Come back RTS games, I miss you :(

[Heliocentric]

To quote myself "You show me an RTS without micro and I'll show you a game you are playing wrong.

If I attack you on 4 fronts and you can't manage them all advantage me.

[Bankrotas]

To quote myself "You show me an RTS without micro and I'll show you a game you are playing wrong.

If I attack you on 4 fronts and you can't manage them all advantage me.

Does Sins of Solar empire really have micro?

[FriendlyFire]

Multi-front attacks aren't micro. They're macro. Broad strokes, even if in multiple areas at the same time. SupCom lets you do coordinated attacks without requiring you to have micro skills.

Micro would be things like spreading marines against banelings (a classic SC thing), or individually casting abilities for each unit you have.

[biz]

a RTS with battles that auto-resolve could have no micro

unit strategy is really choosing which engagements to have. not actually fiddling with units to decide the outcome

[Nalano]

Multi-front attacks aren't micro. They're macro. Broad strokes, even if in multiple areas at the same time. SupCom lets you do coordinated attacks without requiring you to have micro skills.

Micro would be things like spreading marines against banelings (a classic SC thing), or individually casting abilities for each unit you have.

This.

I have to tell a rifleman squad in Company of Heroes to throw grenades, but I do not have to tell them to spread out and keep their heads down.

[FriendlyFire]

I'm of the (possibly unpopular) opinion that I'd even throw grenades out of the window... I wouldn't mind my riflemen being intelligent enough to throw grenades as required, instead of them waiting for the commander's permission to use them. Likewise for a lot of active abilities. Ever since Warcraft 3, it seems like it's pretty much obligatory that most if not all units need at least one active ability.

Am I alone longing for units that could use all of their weapons without my constant interference? Age of Empires wasn't in any way diminished from not having archers with a "Power Shot" ability.

[Sketch]

In CoH taking the grenades manual usage out would just make the infantry OP. Part of the gameplay is using infantry to take out tanks using cover and getting them close enough to do so. If they can just do that themselves, then the tanks are pretty screwed because you can just send a group of troops near a tank safe with the knowledge that one of them will tag it.

[Nalano]

I'm of the (possibly unpopular) opinion that I'd even throw grenades out of the window... I wouldn't mind my riflemen being intelligent enough to throw grenades as required, instead of them waiting for the commander's permission to use them. Likewise for a lot of active abilities. Ever since Warcraft 3, it seems like it's pretty much obligatory that most if not all units need at least one active ability.

Am I alone longing for units that could use all of their weapons without my constant interference? Age of Empires wasn't in any way diminished from not having archers with a "Power Shot" ability.

I'm with you 100%. That said, I suspect the "every unit must have an active ability" thing is so that we have something to do with our hands while we watch battles unfold. Of course, CoH gives you at most a dozen units to handle at any one time, because they're conveniently grouped up into squads of three to six men. SC2 makes you micro every last goddamn soldier on the ground, and steadfastly refuses to allow you to bandbox more than a dozen at a time.

In CoH taking the grenades manual usage out would just make the infantry OP. Part of the gameplay is using infantry to take out tanks using cover and getting them close enough to do so. If they can just do that themselves, then the tanks are pretty screwed because you can just send a group of troops near a tank safe with the knowledge that one of them will tag it.

Well, were infantry more self-sufficient, the devs would likely just make tanks harder to kill.

[Sketch]

Well yeah, but then you just have two groups fighting with no input from you at all.

[Nalano]

Well yeah, but then you just have two groups fighting with no input from you at all.

If every map were a simple corridor, sure.

[QuantaCat]

Atleast Command & Conquer had a button for telling infantry to spread out incase of tank trying to squish em. I miss that game.

[Sketch]

If every map were a simple corridor, sure.

Still, why take out the ability to throw grenades? Position and managing to keep men alive long enough is part of the challenge, why take that out and just let the AI do it themselves? I want some control of the game left to me.

[Nalano]

Company of Heroes troops don't need to be told to avoid tank treads.

Still, why take out the ability to throw grenades? Position and managing to keep men alive long enough is part of the challenge, why take that out and just let the AI do it themselves? I want some control of the game left to me.

Maybe some of us would like strategy in our real-time strategy.

Automating the micro doesn't mean losing control. It just means freeing one up to do more macro.

[arathain]

Automating the micro doesn't mean losing control. It just means freeing one up to do more macro.

I think this is key. RTSs are always going to give the advantage to the player who can do more stuff in a shorter time frame, so decent APM will always be an advantage. What the designers can do is make that stuff more interesting. In SC2 those clicks are best spent keeping your worker production and building perfectly timed, and microing heavily in combat. In CoH the clicks are about cover, flanks, and managing multiple parts of the battle simultaneously. I like the manual grenades in this case, since they draw on your resource pool. Throwing a grenade means putting off an upgrade or a global ability, so you can't use it too often, and it has to count.

[arathain]

Beause one focuses on very hard tiers each containing about dozen of units while the other is completely tier-less, with only a handful of units which you then can upgrade.

That's the key difference for sure, but just about everything else is about the same. Polar opposites is a bit much.

...

I'm complaining about hyperbole on the Internet, aren't I?

[Sketch]

I think this is key. RTSs are always going to give the advantage to the player who can do more stuff in a shorter time frame, so decent APM will always be an advantage. What the designers can do is make that stuff more interesting. In SC2 those clicks are best spent keeping your worker production and building perfectly timed, and microing heavily in combat. In CoH the clicks are about cover, flanks, and managing multiple parts of the battle simultaneously. I like the manual grenades in this case, since they draw on your resource pool. Throwing a grenade means putting off an upgrade or a global ability, so you can't use it too often, and it has to count.

Yeah this. I'm not an fast mouse type of guy, but the micro in CoH isn't really that, it's a tactical choice rather than a "I need to do this to be successful" action like Starcraft has.

[Nalano]

Yeah this. I'm not an fast mouse type of guy, but the micro in CoH isn't really that, it's a tactical choice rather than a "I need to do this to be successful" action like Starcraft has.

CoH is a clear progression from the C&C days of yore, but it isn't the end of said progression.

That's all that I'm saying.

[Mohorovicic]

Multi-front attacks aren't micro. They're macro.

Macro = economy. So, no.

[FriendlyFire]

macro
adjective

1. large-scale; overall: the analysis of social events at the macro level

I don't see why "macro" would only concern economy, otherwise we'd just use economy, right?

[Nalano]

Macro = economy. So, no.

Here is a picture of Marshal Zhukov looking incredulous: