I laughed at that comic, but still, DF should look beyond the pencils and word balloons and look here, in the forums to find the truth. You know where the truth is? *taps heart* Here. Right here.
Please, Gabe and Tycho hate this forum more than they hate Brutal Legend.
If it hadn't been impressed on them the value of having a huge community to carry your banner, these forums would have been deleted years ago.
What I think was the final in-game battle vs. Drowning Doom, at the Sea of Black Tears.
Holy shit! That was the most fun I've had playing a video game in, like ... years? Since Shadow of the Colossus? Granted, I haven't played much except Rock Band since then.
Is multiplayer this fun? Do you guys have any tips for someone who:
(1) Has trouble on medium difficulty, and
(2) Has never played any multiplayer game, ever, over Xbox Live?
Qingu on
0
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
edited October 2009
You're not yet done, you have one more level Qingu.
1) I had some trouble on medium, but the way to do it is to follow the multiplayer post Cantido has (post #2). It helps a lot.
2) Do some 2v2 to help get you into the motions of playing online
What I think was the final in-game battle vs. Drowning Doom, at the Sea of Black Tears.
Holy shit! That was the most fun I've had playing a video game in, like ... years? Since Shadow of the Colossus? Granted, I haven't played much except Rock Band since then.
Is multiplayer this fun? Do you guys have any tips for someone who:
(1) Has trouble on medium difficulty, and
(2) Has never played any multiplayer game, ever, over Xbox Live?
You have one fight left.
The good news is that multiplayer has AI Battles with different difficulties. Take your time and play around with that. Also, the OP has as much guidance to multiplayer as I could think of and a list of friendly players.
Other than the Baron Rushing, multiplayer is fucking glorious. And I gave DF my input on multiplayer tweaks.
You're not yet done, you have one more level Qingu.
1) I had some trouble on medium, but the way to do it is to follow the multiplayer post Cantido has (post #2). It helps a lot.
2) Do some 2v2 to help get you into the motions of playing online
I definitely would echo what's above. Playing around with the AI Practice for a while and get comfortable. It'll also expose you to the quirks of the different maps you'll encounter. The guide in the OP is valuable for emphasizing how you need to approach the fight.
If you get particularly stuck, or are just curious, watch this thread for when Kor throws up his www.livestream.com/pabrutallegend link. It might seem strange, but even just watching how he approached a couple different situations in a game gave me ideas for how to improve my own style.
Doing 2v2 is almost impossible on the PS3 unless you arrange a game. The community is just too small. I have queued up for some ranked 2v2 games on multiple occasions and waited as much as 30 minutes before canceling out. Its a shame really.
The PS3 Brutal Legend community was dead before it ever even got started. I was rank 36 or something ridiculous like that when I got my 50th win.
Lucascraft on
0
KlykaDO you have anySPARE BATTERIES?Registered Userregular
Re: unit data on first page, does Drowning Doom not have those "black riders" with scythes of blue fire as units that you constantly fight in the game?
They seemed like they'd provide the same role as the fire barons...
Re: unit data on first page, does Drowning Doom not have those "black riders" with scythes of blue fire as units that you constantly fight in the game?
They seemed like they'd provide the same role as the fire barons...
They're in there.. lower left on the radial menu. But they're tier 3 units.
Re: unit data on first page, does Drowning Doom not have those "black riders" with scythes of blue fire as units that you constantly fight in the game?
They seemed like they'd provide the same role as the fire barons...
Shit, I forgot Reapers.
What tier are they? My friend has my copy of BL at the moment.
What I can tell you about Reapers is that they take long to get, and are expensive to make. But they are fast, and hit REALLY FUCKING HARD. Very different from the Barons. A single Reaper can cut Barons to bloody ribbons...If you last long enough to get to that tier. Double Team gives you control of the horse and scythe. But you move so fast it's hard to control. It also causes enemies to flee in fear.
Re: unit data on first page, does Drowning Doom not have those "black riders" with scythes of blue fire as units that you constantly fight in the game?
They seemed like they'd provide the same role as the fire barons...
Shit, I forgot Reapers.
What tier are they? My friend has my copy of BL at the moment.
What I can tell you about Reapers is that they take long to get, and are expensive to make. But they are fast, and hit REALLY FUCKING HARD. Very different from the Barons. A single Reaper can cut Barons to bloody ribbons...If you last long enough to get to that tier. Double Team gives you control of the horse and scythe. But you move so fast it's hard to control. It also causes enemies to flee in fear.
