Controlling large empires difficult - some suggestions

Large-scale warfare and economic management is still pretty micro-intensive (some of you can handle that, but hear me out). These are some suggestions to help ease the issue.

  • Factory assisting - allow factories to assist other factories and ‘steal’ part of their work queue. This allows for the dynamic scaling of production without re-creating queues on the other factories - new factories can be created and ‘slaved’ to the original factory at will.

    • Newly-slaved factories should inherit the waypoints of their master, but can be changed at will afterwards (streamlines large-scale production but still gives options and allows for edge cases).

  • Battlegroup/metaunit templating - the ability to create a template of a battlegroup and then build and queue that template from a factory, i.e. 10x brutes, 10x archers, name it “Light Attack”, then select a factory (especially a ‘master’ factory as per the above) and choose the “Light Attack” template, which will add 10x brutes and 10x arches to the queue, and then automatically group them into a single unit when all are constructed.

  • More complex post-production rally-points from factories - allow for a ‘staging’ waypoint and a then the usual ‘move’ rally point with the above suggestion - the units are built and move to the staging point, then when all units from the metaunit have been constructed, group them and send them to the ‘move’ point as normal.

  • Give metaunits an ‘auto reinforce’ option, whereby the ‘best’ factory (closest vs least busy vs whatever else) will automatically produce units that join up with the metaunit WITHOUT causing it to change its movements/formation until those new units arrive at the location of the metaunit and then join it.

    • Defaulted to off for normal metaunits and defaulted to on for template-created metaunits [see above], so that the player doesn’t have to select each metaunit created by a factory and manually set its reinforcement status. Maybe make this default setting a part of the template, or enabled/disabled at the (master) factory level?

  • A faction-wide display showing the economic drain of each unit/building - it is difficult to determine which units and buildings are using resources.

    • A heatmap that adjusts to the zoom level would allow the player to see, at a high-level, the areas (entire sectors are probably not granular enough) that are the most expensive economically, and then as they zoom, more detailed displays are shown, down to the individual units. Colour code i.e. red -> blue; biggest drain -> no drain. This leads to:

  • Infographics, infographics, infographics - The player is blind to the larger war without any serious displays of information.

    • As per the above; heatmap of economic drain or deficit for each area being displayed (green for net gain, red for net drain, etc)

    • Military strength - friendly vs hostile etc

    • Overlay depicting radar coverage

    • Filters for battlegroups containing unit of x type (artillery, bomber, etc) - “Where are my bombers across the entire map? What about my siege dreadnoughts?”

    • Traditional graphs and other non-spatial infographics - predictions/extrapolation to help the player gauge future circumstances?

  • Streamline construction of resource buildings - when an engineer is selected, right-clicking a resource deposit should construct the appropriate extractor (metal vs radioactives), since taking over large areas and having to specify each type for numerous deposits adds nothing to the process or the user’s experience but more time.

  • Allow multiple, selected engineers to assist in construction automatically - when several engineers are selected, and then instructed to build a structure, all engineers move to the indicated location, but only one actually constructs. This requires the player to manually specify that the other engineers are to assist for every single building they wish to construct in this way. All engineers selected when the construction is ordered should participate, even for multiple structures placed in succession (i.e. whilst holding the shift key).

 
-------------------
 
I realize that some awesome players out there can micro empires 10x the size of my comfort zone, but management can get clunky sometimes - I'd rather focus on my strategy and my empire than struggle to move and organize my units and my production chain.
 
Thanks!
42,938 views 26 replies
Reply #1 Top

you have very good points, i sometimes find myself overwhelmed but its because the pace of the game and mechanics is quite different from what im used too, people who played supcom type  of games i can imagine having an easier time with this. i enjoy the game immensely and  im trying to improve in my overall macro..if they implement more tools and such to to help with the burden of this ..it would be more than welcomed.

Reply #2 Top

Very interesting.

Reply #3 Top

Yes, Very interesting.

Have to say that controlling large empires or even small diferent groupes not easy with the left bar .

 I never use the left bar its bit confusing for me ,and i dont know what im select or where is what ,so i decide not use it ,i need be fast  and the left bar dont give me the options i want.

When im play i have to select all i want in - 2 sec + then that its a lost.

Reply #4 Top

Quoting TAG_Utter, reply 3

Yes, Very interesting.

Have to say that controlling large empires or even small diferent groupes not easy with the left bar .

