I personally think this game will have more legs than Stormgate, once everyones done with the campaign and realised it has nothing new to offer Stormgate will likely vanish like so many other traditional RTS games before it. With Battle Aces though it seems they've really nailed a specific vision for the game that fills a gap in the market thats never been explored before. If it succeeds i can see it becoming very popular indeed. Not great at RTS games and limited on time? I can fit in 3-4 games under half an hour and have great fun!
This games looks super fun! I’ve been wanting something with a low learning curve and high skill ceiling. I also love the idea of getting through a bunch of quick matches to experience the game. There’s so much less pressure to perform well. If you screw up, just go again!
Im really excited, that this game is actually trying something different. Stormgate looks awesome, but this one will have a really interesting twist especially for getting casual friends to join in on playing!
Excited to try it. I played CnC Rivals, which is similar in many ways, like having you build a small deck before the game without seeing your opponent's deck. It's fun to theory-craft a deck, play a bunch of short games, tweak it, play some more etc. The one issue I experienced was how after a hundred hours or so, games started to feel somewhat repetitive, as you and your opponent has few units available to you in any one game, the maps are like small arenas, and the games are so short that they rarely have time to develop into a game state that you haven't seen before.
My only qualm about this from my initial impression is that it reminds me a ton of Command and Conquer 4 - which tried to do a similar concept of skipping on what was considered "boring" and putting action as an emphasis. 4 was terrible for C&C as a franchise.
I'd say the advantage here is that it's not trying to fit into an existing RTS's legacy. C&C4's mechanics, if it was a spin off or a separate IP, it would have had a shot.
@@falshion1837 ''I don’t think StarCraft Use Map Settings maps like bunker wars would’ve ever been popular (among mostly mouthbreathers who think building a cloaked unit is ''OP'' ) if the idea was inherently bad.''
@@rocksparadox To be clear, I realize Bunker Wars was just mindless fun, but fun nonetheless. It depends on the goal of the developer. Do they want something that’s casual and fun? Do they want something that has a healthy competitive scene? I think you can make a game with both goals in mind by having a low learning curve to jump in and play and still leave room for an extremely high skill ceiling (Smash Bros Melee). My point was simple, the lack of difficulty to a rts doesn’t make it inherently bad.
The deck building and fast gameplay are two facets that made me love a game called Battleforge which got dropped. This has a very different feel and while I wouldn't be drawn to it normally, I can't deny having a ton of fun with a similar concept.
yeah i agree. it will probably be fun enough to be sucessful financially with the microtransactions but i dont think its going to have a strong competitive scene over time.
@@mvpmvp2980 The Clash franchise still have strong (read profitable) competitive scenes despite Supercell's best efforts to destroy their games. That's a pretty low bar to clear for any game striving to actually be good.
I appreciate that they're trying something new. But this kind of balance first focus isn't very interesting to me. As a casual player, a good campaign with good art, story, music and bespoke missions is what is really gonna win me over. And as a viewer all the hard edges of Starcraft are a big part of what makes it fun to watch. I haven't gotten my hands on this game so it's hard to say how much I'll enjoy playing it, but as a viewer I do not find it super compelling. I've been really enjoying the SC1 vs SC2 mod matches, and those are anything but balanced. All the ways the SC1 spells and splash damage create absurd swingy moments of gameplay create extremely hype moments. A big part of the magic of Brood War is how it's balanced while being completely unbalanced and this approach feels too safe to ever get close to that kind of fun.
So you think it will be far for the game it was StarCraft? Cuz I'm considering to play again to SC2, but maybe something new can be good, but I really like sc2 when I played it like in the release lol, many years ago
Its interesting, I'm not sure it'll become the new champ, but I like its trying newer stuff. With Stormgate I just thought "Its WC3 again". This one looks a fair amount better. Unit design looks better and the action is a lot more readable. I didn't have to stop because my brain rejected placeholder art. Interesting, but I learned to wait.
I have played a lot of tooth and tail which is a deck building rts that is really cool and I can say that it works really great there so pretty hyped about battle aces. On top of that this is personally the best looking rts I have seen In A long time. The whole setting looks really cool.
this kinda reminds me of a different RTS game ... anyone remember battleforge (i think it was called) were you summoned your army with cards and magic? (quick sidenote after some googling: there is a fan project called skylords: reborn if you are interested to look into this) look the idea of creating more or less your own "faction" or commander with its own unitpool is cool (tooth and tail did that aswell), very likely a bitch to ballance but cool ... and i personaly don't mind toning the macroside of things down to make the game more accessible for newcommers and novices after all we are into these type of games to throw armies and/or metal/scrap avalanches at each other but from what the gameplay has shown so far i personaly am clearly missing things be that static defense, be that nukes or artillery ... so far this is "only" units with or without abilities ... ... annnd i don't know .. but not plopping down a number of productionstructures like baracks or vehiclefactories like say in command and conquer, supremecommander or Age of Empires with stables etc. ... ... it kinda doesn't feel right to me :/ ...
By the way, the animation was NOT made by Uncapped Games, it was made by a third party animation studio called The Line Animation. The rest of their catalogue is pretty cool too. You must check it out
Well i have an unhealthy addiction to Aram in hots. This game seems right up my ally. Bacause each time you get back to sc2 your rank drops like rock because you forgot to check for a spire or something. I really like the idea of this game.
