the solution seems simple enough, non ranked play.

That is, have the ladder for competitive PvP players, and non ranked play for those who would like to finish a game rather then lose / "win" (via opponent quitting) in 5 minutes.

I would expect things to be even worse in non ranked play. People quitting when they have no chance of winning happens in every game, ranked or not. In ranked play there is at least some incentive to stay in and try to turn things around.

True. If you and a friend agreed to build for 20 minutes before attacking, the same scenario would happen, although maybe you wouldn't feel the frustration that Brad describes when he says he "can’t just get to play the actual game". The slope is still there, and every lost battle ensures that you're less able to fight the next, until you eventually decide to resign. In some games perhaps a cunning strategy can turn the tables around, but at high level play that is very uncommon.

Original poster: If you want to try something competitive and fun, check out League of Legends. It's a MOBA rather than RTS, but the matchmaker's pretty good after the first 20 or so games and you quickly get into repeated fun experiences of 30-50 min each.

That said, MOBA not RTS... but similar!

I saw this coming eventually

It's possible to make an RTS that doesn't have this to a large degree (Kohan), but it's generally a fault of the genre.  You're dead right on the 20 mins rule just leading to the same situation- people would generate a rush based on the given rules.  This is mentioned in the Sirlin post I made earlier as well.

Besides, if comeback mechanics were too strong (See SF4 ultras)- that tends to encourage negative tactics, or would make initial battles meaningless, which isn't particularly good design.

Honestly, the complaints made by Brad here, sound very much like complaints made by some in the fighting game community- which is another reason why I posted that article by Sirlin.  That said, there comes a point where the barriers can make a game unfun, which is why I don't play certain games.  Starcraft has plenty of those barriers, some of which are even intentional (SF4 does the same thing, and I consider it bad design in both cases.)

The OP is a little overblown. Im a platinum player and have never seen anyone quit out if there initial rush fails.  

YOu might encounter cheese every 1 in 5 games. Occasionally there is a try hard cannon rush but if you scout the 2 or three places and hv good building placement its easily stoppable. Probes can attack too!!!

The frustrating thing about the lower levels is that majority of the time ppl use the same build. Terran it 3 rax MMM 1 base all in. Zerg it fast Roach off 1 base. when you learn to deal with these things you get easy wins rise up the ladder and then start playing the epic 3-4-5 base games that go back and forth and require constant unit composition cahnges and a battle for upgrades. Fighting or watchtower control and battleing it out for specific areas on the map just to gain a small advantage not to actually win the game then and there but to give you the best oppotunity too.

For me, being a protoss player. I have several solid openings that are designed to hold off that INITIAL all in rush. Zerg - 3 gate, with 1 zealot, multiple sentry and mass stalker. This allows you to FF the ramp and hold off roaches with stalkers....NOTE: I only do that specific build if i scout a spawing pool and no expo. Rarely are you able to see the Roach warren start but then if the rush dosnt come expand. Into 6 gate pressure with mass sentry to split there army.

Against terran. 1 gate, robo, FE. Or 1 Gate robo into 3 gate robo. Observer is key to see whats coming.

Cheese is stopable and very satisfying when you do. It took me a while to relise that at ealry levels the best way to avoid the cheese is to chees yourself......then when your in high gold league. YOu can play a "normal" game which is very enjoyable.

At the lower levels, a 3 void ray rush against zerg works 95% of the time. And if it dosnt it induces so much defence that your ground army can stomp them. I have never cannon rushed.....thats no fun, but 4 gateing & void ray rush  are the extend of my "Cheese" and they are not really all in plays, as you can transition out of it.

Macro and build order are very important to prevent it as well, scouting is essential, but if you miss it it dosnt mean complete death. Protoss have sentrys to hold the ramp, i suggest you use them to get past that initial crap.

I know at times its frustrating but stick it out. Scout, adapt, and when you get into upper gold the games are very enjoyable. Youll still get cheesed occasionally but it not at the insane levels of the lower leagues. And then the reward for winning is the feeling you get when you have just outwitted your opponent with good macro and a solid unit composition.

The rewards are there, just stick it out and when you get a game where every mineral on the map is mined out and there is one final battle that you win by having one stalker and a Dark tempar left over. Its a very gratifying feeling, 45minutes well spent and a replay youll watch again and again.

