Strategy Vs Quickest on the button

[Belgarion]

Being a veteran Relic game player I was wondering if this title would help the more thoughtful to win as opposed to the quickest on the button/mouse.
IE strategy vs dexterity

[No Surrender]

I think this game would lean more to the side of strategy as most games at this level do. I can't imagine Relic putting alot of micro into this.

[Belgarion]

Micro means dexterity macro is better for the slow of mouse/fingers

[TheLoneKnight]

Physical ability shouldn't make that big of a difference in a game where you're supposed to use your head. They might as well call it Real Time Micromanagement. :p

[ObsceneName]

No matter how hard you try, you cant get rid of micro, micro is what seperates winners from losers Go play a TBS and even then Micro still seperates the losers from winners, micro can be summed up as this, who ever uses their unit to the fullest and is that not in it self strategy?

[Magus]

However, using a unit to its fullest should not have to involve constant attention. Any game where I have to order each unit or unit group in combat to target something that is not unusual, it is a contest of micro. If, however, units are intelligent enough for the most part that you only have to order them when you want a specific result, there is still micro, but its not "who can do the 20 things per second they need to do best," its "who can understand the battle enough to know that they need this special order executed, orders they only give once every few seconds." That may still technically be micro, but its not the kind of micro we all know and despise (well, some dont despise it, but I don't understand why....)

Edit: If you need an example as to the second case, Homeworld 2 gave each unit target priorities, so if you took your entire battlegroup and group-attacked your opponents battlegroup, they would perform adequately. If you then undertook a bit of battle-management by hitting subsystems with your strike wings, and maybe ignoring combat ships to take out that carrier, you'd get the ideal which I espouse. However, even in that game that doesn't always happen, because getting people of equivalent skill together with no serious screwups and strategies that could counter eachother was pretty rare. But when it happened....

[Penitent]

I agree, if a unit requires constant attention/micro, then its unintelligent design.

Stuff like anti-tank weapons shooting tanks over infantry, perhaps even waiting a few more seconds if its "knows" the tank will be in range soon, that is intelligent design which requires less micro. You could argue that micro is strategy, but I think units should be able to fight for themselves without nannying.

Excessive micro is a failing of DoW I feel, you can't take your eye of anything, its not so much strategy as having to tell your troops who their are meant to be shooting halfway through the battle, closest enemy just isn't good enough.

Some micro is good, you should have to think about what units goes in first, where to move each unit, but when the shooting starts you shouldn't have to continually reassign targets, in DoW I am too busy microing most of the time to enjoy the graphics. I never "watch" battles because I'm too focused on constant micro moves that will decide the battle.

[Da_Loop]

theres one thing that I'm getting quite tired of, its the lack of realism. Somehow, someone, sometime should make a game with realism such as infantries getting hit by a rocket DIES instead of going "nah nah a boo boo, can't touch me cuz i'm a infantry biatch!".

[Thalasion]

Go play close combat.

[Maximus Decimus]

I disagree Obscene.

What Belgarion is referring to, I believe, is the likes of micro you see in blizzard titles where superior strategy pales to superior micro abilities. Frankly, it shouldn’t matter if one player has an APM of 1000 and another of 200.

I believe CoH is going to be a very strategic game, it won’t matter if you can dance around your allied troops because if they are pinned and outgunned they will die. The physics system and unit AI should also help this when considering assaulting fortified positions and attacking the enemy in general. There will be less micromanagement as units will seek cover wherever and whenever possible.

[Raith]

sadly games where you can't dance, or have lots of micro are considered 'Uncompetitive' and will be overlooked by many people. At least thats the impression I get these days.

[Belgarion]

I think there should be a balance of intelligent troops ie Rocketeers using rocket instead of meleeing etc and you ordering your troops to be suicidal ie sending plain infantry after tanks. They should act as comes natural unless ordered to do different

[Da_Humie]

Guys; take a good, hard look at the name of the company developing the game. Now, take a look at the other titles they've made.

There's your answer.

[Noir]

What happens when said company decides to try something new?

[Koki]

Just keep the squads, give one soldier in each squad a radio and that's it. Also, semi-AI would be nice; like, 'Go sturm that building' would be the most precise way of issuing orders. You can't order to 'move to coordinate 3432:7979'.

Oh wait, this is looking like Close Combat 3D with more gore...

[Xenocide]

Would that be a bad thing? If relic could make a gorgeous and accessible WW2 rts game then they would, once again make me thankful for their contribution to the world of pc gaming.

[ObsceneName]

Blizzards only microfest game was Warcraft 3, starcraft = exact opposite. But, just like any other game the pro's micro'd the losers didn't. Just like theamazing gosu guy that can beat 4 zerglings with one marine and a medic.

[Da_Humie]

I'm hoping for an easy access game that's fun to play and still has some good strategy without too much micro-management.

Wait, that's a contradiction of terms...