@@kc_graves6248 over a decade of muscle memory with minimap on left side. why would i want to change that because a developer doesnt do basic UI features?
I didn't think it looked very good in screenshots; but seeing it in action, I actually quite like the designs of the various robots. I'm less into competitive these days and more into co-op, so not sure how long I'll stick with this game, but I definitely do intend to play it when it's out
Currently, the game feels quite "swarmy" with the number of unites and limited army compositions. I wish they would allow for more unit variety in the individual matches, as well as smaller, slower squads with more abilities, for a little more interaction. Right now it just feels like big swarms of slightly different units shooting at each other. Also, the map needs to be less of an open area, and more interesting features for different strategies.
I honestly thought the trailer was for a Ghost In the Shell game. I loved it. I still am not sold on the game, it doesnt really sound like an RTS, but im guessing it will appeal to some people and be a solid piece in the RTS pipeline.
That trailer is epic and the game art is sleek, even during battles, and units are very recognizable. I want to see some games to understand what strategies are available. 5:18 But do we really need to have banelings in every RTS?
Its not an autobattler. You move you're units as you would in any other rts. But its streamlined and only focused on the battle bits. No worrying about macroing workers, or building buildings. You can either build a new base (More income ), Tech up (Research a new unit from your loadout of 8 units), Or build units that u already have researched. The rest is fighting, maneuvering, harassing etc. Fast pace, time control of 10 mins a match, tho they tend to end sooner than that by destroying the main base or a player surrendering.
@@toomuchcheeze6598 So basically like I said, in the sense of depth from an RTS standpoint, an autobattler except you have unit control. Well, might pull in some ppl for a couple of weeks or a month or two, but I think it will quickly get old due to lack of depth and the skill ceiling
Command and Conquer Rivals is still a thing. For mobile, though, but it's pretty good mobile game. I played Battle Aces and it reminded me very heavily of Rivals
Regarding David Kim - you said it's a sign that the game is in good hands. However, wasn't the consensus that SC2 balance has been in a bad spot for years (e.g. swarm host era, winfestor-bl era) without being fixed? How much confidence should we have in David's capability to handle a game's balance?
Aw man I didn’t know it was Tencent 😢. Welp so much for this game. Only a matter of time til every unit moves at lightning speed and does 999,999,999 dmg 😔.
David Kim knows how difficult it is to balance multiple races and please loud and whiney community. Therefore, his next game only has 1 race but with the deck building system to avoid completely mirror matchups. It is so much easier to balance the game this way. In fact, no balancing may be necessary because both sides can play with the same deck if the best composition is found in the future, though completely mirror machups may be boring.
after SC2 and blizzard dropping the ball, having a david kim game come out is so needed. the aesthetics and movement is so SC2 and i can see this being a super micro-intensive game which could eventually lead to an expansion to accomodate the macro players (like me). Love it.
I always wondered that mirror experience thing, so that's how Smite must do it too, I thought to myself there's no way my Duo lane could always been on the left and solo lane always on right.
Except there's still strategy. It's easy macro and even though the decisions are simple, you're still macroing while fighting and it impacts your micro. Beyond that you're still strategising on where to attack, where to defend or sacrifice while you harass, whether to go econ or tech. Saying there's no strategy and shouldn't be an RTS is just gatekeeping the genre. If you just got units and it was all about winning fights through unit control with no decision making then that's when it might warrant not being a strategy game.
so the "S" in RTS stands for strategy, and building is the the primary thing that makes the genre a strategy game? is that what you are saying? seems silly to exclude this entirely from the genre just because there is no traditional building, there is still plenty of strategy.
There's a term for those games, it's an RTT - Real Time Tactics So while it's not fully strategy like RTS genre conveys it with base building, defending, utilizing your tech and etc., using your units to the max that results in skirmishes around the map is more so tactics
@@butterypopcorrn Idk, I don't think rock-paper-scissors style of unit composition is strategy. Everything is strategy if that's the case and every game should have an S in its' genre.
@@mangotar0 at this point i'm convinced the word boomer is just zoomer cope lingo for "people who got to play much better videogames than the bland hyper corporate zog slop i did growing up & i'm incredibly assmad over it"
I can see this as a learn-to-play map design that already looks better then the worse then dota2 looking Stormgate (that new race, lmao). how do most RTS work? you 1.copy a pro players build/timings or 2.spend tons of hours in gold league with your own not-working creations. With Battle Aces you achieve the same, copy decks, or mix for pleasure. It be fun to collect the robots and there could be more playable-options.
I have never ran into someone that wants to skip building stuff in Starcraft/rts. Neither back in the days when I played with friends or today when my brothers 10 year olds have been playing Starcraft 2.
With a Rise of Nations style campaign I could see this being fun as a single player game but I’d never play this in multiplayer. In esports this will likely be everyone playing the same deck and hopefully we see ban/pick and not playing the same units more than once.
