R.U.S.E.-News: In Game Footage

By Jim Rossignol on January 6th, 2010 at 4:20 pm.


Ubisoft have released a couple of new R.U.S.E. videos, but only one of them actually gives you a good idea of how the game plays, so that’s the one I’ve posted it below. The video shows how normal strategy systems of building units and sending them off to die can be combined with the RUSE abilities that the game offers. These change major variables on the field of war, like the fog of war and the morale of the units in question. I’ve spend some time in the beta of this and I’ve enjoyed the slow pace that makes it feel something like a RTS with the personality of a really good boardgame. I’ve got fair hopes for its release in the next couple of months.

Thanks, IGN.

__________________

« | »

, , .

19 Comments »

  1. Monchberter says:

    Hiding an Airfield under combat netting? Really???

    Fanaticism at the click of a button.

    I somewhat think this is a Red Alert Sequel.

    ;)

  2. Torgen says:

    Just repeating what I say on every RUSE article:

    Do want.

    Oh, can we make the entry box for the captcha a color other than white? I have to play pixel hunt to find it in order to comment. Thanks!

    • Alec Meer says:

      Oh, that was a plugin upgrade losing my formatting tweaks. Have twiddled anew – should be easier now.

  3. Jim Rossignol says:

    Torgen: create an account and login, that way the captcha is gone.

  4. Guy says:

    Was it just me or was that the French vs. the Japanese? Counterfactuals time ahoy!

  5. Bhazor says:

    1:15 Resource collection? Fuck.

    This looks like it could end up more like a board game than a RTS with victory and all stratedgy being dictated by “cards”. It’ll be interesting to see if they can balance these “cards” as being able to make your whole base invisible, with magic infinite camo netting no less, seems a bit overpowering. Any word on the micromanaging aspect? Do I have to babysit those para’s or do I just assign a goal and leave them to it? If this is just an RTS with cards, and I say this as a huge fan of Comany of Heroes and Combat Mission, I’ll be very disappointed because I’d hoped for something new.

  6. DrugCrazed says:

    I actually had no idea what was going on. It looks confusing to a first time viewer, so hopefully that’ll clear up.

    Looks good though. Like the idea of these Ruses, but it doesn’t seem new.

    • Christian says:

      Oh, don’t worry. Seeing that this was a video of the XBox version and thus there being a console-version, it won’t be too complex. So it’s more action than strategy, I suppose?

      But it does look interesting, if the statement about the slower pacing is true. Other RTS tend to get a bit too frantic for me, so this might be light enough for a quick play now&then…

  7. Mad Doc MacRae says:

    I actually played the beta for two weeks. It’s very, very fun, and not like a C&C RTS at all. I didn’t watch the video posted here so some of my explanations may be redundant but whatever.

    The cards all have various affects but none are overpowered. Every “region” can only have two cards played on it at a time, and having the cards to do that is a luxury – you’ll often be waiting on your next card so you can hide some units or buildings or speed them up with a blitzkrieg. That said, cards can generally be overcome through strategy with units – scouts can spot “radio silenced” units and engage them, and even “fanaticism” won’t save your Panzer 4 from three fighter-bombers.

    There is a definite rock-paper-scissors feel to the game. Units that are weak against anti-tank are allergic to them. If you see your opponent bringing up some 88′s get your light tanks the eff back. And that’s where the real key to the game, information management, comes through. You don’t want your opponent to know that you’re *bringing* AT at him so you can catch him off guard and score points.

    There’s not that much micromanagement to do. You send your units around and they’ll engage what they can automatically. To maximize damage to the enemy you may need to tell them to switch targets, or if say your tanks are beating up a group of infantry but you really need them to kill the nearby arty you do so. Some of the micro is minimized by the time it takes to move units places. It gets very strategic in terms of “I need to put these here so when he moves his tanks there they get him.”

    I found it very easy to pick up and play a game (games take about 20 minutes but you can set how long you want it to be), go “woo, that was fun” then go back to doing whatever I was doing. And while the pace is slower there’s still a ton of tension (at least for me). You don’t know what the enemy is doing (unless you’re scouting/burning up cards) and I tend to assume the worst. :P

    From the beta, anti-tank + AA was a little overpowered. You could avoid using tanks altogether by creating lines of AT + AA (the German and Italian dual purpose flak guns are great at that) and then attacking when and where you feel confident. There were a lot of complaints about it so it might get tweaked. I ended up loving the Italians (fast harasser tanks and infantry with a great AT/AA gun and good aircraft).

    As for the realism aspect, treat the game like a boardgame set in generally the WW2 era. :P It has no pretensions of retelling history, but I think it does a good job capturing the feel of what a WW2 commander might have to deal with – or at least in a movie. ;) But criticism of it’s historical accuracy sound like criticizing TF2 for not being realistic. I mean, duh.

    Anyway, sorry for the rambling. I’d be more than happy to answer questions about the beta.

    • Guy says:

      Sounds more interesting now, thanks for your post. I’ve a few questions if you don’t mind:
      1. How many nations are there (that you saw)?
      2. Are the units/cards of the various nations all that different from each other?
      3. Is this a game where you spend a lot of time on the resource gathering or is it something that just happens in the background?

      Cheers.

