hey. hard to find a game right now. anyone feel like playing against a bad infernal player to try to improve? let me know. thanks

I think that balancing "techy/robotic/advanced" with "angelic" is possible with a few tweaks.

My favourites seem to be the most "biblical" looking - Archangels, Animancers. Both very flowy, golden, flames, and radiance.

But then the flip side are the more angular robotic looking units Argents, Kri, Vectors...which are not "biblical" looking at all i feel.

Maybe art tweaks like Kri pulsating with golden light and weilding flaming swords; or Argents wearing flowing see-through golden cloaks; or Vectors being festooned with almost religious imagery?

The most played strategy games are capable of running in potato computers. I have even found a correlation between number of players and level of graphics:

Concurrent players (average), from lower to higher graphics quality:

Chess.com: 250.000

AOE2 DE: 24.000

Broodwar remastered: 20.000

Sc2: 20.000

AOE4:10.000

Although I think the graphics must always be attractive, it is not necesary to make it hardware demanding. BW, they are billions and DORF are good examples of visually attractive and non-demanding games.

Unreal engine 5 is killing the potential player base, reduced to a few group of people capable of expending 3000$ in a gaming computer. And those are probably more into other kind of games.

I can run BW and SC2 in my laptop, but not SG or AOE4... And Im not going to spend 3000$ just to play stomgate, which is a shame, since I would love playing it. So, I will stay in BW/Sc2 until dorf or other low (but beautiful) graphics games appear.

What do you think? Do you care much about the graphics being realistic? Or would you play a pixel art game if its fun?

How are people not seeing how absolutely insanely unbalanced T1 vanguard vs infernal is. Not even just for T1 units, but for sentry post rushes/cheese too. I don't even actually see how its possible to stop 95% of the time. Not even joking. If you scout it early maybe. But if he builds a sentry off your vision and creeps in when you're on T1 its simply GG with how bob's operate. Its absolutely insane to me this balance right now. T2 and beyond sure, totally different story. But between hedgehogs and lancers and sentries its unbelievably unbalanced in favour of vanguard, like its comedic how unbalanced it is.
I suppose relentless scouting and ensuring nothing ever catches me by surprise is a strict requirement in every single game as infernal. This nerf on brute price alone I think has ruined this game, and mediocre vanguard player can easily crush T1 infernal.

I keep going back and trying to see precisely what can be done. If they go hedgehogs and I don't get early weavers its instant GG, kite death easily. Ok fair so I MUST rush to T2 weavers to stop this, if I miss this its over. Ok, that can be done. If he does a sentry rush or mass lancers, you are completely hard countered again. You have to do razor sharp precision counter builds to his exact composition to perfection or you're instantly dead.

I suppose scouting perfectly of the entire map every 10 seconds of the game and you watch his exact build and then play your entire game by a small amount of units he builds..

It feels close to impossible....... I don't get how I am alone on this. I lose to celestials all the time and nothing feels insanely overpowered to me, most are great players exploiting celestials quick expansion and mobility, and they do it well and deserve the win.

Playing against vanguard is hell on earth every single time. And look maybe T2 and T3 and late game is a little more reasonable, as hard as vanguard is with mass exo's, its still somewhat reasonable, when they get veterency it becomes close to unreasonable. But at T1 is a complete laugh, how does anyone in their right mind think T1 is even a game ? Vanguard absolutely WRECKS infernals so bad its not even funny or close at all. Like its kindof insane, no ?

My MMR is like 1700, I know I'm not a god at this game but I swear the vanguard battles I have in early to mid game are humorous how much of a joke they are. I see stuff happen and I just think "what?" someone thought this was balanced and a good game ? I couldn't even conceive that possibility that anyone at all would think that.

Luminite mining looks meh. I get that it draws from Warcraft, but I think it looks worse than workers mining from spread out minerals in SC2, for two reasons:

1. Luminite boulders look more like naked game elements and less like a natural part of the environment.
2. Luminite miners look more jumbled and cross eachother's paths more noticeably. Again, more game-ey, less natural.

SG shouldn't necessarily use patches, but maybe some other creative idea could make the mining look better. Mining gets a lot of screen time, so it's worth making it look good.