I don't see why Tencent's policy of throwing money and then keeping the hands mostly off can't be mimicked by another massive publisher that isn't as tied to a shady government.
the only thing i dont like about this game is that you see their deck and what tech they got, you even get notified when they go for it... i wish they leave an option to keep it hidden so you have to scout things
I played a bit of BW but never became fanatical on the ladder. I couldn't even be bothered to play SC2, it looked like a rinse and repeat to me; just too repetitive with the formula - all of the base building and build order dice rolling behind the fog of war was not something I was interested in having to slog through to get to the combat, the tactical decision making. Battle Aces is the freshest take on the genre that I've seen in years. Trimming the fat is the exactly correct description. I hope they succeed. The art direction is also very strong and clean, matching the design decisions.
@ comments about simplicity - I don't honestly think the devs expect to capture say, the Brood War or AoE2 audience. People are more mindless than ever. This trend will only increase in 10 years. More logical to dev for them, than challenge OGs. As humans it is sensible, they should make something of a future they can't stop from coming. I don't blame them for trying The OGs aren't being replaced cause what made them what they are isn't being carried over. It always gets changed. Why? Why, if we know what makes BW good, do we intentionally avoid iterating on its trademark mechanics?? Is it an ego thing? Is it about the distortion of what tech is old, and what is new? I do not care about that. I care about what lasts and what creates the best "timelines" within a match.
Tencent is a company owned by China and there has been controversy about their apps accessing data that they have no business with, like a game accessing your photos. thats the gist of it I believe.
chinese company that people like to scapegoat for everything being bad, they will protest, but in reality, some of their favorite games are likely owned by tencent
This feels a lot like how I view Pokemon Unite, distilled elements that is fun to play, but ultimately kind of a shallow experience. I dont think they will win over RTS fans long term with this; even if that is kind of the point the casual folk aren't who keep games alive. I'll probably play it sure, but for like... A week.
• No factions or unit variety whatsoever • Fielding your units is streamlined to a point you aren't even having to factor in build times anymore & on that note no barracks shipyards or factories either • Maps are purely a series of lanes with control point here & there + flying units that aren't actually flying more so just acting like quicker ground units Looks bad overall NGL
In my humble opinion, the RTS genre is pretty much dead till they actually focus on the strategy part, which largely involves the map itself. This game, battle aces, basically has no map strategy at all. I personally see this kind of game as a PC version of the old Rock'Em Sock'Em Robots game, where you just slam in each other without real strategy but it feels like you "now I got him" when you slightly change the way you're smacking your robot around and winning and losing basically depends on getting lucky with your slight changes against your opponents slight changes, creating either a winning, equal or defeat scenario purely by random strategy choice chance. OR, if you mess up for a split second in your "micro" and allow the opponent to punch your robot right in the button. The only franchise, in my humble opinion, that was on the right track, was the Company of Heroes series, with cover and squads. And in my humble opinion again, there won't be a next "the big thing" in the RTS genre till someone takes that part of strategy games to the next level. It needs to feel "bigger", and be more "immersive". I mean, when Starcraft first came around for example, the "immersion" level of us as gamers was still at a level where we were picturing ourselves to be commanding something "real" on some distant planet somewhere, and that's why it felt so "important" to be actually "strategic" about the choices you made. Battle Aces is like the Tour the France being replaced by all the riders sitting on hometrainers in a hall somewhere. "we removed all the annoying parts, and now it's all about cycling".
I really like it. I love the presentation, the feel of it and the trailer was awesome. Out of all the new things we've seen this one seems the most focused and almost ready. The idea of having a deck is also appealing to me for the amount of matchups that can be possible and the idea of trying different builds out and theorycrafting which is cool from a strategic point of view. The only problem I feel is that it might be a bit too simplified. Not in terms of the fights but I think beginners honestly like to build bases just as much as fight and that feels a bit sad. I wouldn't even mind something like putting up defensive structures like towers that do different things, are towers, air only towers, ones that heal etc but allowing them to be placed where we want as tower defense and a little bit of base building could help appeal to everyone. Anyway the gameplay reveal didn't look too good but all the gameplay matches we've seen and the kraken look awesome and I'm kinda excited to try this one and play. It's good that it plays different to the other things out there and wish them all the best.
Mobile games claim to be RTS and get the ultrahype, while good games like Five Nations sinking into oblivion.... Good job David Kim gutting RTS with this Battle Acne
Imo while i respect david kim, he does not have a good track record. He was the lead balance designer that oversaw the precipitous decline in sc2 viewership due to hesitance to recognize problems and resolve them quickly. Broodlord infestor Swarm host ZvZ muta play Archon toilet Reaper anti building attack Rts games are hard to balance. But some of the biggest issues in sc2 history were left in place for months or years due to ladder numbers. "we are showing win rates at the top ranks around 50%" was such a constant refrain. IMO battle aces looks neat. I doubt it will bring anybody new to RTS and veterans won't find enough to latch on to. But that aside David Kim's tenure as SC2 balance lead is not a vote of confidence.
"The game is in good hands" with DAVID KIM?! are you mad? The guy has no clue about how to balance anything, and from the footage of him playing Battle Aces you can also clearly tell that he's not very good at playing RTS (or RTT what this is).
Yeah most game are overly complex....another game that does a pretty good job at simplyfing yet keeping the ghost of RTS is Halo Wars 2 in my opnion. It even can be play quite well with controller
Funny how opinionated gamers get about what constitutes a genre. Collecting resources, building units, expanding, and destroying enemy armies and bases in real time, but I guess it isn't an RTS because you say so.
We've kinda already had this exact game a few times before (most notably Day9's game), and we found that it kinda sucks. I'll be around and see if this game is somehow different and can make something out of a bad idea, but I'm not optimistic.
Tencent owns a majority stake in Path of Exile, Don’t starve, oxygen not included, Vermintide/darktide, and even has minority stakes in from software, and Remedy game. All of which are great games/studios. The studio and people are more important than the publisher.
@@alloftheinternet Until Tencent, who controls the company and the game, orders that they do X or Y to the detriment of the experience. As has happened so many times, thus why no one trusts Tencent...
This game will fail because of fast-paced. Trailer looks good. Graphic design is new and fresh and remembers a bit of Saber Riders. But a lot of other interesting parts of a rts is missing in this game. So I think a lot of new players and some old experienced players will play this game for a short time and then the new players will leave because of little replayablity and fast-paced. You will have the feeling like in SC2 you can little do to save your army and you will lose it in a few seconds. Yes, in battle aces you can build a new army in a few seconds, but that's not the fun part of an rts and there are a lot of different fun parts in a rts, but in battle aces the most are not available. Base building is just one of it. Its a bit like you think getting iitems in an hack & slay is the most fun part and therefore you decide to build a game where you just collect items. I think you will get the point.
You didn't touch on the monetization, there has to be a catch as a live service, f2p game, no? I get the impression from your description you will be able to level up the units and essentially pay your way to a stronger army. Hope I'm wrong anyway.
Finally a new art style that fits and looks great! I love the old anime look. And dat trailer tho...
How does Thor play RTS if he doesn't even have an email...
I never thought I'd see you here. Love your videos and hair dawg keep up the good work
love your vids!
@@Lingboysc2 appreciate you
trailer was insanely awesome, hope to see you ingame when it drops
I personally think this game will have more legs than Stormgate, once everyones done with the campaign and realised it has nothing new to offer Stormgate will likely vanish like so many other traditional RTS games before it. With Battle Aces though it seems they've really nailed a specific vision for the game that fills a gap in the market thats never been explored before. If it succeeds i can see it becoming very popular indeed. Not great at RTS games and limited on time? I can fit in 3-4 games under half an hour and have great fun!
have played both - this will be far superior
@@HerosofCarpeDiemthe problem with Sg is it has no soul
@@ryu-ken ye battle aces is fun
This games looks super fun! I’ve been wanting something with a low learning curve and high skill ceiling. I also love the idea of getting through a bunch of quick matches to experience the game. There’s so much less pressure to perform well. If you screw up, just go again!
Im really excited, that this game is actually trying something different. Stormgate looks awesome, but this one will have a really interesting twist especially for getting casual friends to join in on playing!
Excited to try it. I played CnC Rivals, which is similar in many ways, like having you build a small deck before the game without seeing your opponent's deck. It's fun to theory-craft a deck, play a bunch of short games, tweak it, play some more etc. The one issue I experienced was how after a hundred hours or so, games started to feel somewhat repetitive, as you and your opponent has few units available to you in any one game, the maps are like small arenas, and the games are so short that they rarely have time to develop into a game state that you haven't seen before.
My only qualm about this from my initial impression is that it reminds me a ton of Command and Conquer 4 - which tried to do a similar concept of skipping on what was considered "boring" and putting action as an emphasis.
4 was terrible for C&C as a franchise.
Yeah, same for me, it's like the aspects that they take from RTS to make it less boring is kind of exactly what makes it satisfying
I don’t think StarCraft Use Map Settings maps like bunker wars would’ve ever been popular if the idea was inherently bad.
I'd say the advantage here is that it's not trying to fit into an existing RTS's legacy. C&C4's mechanics, if it was a spin off or a separate IP, it would have had a shot.
@@falshion1837
''I don’t think StarCraft Use Map Settings maps like bunker wars would’ve ever been popular (among mostly mouthbreathers who think building a cloaked unit is ''OP'' ) if the idea was inherently bad.''
@@rocksparadox To be clear, I realize Bunker Wars was just mindless fun, but fun nonetheless. It depends on the goal of the developer. Do they want something that’s casual and fun? Do they want something that has a healthy competitive scene? I think you can make a game with both goals in mind by having a low learning curve to jump in and play and still leave room for an extremely high skill ceiling (Smash Bros Melee). My point was simple, the lack of difficulty to a rts doesn’t make it inherently bad.
The deck building and fast gameplay are two facets that made me love a game called Battleforge which got dropped. This has a very different feel and while I wouldn't be drawn to it normally, I can't deny having a ton of fun with a similar concept.
I’m excited for the new RTS games but this game reminds me of playing Bunker Wars in the broodwar custom games
Footman Frenzy without heroes. Looks like a fun 10 hour game, but not more than that.
yeah i agree. it will probably be fun enough to be sucessful financially with the microtransactions but i dont think its going to have a strong competitive scene over time.