  8. Mad Doc MacRae says:

    1. There are six – UK, Germany, Italy, France, US, and Russia. I got into the beta late so I played against all of them, but they were only unlocked two at a time apparently. Also apparently there are supposed to be “mirror” relationships amongst them. IE, the Italians are fast-moving (but low impact) while the French turtle. I don’t remember what the other pairs are supposed to be, but each faction felt different. I just played almost exclusively Italians once I found them.

    2. Every faction has access to the same cards. As for the units, every faction gets equivalents to most types. However, some factions units are better than others. So the Italian tanks are lightweight and fast but not much use against armor, while German tanks are much better. So an Italian medium tank would lose to a German medium tank on average, everything else the same. Also, since there is a light research mechanism in the game, different factions can get different levels of a unit. While the Germans get like 2 or 3 “levels” for their medium tank, the Italians only get 2, but can research something else.

    3. Actual resource collecting happens in the background. There are three ways to get resources. Your HQ provides something or other resources per second but it’s just a little bit. The main way is to capture supply depots on the map, which you do by building a depot on them or capturing an enemy’s. Once you have a depot, it automatically generates supply convoys and sends them to your HQ. So you get money when the supply convoy gets from the depot to your HQ – and it can be intercepted by the enemy. But the convoys are sent automatically and you only have to worry about protecting the trucks and the depot. There’s also the third way, building admin buildings, which generate resources automatically like the HQ, but they’re expensive and only good for padding your income.

    So supply depots are critical parts of the map, and denying your enemy depots while securing your own is what a lot of the game revolves around – or at least until one side or can deliver a coup de grace. Also, supply depots eventually run out of resources, which means you can turtle for a bit but not indefinitely. You’re always making choices, which depot to seize, whether you should protect this one or that, or if you should try and harass the enemy’s depot to buy yourself time on another part of the map.

    • Pew says:

      Cheers for that Mad Doc MacRae, you’ve just told me pretty much everything I need to know and have been too lazy to read multi-page previews for.

    • Guy says:

      Excellent, thanks awfully.

  9. destroy.all.monsters says:

    Wow, this looks like a must have. I heart Eugen for having done the Act of War series and beating C&C Generals at its own game but this seems like a different level entirely. In another vid there’s a tank rush of a V2 base. If those are playable in game my money will leap from my pocket into Ubisoft’s hands.

    Mad Doc, are the German superweapons available for use?

  10. Mad Doc MacRae says:

    I don’t believe the Germans get V2s, but I can’t for the life of me find the tech trees that were on the crummy ubisoft forum. Every faction has an “experimental” building that lets them build experimental units (naturally) – though at a steep cost. I think the Germans get one of their silly-heavy tanks among a few other things. The Italians get a mobile version of their “better 88″. There are some neat things but the superheavy tanks are just targets in my opinion. :D

    • destroy.all.monsters says:

      It appeared that they were showing the Maus in the same vid as the V-2. It did a nice job of takng out M-4 Shermans. Didn’t make out the jet fighter bombers the Germans were using though. Didn’t look like ME-262s (are they now old hat?). The video I’m referring to is linked below. Other than the Germans and Americans I don’t recall other nations having anything too exciting in the works, though I could be wrong. Resources sound reminiscent of COH which I haven’t played in an age – albeit a bit more fast and furious (as in Act of War where if you didn’t have your act together you would be wiped out within 5 minutes). How realistic is this or is it so off that you’d say “not at all”?

      http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/objects/14333387/ruse/videos/ruse_trl_wahou_video_10410.html

      Speaking of superweapons I would love to have the XB-70 and the Flying Crowbar at my disposal in some insane Cold War game.

    • Mad Doc MacRae says:

      Those are all in the game (except maybe the V2, still not sure enough to say it is, I never saw it). I would say that if you really didn’t have your act together it could be over in 5 minutes, but you’ll get past that point pretty quick. If nothing else their public game matching thing doesn’t usually pit you with someone way better than you. I mean, the game could be *effectively* decided in 5 minutes if you really blow it, but even then you can linger for a while longer. :D

    • Guy says:

      @d.a.m
      The British Empire had some cool stuff: the Centurion tank, the Tortoise Super-Heavy tank, the Boarhound Scout Car and the CDL tanks. And they were neck and neck with the Germans on jets. The Meteor jet did see action in 1945 (the jet in the video with the V2′s looks kinda like a Meteor) and the Vampire jet nearly saw action. Then there are Pandajandrums (rocket powered wheels with explosives strapped on) and Habbakuk (an aircraft carrier made from ice). The French had some really weird ideas but they were never built or used because of the 1940 defeat. Italy did have a jet program but I’ve no idea how effective it was. The US had the A28 super-heavy tank and at least two jet fighters that never saw combat but were ready by the end of 1945. Lots of WW2 nations had really exciting projects but people are so hung up on the Nazi’s that that’s all you ever see. If there are experimental units I’d love to see some of these wallahs popping up.

    • destroy.all.monsters says:

      Thanks for that info Guy – I was unaware of those particular weapons. I knew of the US superheavy/tank destroyer but not those. I love all that craziness. The panjandrum I remember from a mention in World At War as being ineffectual. I have to say the Boarhound is cool but not as sexy as italy’s Autoblinda series.

      Most of the Japanese weapons I’ve read about were all suicide weapons.