pretty much all the super art combos were two quarter circles and a button away, which is as intuitive is it gets short of just having a &#8216;win button&#8217;.</p>
<p>SFIV on the other hand is enormously complicated, with timing-based focus attacks, focus armour, focus cancels, armour breaking EX attacks, two inversely proportional power bars, and (most confusingly) all the old characters with completely different balancing, so now Guile&#8217;s crap and Dhalsim&#8217;s amazing (the opposite of the original SF2 order).</p>
<p>It&#8217;s always been folly to suppose that fighting games became too complex to play. At the end of the day, it&#8217;s just two guys trying to knock each other out using as much or as little technique as they fancy. Despite the huge tactical and technical depth of SFIV (more than any other series entry by far) you can still beat the arcade mode using only sweep kicks if you want.</p>
<p>2D fighters never got complex, they just lost their casual audience when Tekken appeared and made them look old hat. From there it became clear that only the fans were buying them, so the fans were catered to. Somewhere along the line this became non-fan journalists proclaiming that the genre was up it&#8217;s own arse. Maybe it was, but if it was then SFIV is carrying on a proud tradition.</p>
<p>SFIV is an absolutely brilliant game though, of course. If it wasn&#8217;t then I wouldn&#8217;t care enough to point out when people are talking rubbish about it. Hopefully arcade sticks will be back in stock bu the time the PC version is released!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.169 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2009-11-22 02:33:06 -->