Work on it. Love it enjoy it and the game will love you back. Yes some ppl a sad all in losers. Rise above it and enjoy the potential every game bring. Oh, and dont be afraid to bad mouth the CHEESING FKER after you win. Even more gratifying hearing them cry and try justify that it wasnt an all in build. lmfao.

Enjoy, and be sure to smile

Starcraft?  Tactical maneuver?  It's a bit too simple for much of that.  You'd have to actually build up first.  When people are doing lame crap rush strategies in braindead RTS games, there isn't anything else to them.  You have to build up, get defensive lines, sprawl out across a map first.  Only then do you have strategic warfare on a bigger scale where a bit of brilliance in the face of defeat can turn the thing around.

The crux of the problem, they're playing to win instead of enjoying the game itself.  A losing battle should be a blast, if it's not you've picked the wrong hobby and need to find something you actually enjoy, like knitting!  Back when I was bad news, the most fun I ever had playing RTS games was when I was getting my ass kicked.  My favorite people to play were the few who could challenge me seriously enough to stop messing around while not resorting to five minute tactics.  The ones who made me work to survive were just sheer fun, I had to turn my brain on if I wanted to keep the game going long enough to have a good go of the systems in play.

Well, Battle.net is a system that encourages that kind of behavior. The only thing that affects your ranking is a win or a loss. Sure enough, people will chase rankings the same way they chase shiny armor in World of Warcraft.

To be fair, I haven't seen all-in strategies being employed very often in high level tournament play (although I don't follow the game too closely, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). These players have the skill to counter any early rush if they see it coming (and they usually do, since they scout very well), making those strategies too high risk to employ at this level of play.

Personally, as someone who only plays casually these days, I prefer the gameplay of something like Company of Heroes (victory points, the way resources work and low unit count).

The problem is that their are different types of people. People who derive fun from winning and those who derive fun from the game itself. And of course there's a whole multitude of people like me who are somewhere in between.

If it is possible for a gamer to derive fun from the game itself and not from winning then I would argue that the game is poorly designed. In fact, I would question whether the player is even playing a game and not simply toying with a map editor. A well designed game motivates the player and makes them want to win in a meaningful way.

Why do you think Tetris, arguably the greatest game of all time, was so popular? Was it because people simply liked playing with shapes and still had fun even when they lost? No. It was because Tetris, like all great games, motivated the player to place the shapes in the right way and ultimately "win" the game (get a new high score). In some ways Tetris is a lot like Starcraft. If the OP were playing Tetris and not Starcraft, I would image he would say:

"I don't like Tetris anymore. In my last five Tetris games I kept getting three of those z-shaped figures in a row. I want to enjoy the game by getting shapes that nicely fit into the holes I make. The only choice I have is to figure out how to make holes that fit the z-shape. But when I do that I sometimes get three square block figures in a row and now my z-shape strategy doesn't work! I hate having to keep up and create new strategies when I get the same shape multiple times in a row! Realistically the only thing Mr. Pajitnov can do is not allow the game to release the same shapes multiple times in a row. That way I can finally enjoy the game and not worry about winning!"

interesting thing in league of legends, if you finish a game you get more points than if you quit prematurely. with extra bonus for "long defense" if you lose / protracted offense if win. 

No actually I think it is the game.  Blizzard has a history of making games that have strategy tailored to people with ADHD.... 

Every since Warcraft 2, in 1995 anyway.

Since that time I can't think of a single strategy game they had release that didn't have some form of Rush tactic.... and it also seems that as the designs became more modern the effectivness of "Rushing" increased.

I think that their games` designs encourage that sort of play.

Nothing wrong with that, I am just not in thier marketing "target group", and don't buy thier games (at least not since Warcraft 3).

I pity you.  A lot.

If you didn't enjoy playing Tetris, torturing yourself for countless hours on end simply to achieve a high score no one will ever care about, you are one poor bastard.  Thinking like this makes those morons that do stupid shit to get into Guinness look really smart.  At least they get their name in a book, immortalized in history as the rejects they were.

If you just want to challenge yourself, hold your breath.

I think you are one of those win/lose players then. I lose games all the time and still enjoy them. I don't have to win a game to like a game. Hell I might not even become good at a game but still play it. It's about fun, not winning and losing for some of us. There is nothing poorly designed about a game that people enjoy whether they lose or win. I think you completely missed point on this one.