Order of march - formations keep together - Tanks before AA!!! Behaviour modes.

[Destraex]

I was never able to figure out how to get a proper formation happening without micro in WRG. sometimes my AA would race ahead of my tanks and get slaughtered. Recon especially should have scout modes which make it break contact if it encounters the enemy. Their should be modes.

 

[LittleBobcat]

Micromanagements of units with different speeds is part of WG game series，if u can't get control of it ......

EXERCISE.

 

[Destraex]

So you don't think it's a good idea with potentially 50-100 units on the screen to give behavior and order of march preferences? You prefer micro skills over intelligent strategy and tactics?

 

[Pathogenic]

This is why I always stayed away from Wargame matches with super high points. I would rather control a few units well than a whole mass of units poorly.

 

[LittleBobcat]

If the scale of SD44 is not bigger than the previous RD , I think full controllable is right better , much more flexible than an auto formation . Even now in RD we would change the relative position of recon/AA/arty/tank/ATGMs frequently depending on the changing tactical situation , a preset formation will be too dull and vulnerable to a well-controlled combined attack .

Just a suggestion , when playing WG , don't think in 'formation' , think in 'systems' . Adjust ur units position based on enemy units to build a full combination of weapon systems to counter ur enemies' units , not based on ur own units and try to make them look 'invincible'.

 

[Destraex]

Littlebobcat I don't know if you are thinking along the same lines as me.

Order of March:
If you bring on a mixed force of balanced units such as 2 tanks, 2 AA vehicles, a recon unit and 2 infantry units in APCs. You then might have to move them half way across the map.
In doing this you want them all to arrive together on roads. Not straggled out according to their relative speeds. In convoy you still want to protect against ambushes and any other contingencies. You might run into an enemy force even though you aim to re-form near the front. So it is important to keep the battlegroup together and in order just like in real life.

Similarly if I spread out I may want things different things in different formations in order to maximise my efficiency. Games like Supreme commander do this. I might put my heavies in front or my AA depending on the situation. I am not talking about strategic formations here either. Just battlegroups primarily for movement. So that time is not wasted.

Behaviours:
By the same token you might want to send recon up and not have to baby it while you do other things. Real recon units know how to behave. I cannot be everywhere at once or control everything at once. I want my guys to at least get the basics right without me having to madly click. I am not asking for the game to play for me. Just to have some reasonable behaviours.
So things like my men being aggressive, passive or balanced. Cautious, Fast or normal speeds. Allowing them to be more observant and increasing their spotting abilities.
Homeworld has this and it works a treat.

 

[nande]

So you don't think it's a good idea with potentially 50-100 units on the screen to give behavior and order of march preferences? You prefer micro skills over intelligent strategy and tactics?

"intelligent strategy and tactics"
their execution is also an important skill.

If large groups are more difficult to manage, surely that's a good thing, as it's a comeback mechanic for the losing player with less units on the field.

 

[Destraex]

nande when you consider that in real life each tank is commanded by a crew that is not stupid enough to charge in without a formation then I disagree that micro formation skills are part of execution skills. What I am proposing does not mean that the formation would be perfect. In fact greener units should not be able to execute formations as well and terrain would have a huge impact on them, people who micro would still have an advantage because a formation would be slower trying to keep formation constantly. But having to baby the AI with the basics is not my idea of fun.

I also play things like combat mission. This however even though you micro each tank, lets you pause to micro each tank with as many waypoints and commands you would like to stack up. You can also give general orders to as many units as you want. Move here, do this, do that. To all 4 tanks etc. It's flexible and it works out that you are playing the game rather than the games interface playing you.

There is no panic micro in real life.

15:35 in this video for what I mean by command queues and attitudes.

 

[Spielführer]

I would also love comfort functions and formations.

 

[77Hawk77]

I was never able to figure out how to get a proper formation happening without micro in WRG. sometimes my AA would race ahead of my tanks and get slaughtered. Recon especially should have scout modes which make it break contact if it encounters the enemy. Their should be modes.

I don't know how anyone could be against formations, I whole heartedly agree.

 

[Destraex]

77Hawk77,,, The reason some I gather are against it is because they fear losing their micro click fest advantage. The one they get from working the interface harder rather than smarter which is what formations and more detailed commands for the AI would bring. Command has never been about micro I did not think.

 

[77Hawk77]

77Hawk77,,, The reason some I gather are against it is because they fear losing their micro click fest advantage. The one they get from working the interface harder rather than smarter which is what formations and more detailed commands for the AI would bring. Command has never been about micro I did not think.

Honestly, if formations are implemented I would just micro better, not less. I usually operate with 2-3 assault groups in red dragon, and would just have to adjust their formation constantly. If they kept their formation I would just spend more time attacking and less time adjusting their spacing. The easier it is to manage groups, the more groups I could just realistically control using hotkeys. I wouldn't do less of a click fest haha.

 

[nande]

imagine red dragon forest fights with added formations. Just attack move to win, even more than right now.

 

[77Hawk77]

imagine red dragon forest fights with added formations. Just attack move to win, even more than right now.

Forest fights were bad gameplay in general. It wasn't a formation issue.

 

[nande]

yet they're still nuanced, and the better player can get an advantage with superior micro. Which is a good thing.
How dull would it be if you no longer had to juggle around different kinds of infantry, APCs, tanks and various supporting units.

 

[Destraex]

nande formations would break up even more in forests as the visibility level needs to be line of sight to stay in formation. So formations would close up unless told to disband and ignore.

 

[Sharkey Ward]

yet they're still nuanced, and the better player can get an advantage with superior micro. Which is a good thing.
How dull would it be if you no longer had to juggle around different kinds of infantry, APCs, tanks and various supporting units.

Micromanagement of individual units should never be the deciding factor in the outcome of any battle in a wargame. In real life you don't have generals telling individual infantry squads how many steps to take forward while also shouting at the IFV commander to step on the gas for 3.24s while simulteneously trying to hand signal the nearest tank to advance 12.34 meters to the east. Wargames should focus on centralized decision making but decentralized execution. Which is why a behavior/formation button is needed.


Notice how there's no need to tell the infantry to dismount and retreat or order the tank to face the threat after it fails to retreat due to being detracked.