All big words for a suggestion about the interface, and order. What makes supcom, is that it's not a fight abour army, but abour unit flows. That is, you set up factorys, give them move/attack/pattrol order, set them on repeat. Then it's a game of moving the flows, building patterns, turning factory on and off. Rarely the unit themselves. Not IN battle at least. I don't know how the top players played it, but at my level, and with my friends, that seems the natural way. PA, sharing the scale with it's predecessor, or course needs the same repeat build orders, and the possibility to move patrol nodes without redoing everything for each factory. I would add that we also need the possibility to make a factory assist another (take part of the production), a technique that greatly diminished the micro in supcom, by allowing to command whole sectors by giving orders to only a "mother" factory. But what i suggest, is to change the factory/units->patrol order to the other way arround: Set up a patrol path, or attack move, THEN assign factory/units to it. Kind of like the ferry points in Supcom FA. Assign them, then assign factory to it. The factory will then send their units, wich will then take whatever path the ferry points takes. That would allow to expand factory a lot easier, and get a lot of tedious micro out of the game.
i don't know what i think about the second half (not being snide, i actually don't know what i think), but i *really* agree with the first half. being able to set and control workflows is what enables effective command of a lot of units. it makes the game more about brain skills and less about mouse acrobatics.