More like Zone Control
Spot on could not agree more
lol! it's a lot more than footman frenzy... It's fast action micro rts battles! Just goes to show how much attention you pay before making a judgement
@@mvpmvp2980 The Clash franchise still have strong (read profitable) competitive scenes despite Supercell's best efforts to destroy their games. That's a pretty low bar to clear for any game striving to actually be good.
I appreciate that they're trying something new. But this kind of balance first focus isn't very interesting to me. As a casual player, a good campaign with good art, story, music and bespoke missions is what is really gonna win me over. And as a viewer all the hard edges of Starcraft are a big part of what makes it fun to watch. I haven't gotten my hands on this game so it's hard to say how much I'll enjoy playing it, but as a viewer I do not find it super compelling. I've been really enjoying the SC1 vs SC2 mod matches, and those are anything but balanced. All the ways the SC1 spells and splash damage create absurd swingy moments of gameplay create extremely hype moments. A big part of the magic of Brood War is how it's balanced while being completely unbalanced and this approach feels too safe to ever get close to that kind of fun.
It is not really new, the game is very similar to battleforge, it is basically battleforge lite.
So you think it will be far for the game it was StarCraft? Cuz I'm considering to play again to SC2, but maybe something new can be good, but I really like sc2 when I played it like in the release lol, many years ago
Its interesting, I'm not sure it'll become the new champ, but I like its trying newer stuff. With Stormgate I just thought "Its WC3 again". This one looks a fair amount better. Unit design looks better and the action is a lot more readable. I didn't have to stop because my brain rejected placeholder art. Interesting, but I learned to wait.
I have played a lot of tooth and tail which is a deck building rts that is really cool and I can say that it works really great there so pretty hyped about battle aces. On top of that this is personally the best looking rts I have seen In A long time. The whole setting looks really cool.
I wish the in-game art looked even more like the trailer tbh.
this kinda reminds me of a different RTS game ... anyone remember battleforge (i think it was called) were you summoned your army with cards and magic?
(quick sidenote after some googling: there is a fan project called skylords: reborn if you are interested to look into this)
look the idea of creating more or less your own "faction" or commander with its own unitpool is cool (tooth and tail did that aswell), very likely a bitch to ballance but cool ... and i personaly don't mind toning the macroside of things down to make the game more accessible for newcommers and novices
after all we are into these type of games to throw armies and/or metal/scrap avalanches at each other
but from what the gameplay has shown so far i personaly am clearly missing things
be that static defense, be that nukes or artillery ... so far this is "only" units with or without abilities ...
... annnd i don't know .. but not plopping down a number of productionstructures like baracks or vehiclefactories like say in command and conquer, supremecommander or Age of Empires with stables etc. ... ... it kinda doesn't feel right to me :/ ...
I enjoyed playing battleforge, it was ahead of its time
@@DJ-3maj It was not ahead of its time. Combining 2 genres does not make a game magically ahead of its time.
best game ever
By the way, the animation was NOT made by Uncapped Games, it was made by a third party animation studio called The Line Animation. The rest of their catalogue is pretty cool too. You must check it out
Well i have an unhealthy addiction to Aram in hots. This game seems right up my ally. Bacause each time you get back to sc2 your rank drops like rock because you forgot to check for a spire or something. I really like the idea of this game.
This looks like a fun watching experience, if anything.
Are you able to move the minimap to the left side? big turnoff for me if you cant.
Blind in your right eye?
@@kc_graves6248 over a decade of muscle memory with minimap on left side. why would i want to change that because a developer doesnt do basic UI features?
I didn't think it looked very good in screenshots; but seeing it in action, I actually quite like the designs of the various robots. I'm less into competitive these days and more into co-op, so not sure how long I'll stick with this game, but I definitely do intend to play it when it's out
Currently, the game feels quite "swarmy" with the number of unites and limited army compositions. I wish they would allow for more unit variety in the individual matches, as well as smaller, slower squads with more abilities, for a little more interaction. Right now it just feels like big swarms of slightly different units shooting at each other. Also, the map needs to be less of an open area, and more interesting features for different strategies.
I honestly thought the trailer was for a Ghost In the Shell game. I loved it. I still am not sold on the game, it doesnt really sound like an RTS, but im guessing it will appeal to some people and be a solid piece in the RTS pipeline.
That trailer is epic and the game art is sleek, even during battles, and units are very recognizable.
I want to see some games to understand what strategies are available.
5:18 But do we really need to have banelings in every RTS?
RTS and beat em ups are back, and it warms my heart.
I assume they go for the MOBA rotating free-to-play robots. Player turned blocking of specific units in the pro scene.
The trailer does look fucking epic, love the anime inspiration.
So this is like an autobattler / desert strike but you can control stuff a bit?
Its not an autobattler. You move you're units as you would in any other rts. But its streamlined and only focused on the battle bits. No worrying about macroing workers, or building buildings. You can either build a new base (More income ), Tech up (Research a new unit from your loadout of 8 units), Or build units that u already have researched. The rest is fighting, maneuvering, harassing etc. Fast pace, time control of 10 mins a match, tho they tend to end sooner than that by destroying the main base or a player surrendering.
