Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: R.U.S.E.  (Read 1613 times)

hemmingjay

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
R.U.S.E.
« on: September 10, 2010, 06:08:12 pm »

I have been spending a few hours a day playing this and am really enjoying the gameplay. The single player is painful due to voice acting and easing you into the game mechanics. That being said, the multiplayer is tons-o-fun!

The old RUSE topic had devolved into a conversation about SPRING by the second page.
Logged
Only a simple mind can be certain.

Nilocy

  • Bay Watcher
  • Queen of a Community.
    • View Profile
Re: R.U.S.E.
« Reply #1 on: September 10, 2010, 06:11:26 pm »

I really enjoyed the multiplayer when the beta was out, I've heard the campaign is pretty nutzoid.
Logged

hemmingjay

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: R.U.S.E.
« Reply #2 on: September 10, 2010, 07:57:27 pm »

pretty damn long campaign actually.
Logged
Only a simple mind can be certain.

mikefictiti0us

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • Radio Rivendell
Re: R.U.S.E.
« Reply #3 on: September 10, 2010, 08:04:39 pm »

I saw a video of the game last night and I was pretty much sold. Gonna head out and pick it up today.
Logged

Nikov

  • Bay Watcher
  • Riverend's Flame-beater of Earth-Wounders
    • View Profile
Re: R.U.S.E.
« Reply #4 on: September 10, 2010, 08:46:53 pm »

I kicked so much ass at this game in the Beta I. Actually. Got. Bored. Of. Winning. In. Multiplayer.

Seriously, a 42 game streak? The fuck. I wasn't even using any cheap tricks, just infantry and AT guns in forests with a little light flak support. Maybe run a dozen light tanks into his base under radio silence. Wasn't doing that 'British Bomber Spam' nonsense or anything.

42 game streak! Seriously. Made me too bored to buy it. Maybe next time a free weekend comes out I'll test the waters. Till then, I'll have fond memories of a week spent grinding noobs faces into the mud, politely.
Logged
I should probably have my head checked, because I find myself in complete agreement with Nikov.

Astral

  • Bay Watcher
  • [ENTER_TENTACLES:RIBCAGE]
    • View Profile
Re: R.U.S.E.
« Reply #5 on: September 10, 2010, 09:03:15 pm »

Didn't like it, seemed too... basic. It was definitely geared for consoles and didn't feel like a complete PC port. That's most games, but still.
Logged
What Darwin was too polite to say, my friends, is that we came to rule the Earth not because we were the smartest, or even the meanest, but because we have always been the craziest, most murderous motherfuckers in the jungle. -Stephen King's Cell
It's viable to keep a dead rabbit in the glove compartment to take a drink every now and then.

Nikov

  • Bay Watcher
  • Riverend's Flame-beater of Earth-Wounders
    • View Profile
Re: R.U.S.E.
« Reply #6 on: September 11, 2010, 01:41:08 am »

Mmm. I think it wasn't basic, it was just geared to be less about fiddly stats and minor nuance and more about grand strategy and deception, just as the title suggested. Also, I don't recall it being a port at all.

Quote
Of course, we are conscious this is not the perfect solution for console players since it requires a PC, but it is a first opportunity for players to try our control scheme, and see how smooth and comfortable the game can feel with a pad. If you don't have a PC and are willing to try the game on console, stay tuned, we will update you soon about our plans… - Official Site

Really, it was only "basic" if you expected an in-depth wargame to play out in 25 minute timed resolutions. Which is unrealistic, at best. What they were aiming for was a game that played more like chess than a hex-and-counter wargame, but still invoked the same level of strategic thought.
Logged
I should probably have my head checked, because I find myself in complete agreement with Nikov.

Puck

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: R.U.S.E.
« Reply #7 on: September 11, 2010, 02:23:12 am »

They made cool trailers and when they talked about the game they made you _want_ it. But actually it was hella boring, imho. Generic, bland, uninspired. The ruse tactics were a nice touch, but if they had wrapped them up in a proper game they would have been a lot better :)

A bit like Assassins Creed. Makes you wanna scream "how can you screw up such a cool concept, for the love of everything thats holy!"

hemmingjay

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: R.U.S.E.
« Reply #8 on: September 11, 2010, 07:30:35 am »

I can surely see how the game could be dissapointing to anyone who was looking for something totally new in strategy. It seems the genre has gone over to the micromanaging types. Those are fun but this game harkens back to classics of strategy game playing with the new idea of bluffing. This game isn't about plowing through a tech tree to get ahead of the enemy. It's not about spamming tons of units and sending wave after wave to wear out your opponent.