Based on my limited experience, and the fact that the reapers are tier 3 ... it almost seems like the barons should be switched with the big-fisted dudes for Ironheade. This would also mirror the progression of how you team up with these units in the game. I wonder if the whole thing is just a mistake.
Also, your car totally fucks up the reapers. You can just run them over and then back up and run them over again, over and over. Very satisfying.
Yeah, its unfortunate that the Reapers are tier 3. It pretty much puts them out of reach as a viable counter to Baron rushing. Of course, its probably a good thing that they're T3. If they were T2 we'd all be complaining about Reaper rushing.
Lucascraft on
0
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
edited October 2009
Reapers aren't that bad I've found. Razorgirls can pick them off while they're running around, you might have to have some headbangers as sacrifices.
I'm having some trouble fighting tainted coil, mainly because you have to kill the ground units before you have to take down the nuns or the priests because they heal instantly when they come at your with 10 people to take down a tower.
Just beat it. Good game, but the second half (post-Lionwhyte) got a bit too formulaic, and I thought the whole experience lost a lot of steam. It wasn't bad, but the sense of wonder and amazement that occurs when you first see the world is pretty much gone by the end - it doesn't help that the last two or three areas are really boring, visually.
Cherrn on
All creature will die and all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai.
I'm primarily a TC player, and the best strategy that people used against me (other than a Baron rush) is to do an instant hero bum rush and try to pick off a nun before any units are built. TC players basically have to baby-sit their nuns until they have at least one squad. If you can catch your opponent scouting around, you should swoop in and kill a nun. They go down FAST like that. I've lost a handful of games simply because I wasn't being attentive enough to my nuns and I lost 100 or 200 resources worth of builders before I ever got an army out.
Lucascraft on
0
TrynantManiac BrawlerRank 20.100 and full WildRegistered Userregular
Re: unit data on first page, does Drowning Doom not have those "black riders" with scythes of blue fire as units that you constantly fight in the game?
They seemed like they'd provide the same role as the fire barons...
Shit, I forgot Reapers.
What tier are they? My friend has my copy of BL at the moment.
What I can tell you about Reapers is that they take long to get, and are expensive to make. But they are fast, and hit REALLY FUCKING HARD. Very different from the Barons. A single Reaper can cut Barons to bloody ribbons...If you last long enough to get to that tier. Double Team gives you control of the horse and scythe. But you move so fast it's hard to control. It also causes enemies to flee in fear.
Reapers are Tier 3, as Qingu said. Also, the scythe attack while Double Team has a pretty fun knock back if you manage to hit
And it's only infantry that flee in fear I believe.
Just beat it. Good game, but the second half (post-Lionwhyte) got a bit too formulaic, and I thought the whole experience lost a lot of steam. It wasn't bad, but the sense of wonder and amazement that occurs when you first see the world is pretty much gone by the end - it doesn't help that the last two or three areas are really boring, visually.
Really? I thought the goth environments were amazing.
Wish there was a Tainted Coil land that you go to for the end game, though.
Just beat it. Good game, but the second half (post-Lionwhyte) got a bit too formulaic, and I thought the whole experience lost a lot of steam. It wasn't bad, but the sense of wonder and amazement that occurs when you first see the world is pretty much gone by the end - it doesn't help that the last two or three areas are really boring, visually.
Really? I thought the goth environments were amazing.
Wish there was a Tainted Coil land that you go to for the end game, though.
Yeah, I wasn't impressed with the jungle, but the goth area was awesome. You have to experience it outside of your car. The eeriness of the sounds and subtle music fits it nicely.
I'm primarily a TC player, and the best strategy that people used against me (other than a Baron rush) is to do an instant hero bum rush and try to pick off a nun before any units are built. TC players basically have to baby-sit their nuns until they have at least one squad. If you can catch your opponent scouting around, you should swoop in and kill a nun. They go down FAST like that. I've lost a handful of games simply because I wasn't being attentive enough to my nuns and I lost 100 or 200 resources worth of builders before I ever got an army out.
I try to wait for a hero to do that, but they seem to forget about my chains solo. They think I'm off to the side just messing around then bam, chains, two combos, and lighting spam, coupled with my first pain party which is probably out by now. An easy 50 fans, then I set them on a leech and go harass the enemies starters
Just beat it. Good game, but the second half (post-Lionwhyte) got a bit too formulaic, and I thought the whole experience lost a lot of steam. It wasn't bad, but the sense of wonder and amazement that occurs when you first see the world is pretty much gone by the end - it doesn't help that the last two or three areas are really boring, visually.
