What should the role of micro be in combat?

[TheVoicelessOne]

I've seen a lot of discussion from various players online about the micro required during combat. Just wanted to see what others think here about how much micro should be required to be fun and if we are there yet.

 

[Pesti]

I've seen a lot of discussion from various players online about the micro required during combat. Just wanted to see what others think here about how much micro should be required to be fun and if we are there yet.

Good question. As an AOE3 player, I found IV to be much less micro intensive, but requiring far more APM and macro management. Would be interested in knowing how AOE2 players feel it compares, as the mechanics are far more similar.

Personally I prefer the scales tipping more towards strategy and less towards micro.

 

[TheVoicelessOne]

I'm also interested to see how top tier AOE 2 players feel it compares, as in general it also requires less micro but a lot of macro and eco management. I am inclined to agree with you in terms of strategy, although I think some things like positioning and formation should still play a big role in combat, otherwise it can feel like just a numbers game.

 

[Teebo]

You should also take into account that most RTS build up over months and years, with new micro "tricks" and approaches etc. being discovered. The micro ceiling will probably increase over time as we all realize more and more opportunities

 

[Cetun]

I feel macro will be much more important then micro. Who cares if you loose Units as long as your eco can support to replace them in short order.

 

[MatsuHiroshi]

As well as macro there's plenty of micro to do in battle: getting into position, targeting key opposing units, and activating special abilities on units (eg. Khan arrows for the Mongols), and dodging AOE effects without going to the extreme of dodging individual attacks. AoE4 seems closer to SC2 than AoE2 in that regard, which I think is overall a good thing; no one ever complained that there was no micro in SC2.

 

[Lord_patito]

I fell that Micro and Macro should be equally important in an RTS. As a fan (and amateur player) of AOE II, sometimes I feel micro has too much weight, and often changes the outcome of battles that were supposed to go the otherway.

While I believe it's an important skill to have, I don't like the fact that, at least in AoE II, the good management of 20 Crossbows agains 3 mangonels can make them defeat an army that should be hard-countering them.

 

[Revnak]

Good topic, as an Aoe3 player which is rather a micro focused game, I believe that strategy should be more rewarding than anything else in order to have fun, if your plan is better than your opponent, you should be rewarded to win the game, having a good positioning is also part of the strategy, when it turns out to clicking units one by one to micro, it becomes less fun for me. Another downside of having micro focused game is, it reduces the strenght of strategies. Micro should still be a rewarding part of the game, but not as much as macro or strategy.

 

[TheVoicelessOne]

I will definitely be interested to see how much micro is involved when there is a pro scene in aoe4 and how strategies and ideas become more fleshed out. It's something that will develop over time, but I have seen people complain in various places that there isn't enough micro in aoe4. And I wonder if that will change over time.

 

[Teebo]

I also hope the unit responsiveness will be crisp in the end, as it was a bit off during beta. But since it was included in surveys, we can reasonably hope it will be smoother at launch

 

[Thestifmeister]

From what I've have seen until now, it's seems that Macro will be more dominant in AOE IV than in other RTS. Let's wait and see, but I expect big strategic minds to win over micro nerds