From: Somewhere deep in appalachian valley in PA
I'm not a big fan of super micro management. To me it feels like professional RTS games, where a player with higher mouse APM (action per minute) + multitasking has a great favor. I think wargame should be the one where sound tactics and strategy should be rewarded, not ones with high APM but poor tactical or strategic decision.
Some degree of control is needed, but too much micro management is not realistic IMO. When real platoon leaders issue an order, they never micromanages his or her squads leaders and platoon members to exactly follow like RTS gamers do to his units (forward 10m and turn the corner, left turn at 4m and engage against 3rd from the left enemy...). Rather, leaders give objectives and missions to his or her platoon members. Command should be precise and compact, but should be enough specific for squads to understand and follow. Depending on the situation, it can be sometimes very detailed, but not like micromanagement of other RTS games.
FPC-RS abstracted actions inside 500m sized hex, level of micromanagement is very limited anyway. Actually, I was thinking that FPC-RS is not in the region of micromanagement games, right? I was thinking FPC-RS is kinda doing good so far, in terms of unit management. But I still thinking that sometimes the burden of issuing orders to each units are too much. Especially when I play as Soviet, I need to issue a lot more orders than NATO, and playing Soviet costs more time to set up the game at the initial phase.
I'm advocate of mission-oriented control, not action-oriented control like Starcraft. I know it is really hard to depict such control using known algorithms, but I guess such smart and realistic mission-oriented-control would be the eventual converging point of any realistic wargame in the future, with the help of AI (Also RTS games too). I don't think FPC-SS should follow idea of mission-oriented control right now if source code is not prepared, but if it could mimic or follow such control in low degree by some good idea, it would still be great. But this is just my opinion, don't take this too much seriously.
Plus, some level of automation would be great to unburden the micro. All of individual maneuvers like shoot and scoop would be abstracted in 500m hex, but something like
- SAMs automatically move their position after engagement, and after specific amount of time (give good default number and let users set)
- HQ units automatically moves to 2~3 next time after specific amount of time (give good default number and let users set), even in supply state.
But this maybe make games too easy, I mean, any veteran or smart players should know that they need to move their HQ regularly, and I think such tactically sound thinking of players should be rewarded. So, some automation should be carefully considered, not to harm the distinguishing line of good player and bad player.
- If artillery falls, units in hex in bombardment automatically attempt to full-speed escape to right next hex (regardless of status), with better cover, only if such movable hex exists. If there are no hex with better curve, then do not move. If the unit was in the middle of engagement, let players decide what should be prioritized under artillery. Escape to other hex? or stay covered and engage against enemy ground target.
- Infantry automatically moves to nearby hex with larger cover, if they dropped in open field.
- Give SOP option for units to frequent resupply to prioritize the readiness management (even with good readiness, like 60~70% readiness condition), or prioritize battle and overwatch action to increase fire rate and accuracy.
Those are just examples, there should be more. I think some level of smart automation would decrease the necessity for micromanagement for players. Or, introduce such automation options to players as SOP and let player decide how much degree the player wants to use the automation.
Also, maybe overall delay time could be declined a bit. Most of the frustration I felt during FPC-RS was the unit reactivity, sometimes they are too slow. I understand all is abstracted in 500m hex, but I'm not sure if such slow reaction is really realistic, Sometimes I felt command delay situation was too harsh. Maybe it would be great to distinguish all possible factors for delay time and show to players, so that players can see & understand what causes the delay and what they should do to reduce delay.
< Message edited by exsonic01 -- 7/16/2019 1:37:58 PM >