Really? I thought the goth environments were amazing.
Wish there was a Tainted Coil land that you go to for the end game, though.
Yeah, I wasn't impressed with the jungle, but the goth area was awesome. You have to experience it outside of your car. The eeriness of the sounds and subtle music fits it nicely.
Replaying the campaign, I talk to the NPCs more. They same some crazy shit.
It seems sexytime is The Zalias favorite time, in a stereotypical Amazon Metal Chick fashion.
Based on my limited experience, and the fact that the reapers are tier 3 ... it almost seems like the barons should be switched with the big-fisted dudes for Ironheade. This would also mirror the progression of how you team up with these units in the game. I wonder if the whole thing is just a mistake.
I'm not certain if giving Ironheade anti-vehicle heavy infantry in the 2nd tier is necessarily the way to go. I think that Ironheade needs that counter infantry unit (like DD needs the Ratgut) but that the Barons are probably effective in a few too many categories: you get them early, they're reasonably priced, they're fast as hell, and they molest just about everything that moves.
A number of good solutions have already been proposed: increase cost, decrease damage versus buildings, etc. Given that they use fire, they do have decreased damage against vehicles, right? Another idea might be to limit the total number of Baron squads you can spawn at any one time.
Paradiso on
0
TrynantManiac BrawlerRank 20.100 and full WildRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
So was anyone else completely unsurprised when Yahtzee pretty much hated the game? Or at least disliked it or something?
I'm starting to wonder why I think this game is absolutely fucking awesome when so many people just plain don't like it. Every reviewer/critic/journalist/webcomic artist that I admire or hold respect for tends to hate this game, and finding myself in a gaming minority like this when I see such a brilliant game in front of me is beginning to be irksome.
EDIT: Might as well nitpick here. I really wish there was a better name for the genre Brutal Legend belongs in place of "Action/RTS". I can't appreciate a name that has to use a backslash in the middle to denote a meaning. Worse, "Action/RTS" implies that it can't decide if it's an RTS or an Action game and has to switch between the two, creating a clashing experience. Personally I would call these games (Sacrifice, Battlezone, etc.) "Action Strategy"
Need to play the game more. I can't get it off my mind but I haven't had time to attend to Brutal Legend's multiplayer. Maybe tonight is a good night since the developers are all going to be playing this evening.
Based on my limited experience, and the fact that the reapers are tier 3 ... it almost seems like the barons should be switched with the big-fisted dudes for Ironheade. This would also mirror the progression of how you team up with these units in the game. I wonder if the whole thing is just a mistake.
I'm not certain if giving Ironheade anti-vehicle heavy infantry in the 2nd tier is necessarily the way to go. I think that Ironheade needs that counter infantry unit (like DD needs the Ratgut) but that the Barons are probably effective in a few too many categories: you get them early, they're reasonably priced, they're fast as hell, and they molest just about everything that moves.
A number of good solutions have already been proposed: increase cost, decrease damage versus buildings, etc. Given that they use fire, they do have decreased damage against vehicles, right? Another idea might be to limit the total number of Baron squads you can spawn at any one time.
That would go too far, unless your talking about requiring more slots or making less per unit. I like the increase cost option. I think they produce quickly too, but the resource thing is more important.
So was anyone else completely unsurprised when Yahtzee pretty much hated the game? Or at least disliked it or something?
I'm starting to wonder why I think this game is absolutely fucking awesome when so many people just plain don't like it. Every reviewer/critic/journalist/webcomic artist that I admire or hold respect for tends to hate this game, and finding myself in a gaming minority like this when I see such a brilliant game in front of me is beginning to be irksome.
Do you play a lot of videogames? I haven't played much of anything since the PS2/Gamecube generation, aside from Rock Band. So for me, I think I enjoy Brutal Legend because it doesn't automatically coalesce into some preconceived notion of genre.
But for people like Tycho and pro game reviewers who constantly play games, I'd imagine that their preconceptions are ossified by established genres. Tycho, for example, insists it's an RTS game and was frustrated when he tried to play it as an RTS game. Maybe it's because I read the comic (and Schaffer's response) before I picked the game up, but I don't think this would have even occurred to me.
