To make strategy more important than APM:
1) Use hard counters (ie, every unit must lose abysmally to something).
2) Make it difficult to run injured units away.
3) Make tech switches expensive.
4) Avoid highly multipurpose units.
5) Don't add artificial "macro" mechanics (eg SC2 mule).
[citation][nom]averagejoe_1984[/nom]This is the problem with RTS games. Assuming roughly equivalent knowledge of game mechanics, he who has a faster APM shall win. To make RTS games more appealing, game companies should try to make them more like chess. They should try to make each move more important and less tweakable my quick changes in commands. Perhaps making unit movement changes less relevant to the outcome of the battle, but instead making longer term movement and attack choices more important. Its an enigma how you get a realtime strategy game to encourage strategy over speed. The first game to do it well will likely be a hit. Supreme Commander went in this direction, but the developer never polished the game to completion. Its still the closest example of what I am trying to explain.[/citation]
warcraft 3 is a lot more like what you're looking for that starcraft
I also have to agree with those who say this is what harms RTS games. A game should not be decided solely based on the speed of commands given but rather strategy and tactics. This is why I moved on to more of the Total War series as it puts more elements into the game everything from unit type, unit quality, formations, fatigue, moral, and even how fear inducing they are.
It also introduces a element of game-play that traditional RTS's fail to do where its possible for the unit that is at a natrual disadvantage to do the unexpected and actually win sometimes. In a standard RTS unit X will always lose to unit Y. But through out history we have seen instances of the one considered the underdog winning.
While older RTS games obviously can be excused for the lack of depth put into it due to limitations and what they were doing back then was ground breaking within itself newer games today have no reason to follow that anymore. Its time for the RTS genre to evolve. While a game like Starcraft 2 may be a decent game and bring back some nostalgic feelings it however won't be something epic like it could have been if they simply stopped going on the same path and moved towards something bigger.
[citation][nom]averagejoe_1984[/nom]This is the problem with RTS games. Assuming roughly equivalent knowledge of game mechanics, he who has a faster APM shall win.[/citation]
I agree that the APM Helps a lot but I don't think it's the only thing.
I played a lot of starcraft a while back with a buddy, we both had week APM's compared to those guys but no one was able to beat us...
What I am saying is that APM will aid a lot and bring an advantage on the multitasking BUT a big key to victory is proper scouting, finding weaknesses to the players tactic or setup and hitting that point hard...
I still think out of 200 to 300 apm, 1 third to half of the apm's are wasted by telling units 17 times to go to the same spot...
These guys would do a killing in Company of Heroes tho.
I'm now where near that fast with Supreme Commander... but I think I enjoy the game more.
I may be going up against 3~6 other enemy forces. LAnd, Sea and air.
There are times when I'm about to lose, but I change tactics and fight my way up. Such as when my BASE got nuked, it took out 70% of my abilities. Luckily I had a 2nd base which allowed me to recover.
Kelavarus: " Strategy is more about the long drawn out game, in which APMs are not as important. "
Actually, in long drawn out starcraft games APM is the most important, because you have bases all over the map, alot of small and vital things happening all over and at the same time. This is why the 400-500 apm guys tend to have an advantage in late game.
[citation][nom]salgado18[/nom]Does anybody else thinks that if those guys switch to science, Korean can get in a world war against everybody else and still win?(I said switch to science, not play SC in the lab)[/citation]
[citation][nom]giovanni86[/nom]I'm not dissing Koreans they are fast, but that video was sped up. Look closely and you will see towards right before the guy comes onto the screen theres like 4 seconds is real time. There fast and damn good too, but anyone can master hot keys on a keyboard and click that fast. And if you have ever watched real tournaments on youtube, they don't click that fast. I play those games on a weekly basis, it was sped up.[/citation]
Actually its not sped up. In the main starcraft leagues, the top Koreans will get an average 300 to 400 apm, which... is an average, they can actually hit 500 to 600 apm for short periods.
Not just anyone can manage these speeds, the professionals and top amateurs (200+ of them) probably play about from 10 all the way up to 16 hours a day, 6 days a week. There are thousands who try and fail. Its very competitive and players have tough lives, but can expect to earn A LOT of money if they do well in tourneys.
Starcraft 2 is different from the first game in that it automates probes, larger control groups, bindable hotkeys etc which means top players can drop their APM to about 150+