I find it really fuckin' useful to have single targets. I find that if there's more than one target, comms will tend to say how many there are and then give me one target, which I'll use as a general guide of where they are. I honestly prefer it this way over multiple targets because multiple targets feel like wallhacks; single targets give you one target and leave the rest to the infantry to figure out what to do.
okay: 1. wouldn't having multiple targets instead of just one be MUCH MORE USEFUL TO YOU? 2. isn't it less micromanagement/effort for the comm to NOT HAVE TO COMMUNICATE SOMETHING SO MUNDANE TO YOU THROUGH MIC/TEXT?
To be honest, I pretty much agree with Candles. Single targets are generally far more useful. Before, giving targets was simply "draw a large of a box as carefully as possible and hope you get everyone", and if you were 0.5 seconds slow in doing that, your team would bitch at you constantly and blame you for everything. To be honest, I actually like microing targets a lot more. It requires more skill, and foresight to figure out where the enemy infantry will move to next, meaning that you have to predict who will move where, when. Even better, I'll give a squad of five each different targets, so it'll be impossible for them to get jumped, assuming that everyone in that squad is relatively competent. Thus, I like single targets because they're not as boring and as unforgiving multiple targets, and more than no targets because it gives Comms at least some method to contribute in an obvious way to their team. Multiple targets were just so awful, because you would always assume the other team would have them, meaning that if your comm jumped out to build a radar, you could just get completely obliterated. Edit: Ppersonally, on the ground, I take advantage of single targets as advanced forewarning of whether or not someone is trying to sneak up behind me. If someone is targeted, I often don't go for them, unless they're a scout, and instead try to avoid them looking for untargeted people. The reason for this is because once someone is targeted, assuming you're not on open ground, they're no longer really a threat to you as long as you're careful, and it becomes far more advisable to search for untargeted people before they kill you.
When you zoom in and are forced to keep selecting targets your eye focuses on the screen and you cannot see you vehicle, nor are your eyes on research because your zooming in and doing attack orders. Making your commander to micromanage forces him to divide his attention on multiple fronts instead of having his full attention. Him dragging a selection box once, should be enough. He should not have to keep doing it over and over when one box is fine. This is not company of heroes.
no matter how much you nerf micromanagement, it will always be deciding which of two commanders is better. you dont even know what neat tricks you can pull with walls alone, or how much dropping the right guy a 75res armory in the right moment, even if it goes down instantly - might help your team. macro in empires is rather boring, there are too few deciding options - except for forgetting to research. hell they even patched the small portion of resource management away, the only remaining question is if you drop radar first or build yet another rax somewhere ... i dislike single/mass target only for the reason that they provide wallhacks to those playing the game as FPS. also hobbes, or rather his success in pub games, is a direct result of him giving a shit about macro ...
Engineers should have motion trackers. Tired of scouts emerging from ceilings and walls to jump my shit.
I considered that, even was thinking of noting that as infantry, multiple targets is much more effective. But I decided that, in fact, although multiple targets would make it easier on me and the comm, they would make it too easy for me. I don't like having perfect wallhacks; engineer cameras and enhanced senses do enough to let me know where all the enemies are. That's a given. However, I think I prefer how it makes it so much more important for a comm to actively communicate with their team. If they don't want to micro too much, they can still use the box-method over all of them, give a quick count of how many boxes they see, and then let the game decide which one actually gets targeted while saying how many there are. I've seen my fair share of commanders do this already.
I agree, remove commander targets. If someone is going to get "wallhacks" it should come from a squad leader on the ground, not the commander. The commander's tools ought to be sharp. It is much less fun trying to cut something with a dull blade. Nothing should be difficult on purpose. Difficult does not equal fun nor does it even equal skill. Commanders should not be judged on their apm, but instead be judged on their ability to command a team and their ability to implement strategies. When you're handling more than 15 players, the luxury of being able to micromanage like this becomes much less affordable. The commander should have the BEST tools for something or no tools at all. I think you're confusing decision making with micromanagement: decision making: C walls, building placement micromanagement: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Cloning http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images/9/9f/Cloningattack.png I really miss the psychic warfare of everyone might know where everyone else is. Targets made the game much more straightforward and fun for me. Yet, as much as I like targets, if empiresmod can't handle having 2.12 style targets, empiresmod should have no targets at all. The in-between is like the whackamole micro of 2.12 target spamming on steroids.
to me macromanagement is resource management, build order, research and large scale troop movement, while i consider everything concerened with the direct controll of single units (or small groups) micromanagement - your link is just an explanation how to do this most efficiently in starcraft. i know my deffinition doesnt translate well to empires, yet i consider unrequested offensive/defensive building placement and 'click-ordering' individual players around as micro - the rest is macro. boomtanking is something which actually doesnt really fit in - its part of empires split personality, you wouldnt use the terms micro/macro in FPS - but if id consider it micromanagement as you control a single unit.
Micromanagement doesn't exist in Empires because you can't control the units. It's more like playing as a dictator.
empires is no pure RTS, so you cant use the terms one to one. anyway, its about attack targets - i think they are a dilemma and the current solution is a reasonable middleground. a real fix would require a whole different system which alerts players but doesnt spoil exact positions. camera targets are ok, you see enemy cameras on the minimap and they die quickly, even to melee damage. edit: also FN, apart from guys in your own base and emp_crossroads there really is no reason for mass targets - there only are finite possibilities to get around a map and they usually are quite easy to oversee. i wouldnt have thought that someone with your experience needs targets for battlefield awareness :p
That's it. I give up. At this point flasche, you make absolutely no sense to me. It's like what you think is wrong I see as right and what you see as right I see as wrong. On top of that, you feel the need to throw in ad hominem
because i ever had a different opinion on this? that we have a different perspective of empires shouldnt be anything new to either of us. im sorry you took it overly personal - considering our past quarrels, i should have left out the last sentence.
I don't mean to sound arrogant or anything but your perspective isn't different, it's wrong. Furthermore, it's amusing that player as bad as yourself would believe that they were even somewhat knowledgeable about design or flow. If I am taking anything 'personally' it is without a doubt your incomprehensible stupidity.
