Smart Combat, Unit AI - Why not?

Is there a compelling reason not to do this? I am legitimately curious what others think.

It mitigates the value of micromanagement without removing it from the equation. It reinforces the difference between units. Let the game worry about how units engage, let me worry about how to win the battle.

For those who may not know what Unit AI is:
http://zero-k.info/Wiki/UnitAI

Want to add resource auto-management in that soup?

For a RTS game with multiple spherical playgrounds, either you make micros like kiting or projectile dodging not important, or you can make them automated and use them as tools for establishing unit interactions, I think the latter is better.

I would love to see rich behavioral interactions between units and enemy units. It would make the game look so polished and dynamic to watch. Removing the need for excessive micro is just an added bonus.

Seeing as Sorian has already confirmed some pretty good AI optimisations when it comes to grouped unit behaviour, I'm sure we'll see something along the lines of "smart" units.

I'm in favor of UI optimizations such as the automatic metal fabricator toggle.

The difficulty of managing your economy should be a result of resource scarcity and enemy raiding, not the obfuscation of UI.

I know you are... that was a joke. :?
Let's not turn this into the argument that was had in Resource System thread.

o sor x)

also I hope that question didn't seem loaded, I'm not interested in the game automating battles.

So in other words you want unit interaction to be a little more then just trading shots at each other.
More kind of maneuvering like you would macro to dodge, kite etc. only what you would if you have 100% attention on that unit to micro except it is for thousands of units all at once at once making
PA one step closer to macro based less micro

My opinion at first is hell yeah
but... it can lead down to hard counters vs other units
since one would auto kite with or with out player even knowing and can not be destroyed with that unit..
Limiting choice down to getting right unit for right unit to counter all the time.
Well that's my thinking leads to with out playing zerok but any way it all comes down to what flavour of game play the dev like the most in the end.
(mine is bacon )

yes units need to be balanced with smartness in mind. otherwise the game will break anyway when played by someone with high apm.

zero-k also employs a unit-class system that emphasizes natural balance
http://zero-k.info/Wiki/UnitClasses

zerok is a great game and i recomend giving it a look but it is not without its own problems. at the end of the day planetary annihilation will be the game uber wants to make and that's the game i want to play

I had to vote no.

The ability of a high level player to do this on their own, without any assistance, will separate them from a more casual player. Just seems like it would make the game easier, and too much so.

I wouldn't classify this as reducing micro, I would classify it as reducing the skill cap. People would just end up using this ability for their entire armies, essentially removing the control from their hands entirely.

This game should be about decissions, not about motoric skills.

There's no way Uber can make micro into a important skill cap in this game, unless they want this game to be very unscalable. This isn't Supcom, where you can just zoom out and manually manage units on multiple fronts easily.

There isn't any confliction at all.

At the very least, squad management, aka unit placement, should be intelligent: SC2 didn't have amazing auto-formations, as the portable shields kept going to the back, which was...unproductive. And it's tricky to micro that because they default to that location. I'd be much happier if tanky units were at the front/bled to the sides, dps units fell behind them, defensive buff units (shields or whatever there will be, stealth maybe) will evenly spread themselves, but spread from the center, same as AA.

As well, intelligent pathing is a plus.

As for them developing a mind of their own for tactics...eh. I'm not sure how that would work. In games like these, flanking manually isn't usually that big of a hassle, nor does it provide a significant bonus, so I don't think that in particular needs to be done automatically.

Seems to me like you're disagreeing what should be considered micro. Obviously there is a lot of gray area. Personally I don't think controlling an entire army all at once is micro, which is what you'd have to do normally. You could select them all and que up a few move commands. Also I just don't see the point of building units that can miss on their attacks if the enemy can just right click "auto dodge." The game should reward you for being able to get your artillery into good positions.

I just get worried because I see lots of excellent ideas on the forum, but I also see tons of people trying to make the game more casual. Of course I can't say that's what this idea would do until we saw it implemented, but I think it would significantly reduce the skill cap. It will be a huge challenge for the devs to strike a nice balance between casual and hardcore. Hopefully they'll attempt to go by the premise of Starcraft 2: easy to learn, hard to master.

[my]
No.
Not at all.
Wrong game.
Period.
[/opinion]

I'm not saying it should be like Starcraft 2.

I'm saying it should be easy to learn, and difficult to master.

I just think this might make the game too easy.

There should be no (or little) micro to master. This is a real time strategy game.