It's plain and simple grand strategy.
Logged
Only a simple mind can be certain.

Akura

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: R.U.S.E.
« Reply #9 on: September 11, 2010, 09:09:13 am »

I lost interest in this when in the second beta I saw a single Italian medium tank fight off two or three King Tigers, I think with Flak88 support.

There was also an issue with people building huge amounts of fighters and leaving them in the air over the center of the map, seemingly ignoring air field limits(8 birds per field, or so it says). Sure, air superiority is nice, but it's kinda unbalanced since fighter-bombers can usually one-shot any tank, and AA guns tend to be completely worthless for one reason or another.
Logged
Quote
They asked me how well I understood theoretical physics. I told them I had a theoretical degree in physics. They said welcome aboard.
... Yes, the hugs are for everyone.  No stabbing, though.  Just hugs.

Nilocy

  • Bay Watcher
  • Queen of a Community.
    • View Profile
Re: R.U.S.E.
« Reply #10 on: September 13, 2010, 11:30:07 am »

I lost interest in this when in the second beta I saw a single Italian medium tank fight off two or three King Tigers, I think with Flak88 support.

There was also an issue with people building huge amounts of fighters and leaving them in the air over the center of the map, seemingly ignoring air field limits(8 birds per field, or so it says). Sure, air superiority is nice, but it's kinda unbalanced since fighter-bombers can usually one-shot any tank, and AA guns tend to be completely worthless for one reason or another.

So the second you saw someone beat back king tigers (like one of the most exaggerated tanks in the game) with some smaller tanks and Flak88 support you stopped playing? Flak88's are some of the most powerful guns in the game, and tigers are very slow things making them great targets.

Onto the air superiority you can build more than 1 airfield you know right? Increasing the limits by 8 every time. Also, fighterbombers are terrible against fighters and can't take more than a few shots of flak. So you have two options there, build more fighters than them or build some ground based AA.
Logged

Akura

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: R.U.S.E.
« Reply #11 on: September 13, 2010, 11:43:08 am »

Not some smaller tanks, one smaller tank, fighting off several heavy tanks that had it on the flanks, with AT guns firing at it as well.

They only had usually two airfields, too. And certainly more than 16 planes, and I'd doubt they'd have the money to build that many. I sure didn't, and I grab as many supply depots early on as I can.
Logged
Quote
They asked me how well I understood theoretical physics. I told them I had a theoretical degree in physics. They said welcome aboard.
... Yes, the hugs are for everyone.  No stabbing, though.  Just hugs.

Nilocy

  • Bay Watcher
  • Queen of a Community.
    • View Profile
Re: R.U.S.E.
« Reply #12 on: September 13, 2010, 11:57:41 am »

Not some smaller tanks, one smaller tank, fighting off several heavy tanks that had it on the flanks, with AT guns firing at it as well.

They only had usually two airfields, too. And certainly more than 16 planes, and I'd doubt they'd have the money to build that many. I sure didn't, and I grab as many supply depots early on as I can.

Does that first occurrence happen all the time? Sometimes you just get lucky.

It seems your dumping a rather good, well balanced and genuinely interesting game over some minor quibbles you have by not being able to play properly.
Logged

umiman

  • Bay Watcher
  • Voice Fetishist
    • View Profile
Re: R.U.S.E.
« Reply #13 on: September 13, 2010, 02:23:01 pm »

Not some smaller tanks, one smaller tank, fighting off several heavy tanks that had it on the flanks, with AT guns firing at it as well.

They only had usually two airfields, too. And certainly more than 16 planes, and I'd doubt they'd have the money to build that many. I sure didn't, and I grab as many supply depots early on as I can.
Impossible. The carro series dies in one hit to any 88 caliber gun (tigers, jadgpanthers, etc.) in the game no matter what. As a primarily Italian player, I've seen my zerg rushes of light tanks die to a handful of enemy decent tanks. You must have saw the Italian super heavy instead since it looks exactly like their other tanks but with more armour than a tiger.

Likely too, since in the average game, an Italian player with access to his flak 90 trucks (experimental building) would also build his super heavies (experimental building).

kulik

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: R.U.S.E.
« Reply #14 on: September 13, 2010, 03:24:00 pm »

I like all WW2 strategies COH,MOW,TOW,CM,SP down to old PG... but i didn't liked RUSE during beta and i tried hard to like it.  ???
Logged
Pages: [1] 2