I do think the game could have done a better job focusing the player on the action aspects and simplifying the RTS aspects—it could have been "blended" better. But I wouldn't be surprised if the game appeals to less hardcore players with less expectations of how an RTS "should" play.
Might as well nitpick here. I really wish there was a better name for the genre Brutal Legend belongs in place of "Action/RTS". I can't appreciate a name that has to use a backslash in the middle to denote a meaning. Worse, "Action/RTS" implies that it can't decide if it's an RTS or an Action game and has to switch between the two, creating a clashing experience. Personally I would call these games (Sacrifice, Battlezone, etc.) "Action Strategy"
PC Gamer had an issue where they talked about these sorta games like Battlezone, Urban Assault, and Uprising. I believe they coined the term "Straction." Which doesn't sound all that great.
Yea, I know... why the fuck did I have a subscription to PC Gamer?
So was anyone else completely unsurprised when Yahtzee pretty much hated the game? Or at least disliked it or something?
I'm starting to wonder why I think this game is absolutely fucking awesome when so many people just plain don't like it. Every reviewer/critic/journalist/webcomic artist that I admire or hold respect for tends to hate this game, and finding myself in a gaming minority like this when I see such a brilliant game in front of me is beginning to be irksome.
I'd posit that there are a couple reasons why this appears to be a love it/hate it kind of game.
The first is that some of us have played this "Action Strategy" style of game before (see: Sacrifice) and love how it feels.
For the second, I wonder if the dislike to the game comes as a manner of pace of consumption. This is purely speculative, but when you live and breathe games for a living I don't think you have the luxury of slowly taking in any one title over time. With the frenetic release schedule I think one has little choice but to dive into a game balls deep and consume it as fast as possible.
Someone like me on the other hand, who can only allot a small amount of time toward gaming, samples things slowly and methodically. Brutal Legend worked for me because it introduced all the possibilities multiplayer presents one step at a time. As I worked through the game, the different layers were draped over me like some sort of metal god lasagna. As I learned each new aspect: action, rhythm, RTS, etc I grew more and more comfortable with how they all played together. I didn't resent their introduction; I relished the diversity.
Now, one can argue, and it would be reasonable, that a good game shouldn't require a more languid pace to be enjoyed. I can't refute that.
Now one can argue, and it would be reasonable, that a good game shouldn't require a more languid pace to be enjoyed. I can't refute that.
I think the difference between a "good" game and a "great" game is that great games introduce entirely new forms of gameplay that necessarily have a learning curve, and thus a more deliberate pacing.
The kind of people you are talking about will pick up a new game that they are already experts at. The game may be the most visually awesome, well-balanced, polished game ever put out there, but if it doesn't present something new—if you can be an expert at the game without ever having playing it—I think something is missing.
Might as well nitpick here. I really wish there was a better name for the genre Brutal Legend belongs in place of "Action/RTS". I can't appreciate a name that has to use a backslash in the middle to denote a meaning. Worse, "Action/RTS" implies that it can't decide if it's an RTS or an Action game and has to switch between the two, creating a clashing experience. Personally I would call these games (Sacrifice, Battlezone, etc.) "Action Strategy"
PC Gamer had an issue where they talked about these sorta games like Battlezone, Urban Assault, and Uprising. I believe they coined the term "Straction." Which doesn't sound all that great.
Yea, I know... why the fuck did I have a subscription to PC Gamer?
I always figured if we were absolutely required to assign a name to every conceivable genre, "RTT" would fit best for this type of game. Instead of real time strategy, it's real time tactics, in the sense that the game is focused on the fight itself, rather than the whole resource and tech tree strategy.
But it's not ideal. In my mind, I always saw games like starcraft as a general simulator, as in you're filling in the role of top tier command that requires a lot of "big picture" decisions. Stuff like Brutal Legend puts you in the role of a sergeant.. you're worried about the local fight and that's about it.
Then there's stuff like MOO that I consider "admiral simulators".
I like the new thread title. If only there truly were a Battle of Ozzfest. It would be the epic of the ages.
Lucascraft on
0
KorKnown to detonate from time to timeRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
So I just sent a PM back to double fine as well. Entirely talked about multiplayer balance.
Whoever keeps saying that nerfing barons to do less damage to buildings... yeah, that doesn't work.
All the barons would do, is turn to your units and kill them, and then go back to your base.
It just means that your game would now last 5 minutes 35 seconds, instead of 5 minutes 15 seconds, and you'd still lose.