@@toomuchcheeze6598 So basically like I said, in the sense of depth from an RTS standpoint, an autobattler except you have unit control. Well, might pull in some ppl for a couple of weeks or a month or two, but I think it will quickly get old due to lack of depth and the skill ceiling
@nanotech2080 I think you're wrong. But to each his own
@@toomuchcheeze6598 we'll see, happy to be wrong, but history shows that games w/o depth and replayability die off real fast
The game seems to have a lot of legs going by the beta@@nanotech2080
I really dislike how dark and gray the map is compared to how colourful the cinematic was, a bit of a letdown.
Deck building? Reminds me a little of DesertStrike (sc custom) but with micro.
If I can’t play with friends I don’t like RTS games. That’s why I love AOE if I play RTS
This feels like a sc2/wc3 custom game, which is not a bad thing. Can’t wait to try it out
Just a reminder the entire MOBA genre was born out of SC/War3 custom maps
@@ImperiousRexRacing heres a reminder, mobas suck
@@devingaviria6389Millions of people disagreed.
@@kosmosfantasias7545 you have no taste or discernment, you just appeal to the astroturfed masses, your sir are an npc
@@devingaviria6389 You are free to express your opinion but again, millions of people disagreed.
I’ve been waiting for a long time for someone to do a deck building RTS.
Command and Conquer Rivals is still a thing. For mobile, though, but it's pretty good mobile game. I played Battle Aces and it reminded me very heavily of Rivals
I kinda like this honest takes. When will you do a review of immortal gates of pyre?
Regarding David Kim - you said it's a sign that the game is in good hands. However, wasn't the consensus that SC2 balance has been in a bad spot for years (e.g. swarm host era, winfestor-bl era) without being fixed? How much confidence should we have in David's capability to handle a game's balance?
Happy to see the unit design is so clear. Looks very watchable, I hope the games are exciting too!
Aw man I didn’t know it was Tencent 😢. Welp so much for this game. Only a matter of time til every unit moves at lightning speed and does 999,999,999 dmg 😔.
It already looks better then Stormgate, seen the new race there? lmao
David Kim knows how difficult it is to balance multiple races and please loud and whiney community.
Therefore, his next game only has 1 race but with the deck building system to avoid completely mirror matchups.
It is so much easier to balance the game this way.
In fact, no balancing may be necessary because both sides can play with the same deck if the best composition is found in the future, though completely mirror machups may be boring.
Didn't we see an Alien unit in the cinematic trailer?
I am gonna give this a try and make the crabs work 🦀🦀🦀
after SC2 and blizzard dropping the ball, having a david kim game come out is so needed. the aesthetics and movement is so SC2 and i can see this being a super micro-intensive game which could eventually lead to an expansion to accomodate the macro players (like me). Love it.
I like it but I don't like it being called an RTS. It's a hybrid of rts and moba. Bro someone said Footmen Frenzy. It's spot on.
I always wondered that mirror experience thing, so that's how Smite must do it too, I thought to myself there's no way my Duo lane could always been on the left and solo lane always on right.
I feel like this game embodies dozens of excellent ideas
very good work already
this game is basically slightly better version of tooth and tail, which was an awesome RTS that didnt get enough recognition
Looks a lot better than Stormgate honestly.
Not yet available on Steam but I'll try it out when it is available.
They aren't even comparable
I signed up for the beta. I have always wanted to play a RTS game that is just the meat and potatoes of RTS
I think we should call it RTB rather than RTS. Real Time Battler
Except there's still strategy. It's easy macro and even though the decisions are simple, you're still macroing while fighting and it impacts your micro. Beyond that you're still strategising on where to attack, where to defend or sacrifice while you harass, whether to go econ or tech. Saying there's no strategy and shouldn't be an RTS is just gatekeeping the genre. If you just got units and it was all about winning fights through unit control with no decision making then that's when it might warrant not being a strategy game.
so the "S" in RTS stands for strategy, and building is the the primary thing that makes the genre a strategy game? is that what you are saying? seems silly to exclude this entirely from the genre just because there is no traditional building, there is still plenty of strategy.
While I do have a fondness for strategy games with base building, to say this game doesnt have strategy because of that I think would be incorrect
There's a term for those games, it's an RTT - Real Time Tactics
So while it's not fully strategy like RTS genre conveys it with base building, defending, utilizing your tech and etc., using your units to the max that results in skirmishes around the map is more so tactics
@@butterypopcorrn Idk, I don't think rock-paper-scissors style of unit composition is strategy. Everything is strategy if that's the case and every game should have an S in its' genre.
i think it looks awesome, and im glad we are getting a new take on the genre. idk why the RTS community is so closed minded and negative.
Idk why are you so mindlessly positive towards everything?
Most of them are clearly boomers too
@@mangotar0 at this point i'm convinced the word boomer is just zoomer cope lingo for "people who got to play much better videogames than the bland hyper corporate zog slop i did growing up & i'm incredibly assmad over it"
I can see this as a learn-to-play map design that already looks better then the worse then dota2 looking Stormgate (that new race, lmao). how do most RTS work? you 1.copy a pro players build/timings or 2.spend tons of hours in gold league with your own not-working creations. With Battle Aces you achieve the same, copy decks, or mix for pleasure. It be fun to collect the robots and there could be more playable-options.
