>>724716494
I'm not sure if you are trolling or not.
I'll still wanna write in case, because you might've misunderstood or maybe I explained it very bad. Tho you just repeat "bro" over and over again and write in very African-American/rap/ghetto manner which I don't really understand but I'll try my best.
The problem to me isn't existence of deeper strategies etc.(I play Melee comp) but the problem that PvP seems to be treated as the most important part of RTS these days. It is of course part of it, but I personally think(I just wanna make sure you don't think I mean everyone thinks the same) that having good singleplayer and lots of stuff to do by yourself is important. If someone is interested in more PvP stuff after that, then good. But now it seems to me(not everyone, just me) that current PvP RTS players see the PvP as "true RTS". Is it more skill based and challenging than playing singleplayer? Like duh, most likely. But so is Dark Souls PvP compared to game itself. Doesn't mean you should focus on Souls PvP over the Singleplayer experience. Same as Smash comp shouldn't be focus over casual fun. Same as Pokemon comp shouldn't be focus over casual(tho that is smallest problem for Pokemon games). Same as TF2 comp shouldn't be focus over casual fun(see how that shitshow ended with MyM).
Again. I'm not saying nobody enjoys PvP or competitive or that wanting to play it or more people play it is a bad thing, but that majority of people wants to play a game they enjoy. Introducing someone to RTS in hopes of getting them to be part of comp players shouldn't be(in my opinoon) started with
>"okay go to forum/discord and pick your roles and write this so they know you are a newbie also watch this YT videi so you know how to counter basic strats, then install..."
It's like introducing someone to TF2 by making them play Highlander.

If you think the genre is just about PvP, then it needs to be VERY casual friendly.
Like ASSFAGGOTS.
I hope that helped a bit.

fumos won (again((obviously))