I talked about the barons though. I also mentioned DD having no way to leash a leader unit, and about there being no real reason to use TC's Tier 2 units when you can just upgrade for the superior versions.
Posts
Please, Gabe and Tycho hate this forum more than they hate Brutal Legend.
If it hadn't been impressed on them the value of having a huge community to carry your banner, these forums would have been deleted years ago.
Holy shit! That was the most fun I've had playing a video game in, like ... years? Since Shadow of the Colossus? Granted, I haven't played much except Rock Band since then.
Is multiplayer this fun? Do you guys have any tips for someone who:
(1) Has trouble on medium difficulty, and
(2) Has never played any multiplayer game, ever, over Xbox Live?
1) I had some trouble on medium, but the way to do it is to follow the multiplayer post Cantido has (post #2). It helps a lot.
2) Do some 2v2 to help get you into the motions of playing online
You have one fight left.
The good news is that multiplayer has AI Battles with different difficulties. Take your time and play around with that. Also, the OP has as much guidance to multiplayer as I could think of and a list of friendly players.
Other than the Baron Rushing, multiplayer is fucking glorious. And I gave DF my input on multiplayer tweaks.
He's avoiding the question. Facemelt him!
I definitely would echo what's above. Playing around with the AI Practice for a while and get comfortable. It'll also expose you to the quirks of the different maps you'll encounter. The guide in the OP is valuable for emphasizing how you need to approach the fight.
If you get particularly stuck, or are just curious, watch this thread for when Kor throws up his www.livestream.com/pabrutallegend link. It might seem strange, but even just watching how he approached a couple different situations in a game gave me ideas for how to improve my own style.
The PS3 Brutal Legend community was dead before it ever even got started. I was rank 36 or something ridiculous like that when I got my 50th win.
They seemed like they'd provide the same role as the fire barons...
They're in there.. lower left on the radial menu. But they're tier 3 units.
Shit, I forgot Reapers.
What tier are they? My friend has my copy of BL at the moment.
What I can tell you about Reapers is that they take long to get, and are expensive to make. But they are fast, and hit REALLY FUCKING HARD. Very different from the Barons. A single Reaper can cut Barons to bloody ribbons...If you last long enough to get to that tier. Double Team gives you control of the horse and scythe. But you move so fast it's hard to control. It also causes enemies to flee in fear.
Also, your car totally fucks up the reapers. You can just run them over and then back up and run them over again, over and over. Very satisfying.
I'm having some trouble fighting tainted coil, mainly because you have to kill the ground units before you have to take down the nuns or the priests because they heal instantly when they come at your with 10 people to take down a tower.
Reapers are Tier 3, as Qingu said. Also, the scythe attack while Double Team has a pretty fun knock back if you manage to hit
And it's only infantry that flee in fear I believe.
Aces Wild is a pretty stellar game.
Blog, Playing Rules; Let's Play Demon's Souls; My Backlog
Wish there was a Tainted Coil land that you go to for the end game, though.
Yeah, I wasn't impressed with the jungle, but the goth area was awesome. You have to experience it outside of your car. The eeriness of the sounds and subtle music fits it nicely.
I try to wait for a hero to do that, but they seem to forget about my chains solo. They think I'm off to the side just messing around then bam, chains, two combos, and lighting spam, coupled with my first pain party which is probably out by now. An easy 50 fans, then I set them on a leech and go harass the enemies starters
That said...I have absolutely no idea what the hell anybody is talking about on this page.
See the OP. This game is one fucking crazy Action/RTS. The first of it's kind in like 10 years.
I can't promise lag free play though,sometimes it just seems to hit me.
Replaying the campaign, I talk to the NPCs more. They same some crazy shit.
It seems sexytime is The Zalias favorite time, in a stereotypical Amazon Metal Chick fashion.
Are you here for the mating challenge?
I'm, kinda seeing someone...
Pity.
I'm not certain if giving Ironheade anti-vehicle heavy infantry in the 2nd tier is necessarily the way to go. I think that Ironheade needs that counter infantry unit (like DD needs the Ratgut) but that the Barons are probably effective in a few too many categories: you get them early, they're reasonably priced, they're fast as hell, and they molest just about everything that moves.
A number of good solutions have already been proposed: increase cost, decrease damage versus buildings, etc. Given that they use fire, they do have decreased damage against vehicles, right? Another idea might be to limit the total number of Baron squads you can spawn at any one time.