I have never ran into someone that wants to skip building stuff in Starcraft/rts. Neither back in the days when I played with friends or today when my brothers 10 year olds have been playing Starcraft 2.
With a Rise of Nations style campaign I could see this being fun as a single player game but I’d never play this in multiplayer.
In esports this will likely be everyone playing the same deck and hopefully we see ban/pick and not playing the same units more than once.
I just downloaded it today and having so so so so so so much fun.
I don't see why Tencent's policy of throwing money and then keeping the hands mostly off can't be mimicked by another massive publisher that isn't as tied to a shady government.
the only thing i dont like about this game is that you see their deck and what tech they got, you even get notified when they go for it...
i wish they leave an option to keep it hidden so you have to scout things
Game looks like nothing that we actually want in rts
So this is a mix of StarCraft and Golem Gates
Wishlisted, looks like a lot of fun and a great entry drug to the genre.
I played a bit of BW but never became fanatical on the ladder. I couldn't even be bothered to play SC2, it looked like a rinse and repeat to me; just too repetitive with the formula - all of the base building and build order dice rolling behind the fog of war was not something I was interested in having to slog through to get to the combat, the tactical decision making. Battle Aces is the freshest take on the genre that I've seen in years. Trimming the fat is the exactly correct description. I hope they succeed. The art direction is also very strong and clean, matching the design decisions.
It looks like a good game. I think it will be successful. I haven't been impressed with StormGate.
Game Just looks so clean as well as feeling novel, very interested!
Love it so much! This game is so awesome and glad to hear you're keen for it.
@ comments about simplicity - I don't honestly think the devs expect to capture say, the Brood War or AoE2 audience. People are more mindless than ever. This trend will only increase in 10 years. More logical to dev for them, than challenge OGs. As humans it is sensible, they should make something of a future they can't stop from coming. I don't blame them for trying
The OGs aren't being replaced cause what made them what they are isn't being carried over. It always gets changed. Why? Why, if we know what makes BW good, do we intentionally avoid iterating on its trademark mechanics??
Is it an ego thing? Is it about the distortion of what tech is old, and what is new? I do not care about that. I care about what lasts and what creates the best "timelines" within a match.
Im out of the loop. Can someone explain why we hate Tencent?
Tencent is a company owned by China and there has been controversy about their apps accessing data that they have no business with, like a game accessing your photos. thats the gist of it I believe.
Tencent is a very direct proxy of the Chinese government. That's why a lot of people feel gross about playing something owned by them.
chinese company that people like to scapegoat for everything being bad, they will protest, but in reality, some of their favorite games are likely owned by tencent
Fascinating. My replay has been hidden. I don't even know what triggered the censorship in this case. Perhaps calling 10 sent a proxy for the CCP.
@@forsensfishbox this is another reason to hate them honestly
This feels a lot like how I view Pokemon Unite, distilled elements that is fun to play, but ultimately kind of a shallow experience. I dont think they will win over RTS fans long term with this; even if that is kind of the point the casual folk aren't who keep games alive. I'll probably play it sure, but for like... A week.
Its an interesting idea. But ppl will be over it pretty quick imo. Looks fun to try and play for a few days, a week tops.
What everyone says about every game these days. What a novel opinion to have lol
@@kc_graves6248 nothing more than reflection of everyone's dying commitment/attention span to literally anything
This game looks so freaking good.
• No factions or unit variety whatsoever
• Fielding your units is streamlined to a point you aren't even having to factor in build times anymore & on that note no barracks shipyards or factories either
• Maps are purely a series of lanes with control point here & there + flying units that aren't actually flying more so just acting like quicker ground units
Looks bad overall NGL
In my humble opinion, the RTS genre is pretty much dead till they actually focus on the strategy part, which largely involves the map itself. This game, battle aces, basically has no map strategy at all. I personally see this kind of game as a PC version of the old Rock'Em Sock'Em Robots game, where you just slam in each other without real strategy but it feels like you "now I got him" when you slightly change the way you're smacking your robot around and winning and losing basically depends on getting lucky with your slight changes against your opponents slight changes, creating either a winning, equal or defeat scenario purely by random strategy choice chance. OR, if you mess up for a split second in your "micro" and allow the opponent to punch your robot right in the button.
The only franchise, in my humble opinion, that was on the right track, was the Company of Heroes series, with cover and squads. And in my humble opinion again, there won't be a next "the big thing" in the RTS genre till someone takes that part of strategy games to the next level. It needs to feel "bigger", and be more "immersive". I mean, when Starcraft first came around for example, the "immersion" level of us as gamers was still at a level where we were picturing ourselves to be commanding something "real" on some distant planet somewhere, and that's why it felt so "important" to be actually "strategic" about the choices you made.
Battle Aces is like the Tour the France being replaced by all the riders sitting on hometrainers in a hall somewhere. "we removed all the annoying parts, and now it's all about cycling".
I thought it was pretty boring. Just skirmish skirmish, push and over.
Also, the ground units are hard to tell apart.
