Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbreaker

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

This is not about me convincing you that micro should be in the game.
Its about you recognizing that the thing you call macromanagment, is just the combination of all possible micro options into one word.

The thing which you call macromanagment, is build out of an assignment of atomic mouse- and keyboardmovements formally known as micromanagment.

Its like pretending that you have an soul or an intellect without the neurons, causing this illusion.


I played supreme commander 1 and 2.
I didnt play total anhilation.

Regarding Starcraft:

Starcraft 1 was a brillant game, nearly errorless. It was one of the games which are timeless because of there perfect gameplaybalance ,which was often tryed to be emulated by others but never with complete sucsess.

There are only 9 other games which are equal perfect in every aspect of their own categories:

Super Metroid (Snes)
A Legend of Zelda (Snes)
Secret of Mana(Snes)
Super Mario 64 (N64)
Sillent Hill 2 (PS 2)
Deus Ex (PC)
Minecraft (PC)
Portal (PC)
MarvelvsCapcom3 (PS3/Xbox 360)

Starcraft 2 was not nearly as perfect, it has many errors, but it was fun.
Main broplem of starcraft 2 is that the developers are not willing to take any risk and try to copy starcraft one, which they fail in every regarde, because they are not nearly as gifted as the starcraft one developers. Its like someone else, than da Vinci, trying to paint the mona lisa.After they had copied it with sligthly alterations of some own good ideas:helions,medivacs,baelings,phonix,creepspread, they ran out of own ideas and now try to copy from their own copy from sc1 to build the expansion heart of the swarm, which feels very uninspiring to play.

Thats all i have to say about Starcraft.

By the way this argumentation "let us our macrogame supreme commander and we will let you your microgame starcraft" is totally wrong.

Starcraft was a healthy mix between micro and macro . It had both in equal parts.
supremecommander was what i call an macroorientated game. The opposit of this ,
an microorientated game would not be starcraft, it would be a game like man of war , where you arent able to build an base at all .

It doesnt solve the problem when you tell people with an different opinion to go somewhere else.Thats all i have to say in regarde of your question.

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

This sounds to me like you are describing input. How fast you can give input to the game shouldn't determine if you win or not. Input to the game is of course important but the importance shouldn't be about how fast you can give input but rather what input you give the game.

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

People like this irritate the crap out of me. Go ahead and dance your little 1 unit around so that it takes 2-4 higher units to kill it eventually. I won't be watching your little antics... I will be targeting your commander with the asteroid I was able to acquire and fuel because I wasn't being an idiot and forgetting the meta game.

If you want to play an FPS, go do it. Me, I want to play an RTS.

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

The speed of your thinking restricts the speed of your mouse-keyboardmovements.
The correct order is: You think -than you execute.
In this excecution is already implementet your thinking , they build together the most atomic entity of micromanagment namely one key or mouse input.

The higher thinking processes like ideas or complex emotions are only sequences of
different atomic entitys which are linked together into something which you see as 1 action. but its not one action its a sequence of many small actions . You just cant see that because the sequence is to long and complex so that your brain is not able to split it up into all its parts because the amount of data which it can handle and interpret at the same time is to small.

But thats only theoretical, it boils down to: Different people have different taste.
So you are rigth in this reguarde

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

When did i say that i want to play an fps. Every game has input.You basically say that all games with micro like Starcraft,Comand and Conquer, Company of Heros , Man of War are first person shooters? All i said is that i like to have both micro and macro in my games. And you make something out of this statement like:

"If you want to play an FPS, go do it."

Its just you losing control over your anger .This anger has nothing to do with me by the way.Its just that you heard an opinion which you didnt liked and reacted in the incorect way by insulting(maybe a bit overextendet for this, but i stick with it)me and not bringing up valid arguments about my opinion.

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

I think for balancing 1 race is easier. Also will be easy to learn the game at the beginning... if there were 2 or more races you couldn't just use for favorie one all the time but still needed to learn about the others(cause you are fighting them and need to learn their weaknesses).

If moddable maybe... users will add other stuff... or maybe some bigger addon if the game is successful and they think they can make money with it if they add other stuff.

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

The only answer I will give you for the use of FPS as a description for the kind of single-unit, bullet-dodging antics you seem to be advocating is to suggest that you look up the word "metaphor".

As for the rest, your opinion has no valid arguments in this context. Simply do a search on this forum for Garat or Neutrino as user, add micro for the search term and then see for yourself what the intended vision for this game is: macro, and discouragement of any feature that rewards micro. If you don't like it, too bad. You are looking for a different game, and there are plenty out there. Quit trying to argue for micro in a game specifically targeted at macro play. It does nothing for the discussion on these boards and contributes to the noise drowning out relevant conversations.

By the way, this doesn't help any argument you might make:

If you can't spell, use a spell-checker. Just a suggestion...
Also, I don't know what to suggest for the grammar issues:

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

Sure thing, once my smaller army defeats your somehow larger army I am sure you could asteroid me before I could wipe you off the map.

Micro isn't limited to controlling a single unit, but rather to the movement of one army around another in contrast to macro where I want the other army defeated.

Micro allows me to manually decide how this is done, with the benefit of greater efficiency, and their flaw of the time it take possibly being used elsewhere, creating a balancing act where you manage your micro and macro effectively to produce the best results.

Aims (Macro) and objectives (Micro).

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

This thread confuses me... so just for my own sake:


Micromanagement: to manage especially with excessive control or attention to details (the transitive uses this definition in its definition, so this is the only truly relevant one).

