It would be great if there was an option when you click on a unit to have your forces not to destroy it. For example you want to capature it instead.
Yes! This has happened to me so many times, engineer runs into my base, try to capture but the commander shoots it while it's walking to capture range!
Sure would make capturing enemy engineers a heck of a lot easier. But wait, everyone will be getting the same units, right? So what's the point? Capturing enemy economy, enemy factories, enemy kinetic impact engines. I like the idea. Potentially adds a little more strategy to losing a base. You're fighting a losing battle over a base on an asteroid that you've been prepping for launch, but it's just not ready, and you're going to lose it. But you notice that the enemy force is not targeting the engines. Do you dump more forces on, or do you pull the plug and destroy the engines yourself to deny their use to the enemy?
A better solution is to just have allied units know to not attack things that are queued up for capturing. One less thing for players to think about, and one less button to press. Adding features is easy; making it simple is the hard part.
I want powerful and elegant. Elegant implies we don't just add random features and more buttons but find a way to make the whole UI more expressive and powerful without being cluttered for new users. This is probably the largest design challenge in the game. There are definitely places where I will cut features because they can't be included without basically being UI hacks.
Macro versus Micro. If at this point you have come to the place, where you are about to capture the enemies base. I hope its just a 1v1.
It comes down to the question: Do we need to have control every micro-aspect of a process in order to maintain complete control over the game? Which is what I assume you meant when you said: To me what Neutrino said makes perfect sense. Elegant solutions to problems are the best. It is also true that the most simple solutions are often the most elegant ones. Let's consider a couple of things. 1. What else could a "do not attack" instruction be used for other than not attacking a unit queued for capture? 2. Is it necessary (and for that matter does it enhance the game) for the player to have that level of control? Or to put it another way, will it be dumbing down the game if you issue the command and the UI does the micro for you? Personally I think that the solution has already been brought to our attention: It is a simple solution that utilises something that is already there in the game and removes needless micromanagement, allowing the player to concentrate on actually playing the game. It's simple and it doesn't clutter the UI with an extra button that will only be applicable in a very specific set of circumstances.
People who say they don't want it simple should be made to play blindfolded. They'll be begging for simple in no time It doesn't get more fun just because it takes more time to accomplish a simple task. Like Neutrino said, elegance is the real key. The easier it is to do something, the more things you can do. If I can press one less button, that doesn't mean I get to be lazy. On the contrary, it means I can use the time I saved to accomplish another thing. It's why in this game we'll hopefully be able to control a thousand units per player. That'll only be possible if controlling the units is as elegant and simple as possible.
To some extend yes, but there is no way around at least some micro in PA. (Hint: Winning a game depends on the death of a single unit aka your commander. If you don't micro that one, you are maybe doing it wrong )
Once you go beyond the 10 minute mark, if your opponent is still shooting at your commander, you might be doing it wrong. Ordering a unit to move to a new location isn't micro. And babysitting your commander will probably mean you lose.
I usualy lose my commander right off, but I dont usualy lose. Suppioror Air power has always been my strong point. I am not sure how thats going to work if it still will at all here in PA, but as sayed before, PA is the direct next stage to TA. I expect my use of air power should need a tweeking but should still work here as well.
