I was watching the trailer for Homeworld 2 yesterday, and I remember thinking what a horrible drag it must be to have to click-and-drag in 3D, with all those units wandering around. I''d much rather see the interface as a command system, with unit designations. So once you position your units, you wouldn''t ever really click on them again. Instead, you could use a menu or keystrokes to issue commands. For instance, you could say, "Attack Team 3, take up a defensive position in front of Artillery Battery 2". It could be as simple as three keystrokes: "AT3 - DEF @ - AB2". Individual tactics could be entirely automated, depending upon the stats and XP level of the units involved.

I always liked the idea of actually giving orders and having the units carry them out to the best of their ability, rather than clicking them a new destination every few seconds. You could even set waypoints and go-codes to synchronize your actions, like in Rainbow Six.

quote: Original post by CGameProgrammer
The game this reminds me of is that 3D wargame, I''ve forgotten the name. Came out 2-3 years ago... anyway it was turn-based, but you plan your turn while the enemy plans his and then you watch in cinematic real-time as both sides execute the commands they''d been issued.

Hi, I believe your thinking of Combat Mission (http://www.battlefront.com/products/cmbo/cmbo.html). Fun game.

But what if during the battle you want to do something else (like explore with a small group of units away from the action)? You would need a way to switch away from the battle.

The AI controlling your units during the ''cinematic'' mode would have to be pretty good, as personally I feel that if it were using any AI I''ve currently seen in RTS games, I (and probably the majority of RTS players) could defeat this AI using the regular command interface. You would need to ensure that the AI carrying out these scenarios for you is very effective, otherwise I invision a situation where one team sends in a large attack force to a battle, and the ''director AI'' takes over his units. The other player sends in a force that is only one unit short of the limit which activates this mode, and therefore has a respectable force but can control individual units. In many cases I''m betting the smaller player-controlled force would win.

As mentioned above, there is also the issue of multiple battles on many parts of the map. You''ve stated that you dont often do this, as its very hard to actually control all of those forces, but you''ve also stated that you dont actually play a lot of RTS games, and as someone who does play them a fair bit, I can tell you that MANY players will use multiple forces in different parts of the map simultaneously, and using things such as waypoints, squad-groupings, and the radar to rapidly change locations it can be VERY effective, not actually sacrificing control of individual units much at all.

Also theres the issue of using small groups of units for other tasks, such as scouting, resource gathering, etc, as well as base management - what if a building is completed during one of these ''cinematic'' sequences - will there be some way the player can either place the building (if the game is CnC style), or if they''re played pre-construction (*craft style) order construction of a enw structure?

Its not a bad concept, but it definately needs refining, theres a lot of things to consider.

It''s called Kessen. It''s basically a majorly interactive DVD for the PS2.

I think this would be very very VERY possible, but not as a RTS. Make it a Turn based game! Then you can give your orders, click ''end turn'' and watch your units run around in full movie quality carrying out your orders. Just imagine the first X-com like this. oooooh...

Shogun: Total War is also sort of like this, except you ordered groups of units around using these little flag things. It really was frustrating though, especially when the men fled or something because they were overnumbered or too tired to fight. I played a battle at one time where I had three times the enemy force (computer enemy). Half my forces began scattering for some reason, the cavalry fled off the map, and soon I lost. It really sucked.

It''s not a very good idea, in my opinion, to let the AI control units during high-stress scenarios like battles. Some players (me included) would like to be able to micromanage fighting units when necessary. Even the best AI won''t satisfy every player, unless its custom tailored.