Well, when you have a RTS/strategy/sim game, sometimes you have breaks, especially if you need to build up your base:
You don't have enough resources to build new stuff, the ordered stuff is still under constructed, no enemy attacks and you don't have enough power to attack the enemy either.

What do you do in the meantime ?

There's just one important resource left, the time the player could use to do something meaningful. So , what ways exist to put the player time
to some use. It should be important, that the action should be optional and not mandatory to progress in the game.

A pretty cool example is dungeon keeper 1/2, where the game entities interact with the world on their own, but
the player has the option to speed it up by placing creature at certain places (e.g. start training now) or to slap them as
temporary speed boost.

Are there other examples to fill in the gaps ?

As player, how to you handle such a situation ? Just wait, check some reports, watch TV, or get mad at the game ?

If it's a single-player game, how about a button that just fast-forwards the game simulation to the next meaningful event? If nothing is happening, then just skip ahead to when something is happening.

I had this thought too, knowing this feature from some space simulations. Nevertheless, it feels somehow like bad game design...

Maybe add a general planning mode where you can place stuff to be built without having to commit to building them until you realize the plans.

Similar to orders I guess but not as concrete.


You can also add small things like scouting or doing mini ambushes with a few troops if you havel the time to micro them.

Adding customization of all kind could be fun so you can spend free time making your stuff look more badass by adding decorative spikes and stuff.

In my own experience the free time is needed to think of your next move or try to predict the enemy. So in that sense, dont make a game that plays out the same every time, so people needed all the time they can get to process the novel situation.

From having watched a lot of SC2 tournaments, finding something to do in the idle time seems to be a skill in itself.
Controlling scouting units, patrolling with armies (but being ready to instantly disengage or charge forth once an enemy is detected), being ready to instantly respond to alerts (building/unit/research completed, some blip appeared on your minimap you should inspect, something took damage), periodically using cooldown abilities, probing the opponent to maintain knowledge of their strategy.

A large part of this is simply because SC2 deliberately limits the amount of automation. E.g. 45 second cooldown abilities that should be repeatedly used but no auto-cast button, or no auto fall-back/skirmish command, no queueing up of research/tech-tree choices, unit AI that is sub-optimal compared to manual micro-management, etc...
They seem to create constant opportunities to carry out tasks by deliberately making the interface non-user-friendly in very specific ways!

They seem to create constant opportunities to carry out tasks by deliberately making the interface non-user-friendly in very specific ways!

That's interesting, I haven't thought about it this way before. I don't know much about SC2, but I've played WC3 a lot (lot).
In WC3, there are research queues.
Both games focus on micro-management of single units or small groups of units. That's a design decision that forces you to have little automation (including AI) of movement and casting, because that's how players compete. I like the idea, that most of what happens is caused by direct
player input.

I agree that the player has to carry out a lot of tasks, but I don't think they want to keep the player busy clicking.
The assignment of drones to minerals, for example, has been automated in SC2, simply because it's a boring task with no
consequence for the outcome of a match.

From having watched a lot of SC2 tournaments, finding something to do in the idle time seems to be a skill in itself.

I see this as good time management design in a competive RTS game: the game speed is limited by the skill of the player.

Nevertheless, this might be the goal, but good design is hard to archive and I'm not sure that a clumpsy UI is the pure reason, but it most properly support the effect.

Thinking of LoL , where you have auto-cast, less units to control and observe, you still have almost no breaks at all. But this might be due to the competive nature of multiplayer games.

But I'm thinking more about single player games.

Both games focus on micro-management of single units or small groups of units. That's a design decision that forces you to have little automation (including AI) of movement and casting, because that's how players compete. I like the idea, that most of what happens is caused by direct
player input.

Yeah, micromanagement seems to be a way, thought it often focus on the effectivity of combat. A micromanaged combat situation, a situation where you seldomly find a break at all, is often mandatory to defeat the opponent. But I'm thinking about more of the less stressful times in a RTS game, where no combat situation occurs and you have some time left over.

Adding customization of all kind could be fun so you can spend free time making your stuff look more badass by adding decorative spikes and stuff.

This seems like a good idea, I like it.

Depending on the length of the downtime, it can be good to just let it be. Pacing is important, a game that requires maximum attention at all times is stressful, which is why most games have lulls. On the other hand if your lull is an hour long, well, maybe you can give them something to do.

The old Warhammer games, like Shadow of the Horned Rat, engaged units would have a little icon one could click repeatedly to make them perform (ever so slightly) better. It basically gave you something to do when all your units were busy engaged in combat, sort of like an Elevator Close Door button. The GTA series, while driving in a car, the radio stations would play random stuff, music or talk radio, which was sometimes pretty funny. For a 4x version of that, banal news reports from the citizens could be entertaining, if they didn't get to spammy. (I'm assuming text with some simple images, because you probably don't have the budget to hire Wil Wheaton to do VO, like one of the GTAs did.)