Micromanagement: Macromanagement is the act of leading decision makers or managing the managers.

Input: information fed into a data processing system or computer.

None of these are synonymous.


As an aside, and relating the the original topic.... I'll start with the ominous "wouldn't it be cool if" there was an extremely large pool of units (think several hundred), and players could either customize their entire army by choosing particular units, or at least customize a portion of their army by filling X amount of slots from this pool of units (which presumably fill different roles) thus allowing players a few more strategic choices and decisions on how their army will function.

I know the answer here will probably be "why not just put all the units into the army and let players choose as they build" ...because this makes it a choice you can go back on immediately and removes some of the gravity to the choice, whereas allowing a user to "build" their army's composition prior to the match provides and extra element of strategy and meta-game in the preparation exponentially increasing the importance of a player's decision in-game.

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

Im not nativ english , i dont live in your country. But i can speak your language better than you can speak mine. Is this the level you are going now. You have zero real arguments , all you do is getting personal , or what you think, is getting personal.

I could use an spellchecker.
But you cant use something which make the things you say sound smarter,
and thats the said thing.

But i will not argue with you anymore because i feel that there is no common ground between us.

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

I think you are confusing macro with abstraction.
Anyone who thinks that micro belongs in this game, go watch some high-level StarCraft II games on YouTube or Twitch.TV and see if that is what you want in PA. StarCraft II has a unit limit, 200 if I remember correctly. The entire game you feel like you are playing with your head constantly banging against a ridiculously low ceiling. In that context, you probably are better served babysitting your army, because there are so few of them. Simple things like units unable to fire while moving forces the point as well.

Micro, in the context of PA, refers to having to babysit every unit in order for them to be effective. Focusing on macro means that the developers are not building a game that requires you to have to babysit every single engagement. In short, they are building an RTS where the 'S' stands for Strategy and is not the mistaken initial that should read Tactical as it is in so many other games.

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

You understood the point i try to make 100%
This is a very good post

regarding assembling your unit out of components:

Yes 100s of units sounds cool, but it would be very difficult to build them out of combining different boadyparts and finding an reliable way of combining them without some of them beeing overpowert and some of beeing underpowert.
It would end up in everyone is looking in the internetwikis for the strongest combination for their playstyle. But it would devenitely make the game more unpredictable, which is not a bad thing

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

This thread is proof that Nanolathe has his alpha key.

Can't be bothered for more than one post. :lol:

If you want a game with heavy focus on micro with a large variety of units and skillset go play a MOBA like League of Legends.

You can make 100,000 posts in this thread but there won't be multiple factions any time soon. BUT everyone plays differently, and you can micro to whatever degree you want, it might just not be rewarded with a win.

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

igncom1 had the idea with 100s of units not me.
I dont play dota or league of legends .
And this whole "go play something else" talk is getting repetitiv.
I play something else , but i also want to check this game out.
Because the developers have some very good ideas.
I think it will be an great game no mater if micro is in it or not.
Im just testing the boundarys of how many of you guys want micro involved in this game.
No need for Nanolathe to get angry, we are just having fun here in this post.
Nothing to worry about.But he showed up once in this topic i think.

But i recognize that i reached the limit of your willingness to argue about this topic and so my next topic will be non micro related , it will be about some directly gameplayrelated. So be on the lookout.

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

garibaldi5, play some Zero-K. A decent number of 1v1 games against decent people and ask them about UI features. No argument is better than the insight you would gain from this experience. Low level management of economy and units has been reduced and there is still always a lot to do. There is no automation possible which would remove the need to pay attention to units that you send into danger.

On top of that we have plenty of these units with "special abilities", none of the generic Supcomm dot wars. These are mostly passive abilities in a unit's movement or armament but their are jumpjets which can be pretty micro heavy.

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

But that's the thing, he will still beat you, because micro in this game won't be as important.

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

If my micro can win the battle, then that allows my macro to be weaker and still produce the same results.

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

Macro is the strategy, and micro is the tactics.

Controlling 1 unit in a game like PA is better described as a operational level kind of management.

And it's funny that you bring up Starcraft, the zerg faction play very much like a SupCom game due to how casualty's of a few units matter much less then the other factions.

Micro for starcrafts scale means managing each individual unit, micro in supcom, TA and indeed PA means managing each cluster of units.

You say that I have muddled up abstraction and macro, but I say that you are not accounting for the increase in scale that changes micro and macro to use larger amounts of numbers.

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

Actually no. A large part of maximizing macro, and minimizing micro, is scale, this is what taylor was aiming for when he tried supcom, just couldn't get it right.

Your micro may win a battle
His macro will have planned to have you surrounded and outgunned

And because of scale, you would not of thought of that in advance, that's macro level thinking, otherwise known as strategy. What microers do, is tactics, small level thinking.

I played a game called RUSE and Wargame EE, fantastic games, that punish micro. But it has a small player base because some find it REALLY frustrating. The scale is too big, and the units don't move as fast as they want them too, but that was exactly the point.

If for example bullets track who they shot at, then the micro is screwed, what benefit could be got from moving the equivalent of mantis's back and forth, if either the bullets/missiles track, or they reach their target too fast? None. It will be pointless to do so. I have quite good 'micro' myself, but i deplore it.

Re: Love your product, but only one race is a total dealbrea

I'll highlight the point I am replying to for my point here.

Your macro is what you want done, your strategy.

The micro is how you do it, manually. Otherwise we'd all be playing sim city with the army's doing everything we need.