Supcom Tactics
Mar. 12th, 2010 11:12 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sobriqueReal Time Strategy, vs. Real Time tactics.
So, having played SupCom 2 demo, and been distinctly unimpressed, has lead me to wanting to have a rant.
It seems that every 'controlling multiple units' game out there, is billed as a strategy game - real time or otherwise.
But most of them - at the moment - seem to focus on the tactics, rather than the strategy.
Total War does this quite clearly - you have a strategic map, and you have tactical battles, and the outcome of either is linked - good strategy can make up for not so good tactics, and vice versa.
But the thing is, there's a LOT of games currently, that are really more 'real time tactics' with a little bit of strategy over the top - Star Craft and War Craft for example - possibly some of the biggest names in the genre.
But the thing is, they're tactical games, really. The units have special abilities, which are decisive in small scale fighting. The unit numbers are capped, so you have to choose where to deploy them - that's a tactical decision too.
And you have resource depletion, so you will only get a finite number of units before you have to stop. I'm not saying there's no strategy in SC or WC, but just that it's a game that's _about_ the tactics.
Supreme Commander was a game I liked, because it was a game that was about the strategy. The units are 'smart' in terms of use of weapons and targeting priorities. You can define orders and assists, and all manner of things to automate the tactics. And then you set it going. You don't need to manually focus fire, and you don't need to press buttons to tell each unit to heal.
Which is why I'm a bit annoyed about what they've done with Supreme Commander 2. They took a very elegant strategy game, and ... seem to have tried to turn it into the next StarCraft. They've 'dumbed down' a lot of the strategic elements, in order to improve game flow, and accessibility.
I think that's a huge mistake - SupCom 2 has thrown out the baby with the bathwater - it's trying to elbow in to a different market niche - one where there is no shortage of competition.
I mean, playing chess with only Pawns, because it's too hard to understand how to use a Knight just seems a bad design move.
So, having played SupCom 2 demo, and been distinctly unimpressed, has lead me to wanting to have a rant.
It seems that every 'controlling multiple units' game out there, is billed as a strategy game - real time or otherwise.
But most of them - at the moment - seem to focus on the tactics, rather than the strategy.
Total War does this quite clearly - you have a strategic map, and you have tactical battles, and the outcome of either is linked - good strategy can make up for not so good tactics, and vice versa.
But the thing is, there's a LOT of games currently, that are really more 'real time tactics' with a little bit of strategy over the top - Star Craft and War Craft for example - possibly some of the biggest names in the genre.
But the thing is, they're tactical games, really. The units have special abilities, which are decisive in small scale fighting. The unit numbers are capped, so you have to choose where to deploy them - that's a tactical decision too.
And you have resource depletion, so you will only get a finite number of units before you have to stop. I'm not saying there's no strategy in SC or WC, but just that it's a game that's _about_ the tactics.
Supreme Commander was a game I liked, because it was a game that was about the strategy. The units are 'smart' in terms of use of weapons and targeting priorities. You can define orders and assists, and all manner of things to automate the tactics. And then you set it going. You don't need to manually focus fire, and you don't need to press buttons to tell each unit to heal.
Which is why I'm a bit annoyed about what they've done with Supreme Commander 2. They took a very elegant strategy game, and ... seem to have tried to turn it into the next StarCraft. They've 'dumbed down' a lot of the strategic elements, in order to improve game flow, and accessibility.
I think that's a huge mistake - SupCom 2 has thrown out the baby with the bathwater - it's trying to elbow in to a different market niche - one where there is no shortage of competition.
I mean, playing chess with only Pawns, because it's too hard to understand how to use a Knight just seems a bad design move.