Well, gimme good strategy then.

[Belgarion]

What I would like is a chess type RTS as opposed to a checkers type ie many different strats to the same situation.

[Da_Humie]

I couldn't have said it better myself Belgarion

[Stinger]

I don't care much for Strategy and I HATE quickest on the button.
Here's hoping for TACTICS .

Ops, did all the Command and Conquer people out there learn a new word ?

You know guys, in the real world people use cover (and blow it up), concealment, movement and fire.
They don't just run up on one unit with the best unit to beat the other specific unit...Nope. You have one team laying down suppressive fire and another team flanking the suppressed team using cover and concealment.

Here's hoping for a game where I use my brain as much as I use my mouse.

//Stinger

[Bobacanoosh]

Requiring good use of units is fine, but the problem with an a RTS is that this can quickly devolve into a clickfest where speed with the mouse is more important than actual strategy. I'm with Stinger, I want a game where I need to move units into cover or flanking attacks but don't have to constantly move one unit half an inch away from the ones he's fighting so he won't be in close combat. That sort of movement isn't much fun.

[General Nuke Em]

Obscene, I didn't buy starcraft to play an RPG game where you play the role of a Marine, with a sexy female medic at his side to heal wounds caused by the wild native Zerglings of Tarsonis.

The only reason they're "pros" is because the unit AI was so dumb you had to micro it to get maximum combat effectiveness. Hopefully in Company of Heroes, the unit AI will be good enough so that you don't need to constatnly tell every unit exactly what to do.

[Belgarion]

Well Strategy/ tactics are very similar in my book but lets not play word games.
The clickfest is exactly what this game should avoid

[Noir]

That'll be a case of irony, a WWII game that has the potential to start doing away with the elements that plague RTSes to this day...

[Belgarion]

Well this is a huge opportunity which could make this a huge hit which Im sure it will be.

[Ammon Ra]

how can you say that sc wasn't a microfest? Given you did have a 200 unit limit, but there were many "specials" that you could use that destroyed your enemies faster than they did yours: clickfest.

relic did say somewherere that the game will be more of a focus towards strategy and not "micromanagment simulator". Ergo, sc, Wc3 Et. clones style of gameplay is out of the window [hopefully].

/me crosses fingers.

p.s. would you consider dow gamplay microfestish or not?

[naradaman]

No, theres no need to worry. I have full faith in Relic that this game will contain minimal micro. Relic aren't about following a formula, or the pack for that matter. They are proper developers, who atleast try (and succeed for the most part) to innovate, instead of rehashing the same crap to make money.

I assure you Raith, theres no need to worry about the appeal of this game. The gfx are so pretty not even an FPSer could miss it :b. This pretty much sums it all up:

Guys; take a good, hard look at the name of the company developing the game. Now, take a look at the other titles they've made.
Just with the E3 coverage and the preview we've seen, this game has already shaken the RTS world. If Blizzard want to compete for king of RTS developing this new generation, they're gonna have some stiff competition. (Come to think of it, what is blizzard developing? BG3 I hope ;))

[Thunderhawk]

If CoH will actually require tactice I will die happy. That was one of the shortfalls in DoW. It usually poils down to mass rush and whoever can micro better wins. Hmm, I wonder if the Mod community for DoW would like that idea *runs over to the DoW Mod forum*

[Ammon Ra]

/me waits for thunderhawk to get smiten by the microfestish dowers...

:p

[3zekiel]

Interesting is Ammon Ra's sig. No one's really duplicated the nifty features and order-queing and sundry other awesomeness of Total Annihilation. I think we could look to that game for unit AI and micro-curtailment, although I realize it's quite a different sort of game.

[severijn]

you mean the total "oh no, my units got stuck, again!" annihilation AI?

I'd like to see a unit that enters combat when the combat is upon him. When he meets his enemies, he and his squad engage the combat, and an battle AI will take care of the execution. There is no such thing as human interaction...the combat is just for the units AI.

Ofcourse, you can order them to fight towards a certain objective, and order them a hasty retreat, when necessary. The victor in combat will be decided on the grounds of who has the best morale, who is standing on beneficial terrain and who isn't...exhaustion, luck(which is present in any form of combat), the squad leaders skill and experience...

It would nearly eliminate all the micro.

To see what I'm talking about, go play kohan 1 or 2.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

The units in TA and presumably SC will all be, in effect, robots. That's the theme.

[Belgarion]

Hmm Lots of good points but no dev input.
Kinda points to a finished product which is just being tweaked and not actively changed.

[Starfisher]

Or designed. Plus, nothing has been said here other than, "Micro good, micro bad" or "Squads should do [something incredibly complex and hard to program]"

[Belgarion]

What has been suggested is that units when ordered into combat should always try to do what they are best at not just stumble into melee. ie ranged units should always try to use range first or artillery should use art first before being forced to combat in another way.
So I still think this thread has some mileage yet