I can’t say I’ve ever been a particularly big fan of real-time strategy games' multiplayer portions. I know that sounds crazy (seeing as how StarCraft is almost a national sport in Korea), but I like devising tactics and executing them against AI more than other humans. When playing against living beings, I typically don’t think as fast due to my lack of ability in the genre. I don’t do well with micromanaging or base building.
So Dawn of War II was more my speed when it came to exhibition matches. I liked that the game put a stronger emphasis on the action elements while relegating traditional-style RTS staples to specific game modes. The same as the campaign, you had a few "Champion" units and small squads that could be recovered from capture points, putting an emphasis on pushing forward and bringing the fight to the enemy instead of meticulously researching upgrades, placing buildings, and managing resources.
Still, I understand the appeal behind that style of gameplay. It rewards more careful thinking and cautious play. It doesn’t even slow down the pace of the game, if you’re able to quickly grasp the mechanics. That being said, Dawn of War III’s multiplayer beta showed me very little that I particularly find interesting about strategy games.
via destructoid http://ift.tt/2pmY6uy