Random thought. What would RTS faction development look like if you had devs exclusively assigned to each race, and their job is to make their faction the best it can be?

So example: in Stormgate’s case, you’d have a few people on Infernals, a few on Vanguard, a few on Celestials. The key is, they’re not worried about balance yet — that can come later. They have each faction’s strengths and limitations, right? And they work with them to come up with creative ways compete. I’m not talking about arbitrary stat increases. In real war, you can’t just will your soldiers to run faster or shoot more accurately, or have infinite armor. I’m more talking about tool and ability design. So you get an encouraged one-upping, where one team creates some creative unit or ability to help them win, and the other teams either brainstorm a killer counter for it, or something else that will give them a different advantage.

You could have a team set-up that creates awesome units and abilities first, then sift through them with balance in mind. This set-up can echo how the factions would actually fight. In lore, no one’s concerned about balance or fairness. They’re trying to expel each other from existence, as gloriously as possible. Of course, you’d want a supervising team dedicated to overall balance, which veto different ideas that are too disruptive. But I think there’s value in encouraging a little disruption in the design process.

Of course there’s plenty of issues with the idea and I’m glad to hear all the ways it’s just rubbish. What are your thoughts?

"UI devs almost getting into a punch up about a button" was not on my Stormgate bingo card.

JEX/GERALD - WHO WERE THESE PASSIONATE PPL?! We need this goss. 🤣

https://youtu.be/uP0f9mEUwxE?feature=shared

It’s been a pretty significant amount of time since a major EA patch. I’m sure many people are anticipating and getting anxious for the patch to drop. What are you most looking forward to in 0.2.0?

I’m excited for the art improvements, but I think I’m most anticipating the audio improvements. I really hope they’re quite significant overhauls, and are in a more ‘weighty’ sound direction. I can’t say I love all the audio that sounds like puffs of air.

I’m also extremely interested to see if they actually do significant gameplay design changes…I surely hope so.

I've been challenging myself to try and beat co-op just by myself at higher and higher difficulties, I managed to do brutal on 3 maps so far, it's a ton of fun, two with Amara, one with Blockade, and I wasn't actually 15 yet at the time, so I noticed the amount of exp I got for wins was kinda average.

It'd be neat if you could earn EXP bounties for completing co-op maps alone. Probs not something most people would do, but still, small extra details can go a long way. Besides, the game could use extra challenges for players to try while waiting for new stuff to be finished.

As the holidays are approaching, we've moved the patch forward as a special gift to all of you. Update 0.2.0 will now launch on December 17! Surprise!

I've been trying to understand it, but there's so many units and interactions, and it randomly lists spell or interaction names, but nowhere can I go to tell what they are talking about. The "wiki" doesn't have much in it at all. Is there anywehre to go in game or internet to learn more about coop heroes and their interactions? or na?

Hey Stormgate fans! We sat down with Frost Giant Studios’ Tim Morten to talk about how they’re making Stormgate without a publisher, raising funds through crowdfunding, and keeping RTS games alive in today’s tough game dev world.
Watch on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1hjwWhIPsE

SpeakIndie Youtube Show

Redesigning the Hedgehog unit!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1hjwWhIPsE

https://preview.redd.it/ps4dwdujmk6e1.png?width=687&format=png&auto=webp&s=be8b5c8f795a10e0f3538971907a828b70cca9ab

Pretty much the question. I live in Australia, when player counts were low in older RTS games loke sc2, wc3; i could never get a good 1v1 match.

Stormgate has (apparently) no players and yet i have never not had a good 1v1 game - I'm playing folk from norway, korea...no major lag.

Maybe impacts co-op or 3v3, but i play that exclusively with friends.

I have an i7 4790k and a 980ti. Ancient stuff. I can't even install windows 11 my computer is so old. I can't install directx 12. Game runs fine at 1440p widescreen... which is a hell of a lot of pixels. I play 3 player coop with tons of units and players.

I just am confused when I hear people say performance is holding them back, when I'm playing on decade+ old hardware, on a resolution that didn't even exist back when they were released, and I'm doing 100% fine.

I feel like if you're playing a 2024 game on hardware older than a decade old... that's some pretty unrealistic expectations.