I'm starting to wonder why I think this game is absolutely fucking awesome when so many people just plain don't like it. Every reviewer/critic/journalist/webcomic artist that I admire or hold respect for tends to hate this game, and finding myself in a gaming minority like this when I see such a brilliant game in front of me is beginning to be irksome.
EDIT: Might as well nitpick here. I really wish there was a better name for the genre Brutal Legend belongs in place of "Action/RTS". I can't appreciate a name that has to use a backslash in the middle to denote a meaning. Worse, "Action/RTS" implies that it can't decide if it's an RTS or an Action game and has to switch between the two, creating a clashing experience. Personally I would call these games (Sacrifice, Battlezone, etc.) "Action Strategy"
Need to play the game more. I can't get it off my mind but I haven't had time to attend to Brutal Legend's multiplayer. Maybe tonight is a good night since the developers are all going to be playing this evening.
Aces Wild is a pretty stellar game.
Blog, Playing Rules; Let's Play Demon's Souls; My Backlog
That would go too far, unless your talking about requiring more slots or making less per unit. I like the increase cost option. I think they produce quickly too, but the resource thing is more important.
It's not that other ideas are bad.. they just might introduce lots of new problems we can't predict.
But for people like Tycho and pro game reviewers who constantly play games, I'd imagine that their preconceptions are ossified by established genres. Tycho, for example, insists it's an RTS game and was frustrated when he tried to play it as an RTS game. Maybe it's because I read the comic (and Schaffer's response) before I picked the game up, but I don't think this would have even occurred to me.
I do think the game could have done a better job focusing the player on the action aspects and simplifying the RTS aspects—it could have been "blended" better. But I wouldn't be surprised if the game appeals to less hardcore players with less expectations of how an RTS "should" play.
PC Gamer had an issue where they talked about these sorta games like Battlezone, Urban Assault, and Uprising. I believe they coined the term "Straction." Which doesn't sound all that great.
Yea, I know... why the fuck did I have a subscription to PC Gamer?
I'd posit that there are a couple reasons why this appears to be a love it/hate it kind of game.
The first is that some of us have played this "Action Strategy" style of game before (see: Sacrifice) and love how it feels.
For the second, I wonder if the dislike to the game comes as a manner of pace of consumption. This is purely speculative, but when you live and breathe games for a living I don't think you have the luxury of slowly taking in any one title over time. With the frenetic release schedule I think one has little choice but to dive into a game balls deep and consume it as fast as possible.
Someone like me on the other hand, who can only allot a small amount of time toward gaming, samples things slowly and methodically. Brutal Legend worked for me because it introduced all the possibilities multiplayer presents one step at a time. As I worked through the game, the different layers were draped over me like some sort of metal god lasagna. As I learned each new aspect: action, rhythm, RTS, etc I grew more and more comfortable with how they all played together. I didn't resent their introduction; I relished the diversity.
Now, one can argue, and it would be reasonable, that a good game shouldn't require a more languid pace to be enjoyed. I can't refute that.
The kind of people you are talking about will pick up a new game that they are already experts at. The game may be the most visually awesome, well-balanced, polished game ever put out there, but if it doesn't present something new—if you can be an expert at the game without ever having playing it—I think something is missing.
I always figured if we were absolutely required to assign a name to every conceivable genre, "RTT" would fit best for this type of game. Instead of real time strategy, it's real time tactics, in the sense that the game is focused on the fight itself, rather than the whole resource and tech tree strategy.
But it's not ideal. In my mind, I always saw games like starcraft as a general simulator, as in you're filling in the role of top tier command that requires a lot of "big picture" decisions. Stuff like Brutal Legend puts you in the role of a sergeant.. you're worried about the local fight and that's about it.
Then there's stuff like MOO that I consider "admiral simulators".
Whoever keeps saying that nerfing barons to do less damage to buildings... yeah, that doesn't work.
All the barons would do, is turn to your units and kill them, and then go back to your base.
It just means that your game would now last 5 minutes 35 seconds, instead of 5 minutes 15 seconds, and you'd still lose.
I talked about the barons though. I also mentioned DD having no way to leash a leader unit, and about there being no real reason to use TC's Tier 2 units when you can just upgrade for the superior versions.
Pokemon Safari - Sneasel, Pawniard, ????
If you know that something won't work, then surely you must have ideas for what will work, right?