I really like it. I love the presentation, the feel of it and the trailer was awesome. Out of all the new things we've seen this one seems the most focused and almost ready. The idea of having a deck is also appealing to me for the amount of matchups that can be possible and the idea of trying different builds out and theorycrafting which is cool from a strategic point of view. The only problem I feel is that it might be a bit too simplified. Not in terms of the fights but I think beginners honestly like to build bases just as much as fight and that feels a bit sad. I wouldn't even mind something like putting up defensive structures like towers that do different things, are towers, air only towers, ones that heal etc but allowing them to be placed where we want as tower defense and a little bit of base building could help appeal to everyone.
Anyway the gameplay reveal didn't look too good but all the gameplay matches we've seen and the kraken look awesome and I'm kinda excited to try this one and play. It's good that it plays different to the other things out there and wish them all the best.
Mobile games claim to be RTS and get the ultrahype, while good games like Five Nations sinking into oblivion....
Good job David Kim gutting RTS with this Battle Acne
I actually like this MegaMan style Art. A little more grungy wouldn’t be bad
Hmm i remember David Kim being really slow with the balance patches, can't say i trust him a lot, also i don't like tencent very much, but let's see.
Imo while i respect david kim, he does not have a good track record. He was the lead balance designer that oversaw the precipitous decline in sc2 viewership due to hesitance to recognize problems and resolve them quickly.
Broodlord infestor
Swarm host
ZvZ muta play
Archon toilet
Reaper anti building attack
Rts games are hard to balance. But some of the biggest issues in sc2 history were left in place for months or years due to ladder numbers. "we are showing win rates at the top ranks around 50%" was such a constant refrain.
IMO battle aces looks neat. I doubt it will bring anybody new to RTS and veterans won't find enough to latch on to. But that aside David Kim's tenure as SC2 balance lead is not a vote of confidence.
Its from China???
It's over...
I love the idea of minimizing macro and economy, but I'm not happy about deck building.
"The game is in good hands" with DAVID KIM?! are you mad? The guy has no clue about how to balance anything, and from the footage of him playing Battle Aces you can also clearly tell that he's not very good at playing RTS (or RTT what this is).
So Clash Royale, but StarCraft?
Yeah most game are overly complex....another game that does a pretty good job at simplyfing yet keeping the ghost of RTS is Halo Wars 2 in my opnion. It even can be play quite well with controller
that's not an RTS is a micro battler arena
It is RTT, Real Time Tactics.
Funny how opinionated gamers get about what constitutes a genre. Collecting resources, building units, expanding, and destroying enemy armies and bases in real time, but I guess it isn't an RTS because you say so.
We've kinda already had this exact game a few times before (most notably Day9's game), and we found that it kinda sucks. I'll be around and see if this game is somehow different and can make something out of a bad idea, but I'm not optimistic.
Looks awesome..seems like they made a lot of great decisions.
Stopped caring at "Tencent". Too bad.
Tencent owns a majority stake in Path of Exile, Don’t starve, oxygen not included, Vermintide/darktide, and even has minority stakes in from software, and Remedy game. All of which are great games/studios. The studio and people are more important than the publisher.
@@alloftheinternet Darktide was an absolute train wreck ,are you serious.
@@alloftheinternet Until Tencent, who controls the company and the game, orders that they do X or Y to the detriment of the experience. As has happened so many times, thus why no one trusts Tencent...
A good game is a good game. I don’t understand your logic.
@@lt2064Sure but PoE is excellent. What's your point?
This game will fail because of fast-paced.
Trailer looks good. Graphic design is new and fresh and remembers a bit of Saber Riders.
But a lot of other interesting parts of a rts is missing in this game. So I think a lot of new players and some old experienced players will play this game for a short time and then the new players will leave because of little replayablity and fast-paced. You will have the feeling like in SC2 you can little do to save your army and you will lose it in a few seconds. Yes, in battle aces you can build a new army in a few seconds, but that's not the fun part of an rts and there are a lot of different fun parts in a rts, but in battle aces the most are not available. Base building is just one of it. Its a bit like you think getting iitems in an hack & slay is the most fun part and therefore you decide to build a game where you just collect items. I think you will get the point.
>Tencent
Dropped like a hot potato
Damage control even before the game is released lmao
this looks better than stormgate
That's a very low bar
I know that it’s all the rage these days but I can’t get behind twitch-shooter strategy games
this gameplay looks like, oh i picked the wrong unit, i guess it dies
isn't this game not just some kind of Dawn of War 2?
I dont think the looks and the style of the game is bad but I think it looks a bit generic
Can we get your dishonest thoughts next?
more RT than S? (c) :D
Battle Aces looks good, but they need more variability imo, some macro need to be done in RTS genre etc
good fit for mobile
akira anime vibes
You didn't touch on the monetization, there has to be a catch as a live service, f2p game, no? I get the impression from your description you will be able to level up the units and essentially pay your way to a stronger army. Hope I'm wrong anyway.
you're wrong. It's just skins.
This looks way cooler aesthetically and has so much more identity than Stormgate. Really looking forward to this!
Nexus wars???
halo blitz the game
The trailer looks really cool, but the units/game visuals are very dull?!?
Looks better than stormgate that's for sure