I'm all for bashing the horrible execution of this game in terms of design, art, balance, etc. But I'm just puzzled by the performance stuff. Are you guys playing on 10 year old igpus or something and expecting that to work?

He's one of the most knowledgeable people in the RTS industry. He would bring many eyeballs and credibility back to the game. And maybe put some soul back in it. FG needs to bring him on as a paid consultant. I have no confidence in the team that made what we currently have to magically turn this around. The problem is the game is just poorly conceived, but it can honestly be made much better if it was tweaked by someone like David Kim(Battle Aces Currently), or Artosis, or Catz/Scarlett/Pig(Zero Space).

You can see that games with actual experts(like the aforementioned Battle Aces and Zerospace) like those people don't have these idiotic design decisions. Stormgate had the resources. They have a decent base game. Their problem is the game feels like if a Private Equity guy was asked to make an RTS, without ever having played one, and was just randomly copy pasting stuff without understanding why things in RTS are the way they are.

If not Artosis, bring in some kind of actual pro gamer/caster who thinks about these things in a deep way. But they need some help... every $1 spent on that will probably do $10 of good compared to their current methods.

Sing along to the original here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_D0wkLyCXE
Or fill in the vocals to the instrumental version here: https://youtu.be/cdGoCo1r-AY

-----

[INTRO]

I see gossip in the Discord
I hear murmurs, I hear pleas
As the Reddit asks 'Finances?'
And the Giants won't accede

[INSTRUMENTAL]

'Our trouble' says the Reddit
And they're quite convinced they're right
'Is that these numbers just don't add up
Through all twenty twenty-five!'
But the Giants who left Blizzard
Play inside the snow they see
And they wonder why the Reddit
Wants to trust the S-E-C

There's a tempest in the Stormgate
And the mainstream press has fled
As the giants ask for patience
And the Reddit says 'It's dead'

[INSTRUMENTAL]

So the Reddit made a hue and
Well the Reddit had a cry
'They don't know what they're doing
Back to Starcraft, now goodbye!'
Now there's no more Giant mistakes
For they made a simple call
And the Stormgate husk now belongs
To Tencent.. Riot... et al

[OUTRO]

The games that turn around from initial bad releases or early access are the exception and not the norm. They usually turn around with much effort and very importantly…have enough funding to do so. Also those initial releases impressions will never really go away unless said game really and I mean really turn things around.

I don’t doubt their drive to make a better game, I doubt their creative vision as well as the funds they have left.

Warcraft 3 was my most favorite times and years of playing an RTS and to this day looking back I enjoyed the times with it more than with SC2. But as it became older and SC2 came out, I switched to SC2 and that became my game for all these years, watching the premier leagues, playing ladder and some tourneys, even doing some modding things, which I did both with war3 and sc2.

If I have to look back, the symmetrical balance more micro, slower battles and heroes was much much more interesting (but 4 races was more interesting too) than what SC2 LOTV became especially with LOTV - the expandcraft, easier to expand than to deny expanders. And SC2 had by far the most awful designed units (comparing to war3), it is like in LotV they tried hard to make more and more lame units. But some of them like Widow Mine, Swarm Host came with HotS (people joked me when I saw the free damage of SH). Then they continued - Disruptor balls, storm spam which some balances made it more viable, BC Tactical Jump - never seen so lame units if I had to compare to units from War3, SC2 and SG.

Now SG came perhaps it is time for a new RTS and forget SC2 at least for playing - seeing these unenjoyable units.

Let's see what was found wrong with SG and what really is so bad with SG compared to other games or is there such?

Graphics

BEFORE

When I first saw Stormgate, I also was disappointed, it looked like comics graphics like concept art graphics and I too wished something more graphical like SC2 at least since both are sci fi.

NOW
Graphics are good actually, the forest, post apocalyptic terrains are good, the trees are still a little meh but in graphics it does not look worse, the mobile graphics are gone I'd say, whether they remade texture or lighting fixed it.

Units are also judged - these TOY-like styles, fat units nothing realistic. In a fast paced game though readability matters. So instead of really top view units like AOE2 and such games, you need to distinguish them. So the units not looking realistic but like toys and not slim and small was needed to some point.

MODELS

I do not think the model designs are such a problem. Most of them. And that matters a lot. If the models were so bad you have to scrap the entire models all assets, that would be almost like starting over.

Also texture improvements and layers like normal/specular can greatly increase the graphics, it is just about textures and this is not hard to improve.

So where is the problem with unit designs?
The positive critics I can agree with, is that the units not only Vanguard maybe Celestial, but Van specially, too much taken from SC2 as unit designs - their roles. It is almost like playing Alternative terran

Still I am glad this 'terran' has more defense than a SC2 Terran.

Balance and unit designs

These can be completely remade about their roles and such, balance and redesigns have been part of SC2 for expansions, units get removed like mothership core. Why is this seen as destined to doom the game?? Editing stats, add/remove units is fixable.

Mechanics

Slower battles - again quite fixable that it should not lead to failing the game.
Interactions (unit AI response) and pathing - I read it is already better than ZeroSpace.

Campaign

It may not be perfect but it is something you play once to complete and move on. COOP is where you repeat in a more interesting way. I never saw campaigns failing a game, becoming a reason to stop playing the game, it is arbitrary.

Fear of no budget

Imagine they needed another 1 year to have budget to complete everything that they planned. Would this doom the game forever from that moment ? No, the game is playable now too.

How others perceive the game

Korean bias because everything there is revolving around SCBW (not even SC2) is not a reason to think SG will fail. Ofc SG struggles the same as any other RTS - niche genre that not many play.

Editor will arrive
this will allow famous maps to be made

The concept being bad - demons, angels, human

What can the concept be that will not repeat? Fantasy - made, sci fi - made, demons/doom theme - not made

To differ from SC2 they need a 4th race, a 5th and 6th race, As being veterans of 2 big RTSes SC2 and War3. if they went for symmetrical design like War3, wouldn't it be better for the game to have that many races- there will be so much to explore!

The angels should more like some Nordic aliens theme than divine (to not go into religion), and they could include races like Giants (frost giants), Lizardmen, some other alien - and all these factions to be races. They can come as DLC and perhaps some campaigns can be made of them as DLC.

That is to me better improvement of how to make the game really not another SC2 when it isn't just 3 races where one is like terran, another like zerg, third like protoss.

And to redesign creep camps and what they will do - capturing is fine but as some suggest there needs to be another reason. Maybe instead of mothership, races can hire a hero-unit as last tier unit.

When I look at my ideas I see that I also ask for a lot of things but - this is not changing what they have so far - demons, angels, human. If they really go that far to add such races. this will be the best RTS ever.

They need budget - some new race could come 1 each year, so they can wait to get budget again and this over years bring new content - fighting games do that (except they have the budget already) a lot MK1 for example brought so many new things 1 year and more after it released. And I think I see more people playing the game than I saw before.

Because lots of negativity I see comes from people who maybe play a game for 30 mins, uninstall then post how bad it is.

To me, this hero just straight up sucks. Its cooldowns for its actual useful abilities take forever. And its units just aren't all that good, and take too long to get. Am I missing something here? Or is the balance in this game just horrible for coop? With amara I can basically solo some levels with just the hero, then on top of it her army is easy to get early game, and is pretty darn good.

I've tried all of Aurlana's units, and I can't find anything that really works. Sure, any army can win in an easy scenario with good allies. But I find that I can almost never carry with Aurlana's . Are there some kind of spells/energy things I am missing here? I tried the legion hall units, and all of them seem pretty lackluster. The only units that seem half decent are the mech units, but the vectors are too squishy to really be useful(I'd love if I could use them like blink stalkers but it simply isn't very strong). The big long range thing is alright as a support, but doesn't shoot up, and you can really only use a few without severely diminishing returns(cryo tank seems to just be worse as it tickles enemies).

The main infantry that only cost minerals are decent, but squishy, and they run out of energy so fast that they basically become ticklers pretty fast, and even with your "beam of light" still aren't that good. The "zealots" are pretty decent.

Anyway, I'm just pretty discouraged because a good half of the units just seem to be garbage. Wondering if others have the same opinion or if they've found some useful/fun combos to use.