 I never use the left bar its bit confusing for me ,and i dont know what im select or where is what ,so i decide not use it ,i need be fast  and the left bar dont give me the options i want.

When im play i have to select all i want in - 2 sec + then that its a lost.

Reduced 55%
Original 1023 x 718


yeah i don't either tbh but that's the same layout for sins of the solar empire which i rely on a lot. i think they just need to clean it up some more, make it more "prettier". 

Reply #5 Top

autot add to battle group is important...and the whole stop rearranging yourself is important too (I often do not want to form just knowing it will move units all around for the next 2 minutes and prevent me pushing forward - they often move backwards)

Reply #6 Top

Wow  you Nailed it, really nice Post! :thumbsup:

Cheers! :beer:    \o/

Reply #7 Top

Lots of great pieces of information!

Reply #8 Top

we love to get feedback like this.  Thanks for your thoughts!

Reply #9 Top

I'm struggling with the empire tree as well.   Thoughts?

Reply #10 Top

Was try a bit Act Of Aggression because i saw last time i play something very interesting ,how they use the strategic view.

To fix that problem they use has full Zoom  diferent screen so that dont affect the gameplay view, i think we could try think in somethig like that.

 

EX: wy not have a key like space key or any other option you guys can remenber ,to have a full picture with FULL STRATEGIC ZOOM with icons  showing ,all units  builds resources , make it  easy select the units or builds we want.

 

That way you keep the game without icons like it is now , and have a key to other full picture view with FULL STRATEGIC ZOOM and make all happy :)

 

 

Reply #11 Top

Quoting Frogboy, reply 9

I'm struggling with the empire tree as well.   Thoughts?

Sins is the only place I've seen it, and I never actually played Sins. Maybe I should.

What I can gather from Let's Plays, the true benefit of the empire tree is you can see at a glance the relative strength and composition  of your local assets compared to those of another player, including what structures are there (I think). Due to fog of war, I'm not sure this is practical for AotS. If you can make it practical, do it. If not, replace it with something less busy.

Reply #12 Top

Quoting Frogboy, reply 9

I'm struggling with the empire tree as well.   Thoughts?

I've honestly never found the empire tree useful (same as in Sins) - it's always been way too many pieces of information presented in an almost identical fashion. Add on the fact that you can't organize the information by location as easily in Ashes, since in Sins you at least had discrete planets (with names) that people might remember, and around which combat was focused, and it gets even more confusing. Looking back at Sins, being able to collapse the data down into a per-planet view made is so much more practical.

Some people who're really into Sins and Ashes may end up finding these very useful, but I imagine that any less-experienced player would be overwhelmed (I still am) by all of the flashing sections and similar icons, particularly in Ashes. It's a UX/UI nightmare to present that much information, so Sins in particular isn't that bad, all things considered :)

If someone could post some pictures involving a rather complex empire, with some control groups, etc, I'd appreciate it! (Can't jump into the game right now and check it out). One of the 'strategic map' as well would be lovely - I imagine moving some info from the tree view into the strat map's surrounds/border would alleviate some of this, but I'll try to figure out some more solid ideas for it soon and edit them into the original post :)

 

Reply #13 Top

im one of the small active skilled groups in sins.. and i can honestly say i don't find the side tree use full at all in ashes...when i look at it.. seems like blobs lol in sins when i was in battle..it would be very useful because lets say i had a high level ship and it was taking damage i selected it and retreated ..it is more practical to use it than actually looking at the battle itself mind you health is also reflected of different units and what not, also you can make it them appear stacked like 10 units per icon..i used it also to determine the forces of my enemy..if i could win or not..in ashes i just feel its a blob.

Reply #14 Top

maybe it can if they enhanced it more and what not as to the way i described it in sins maybe...its def not going to work for a world wide scope..but when you look at a certain part of the map..say a turinium generator and you look at that skermish..then id think the empire tree would be practical if it was represented better than its current state. just finished a quick game and paid attention to that blop lol i couldn't see enemy ships just my own..i should be able to see other side too..or maybe i missed something? or it might of been bugged?

Reply #15 Top

Good we are getting a point.

Many think the same, the empire tree isnt't  usefull in AOTS, i think we all want all information in field right? or rong?

So what options we have in ower minds i already show 1 but what you guys like to have  ?


Option 1-If the empire tree showldnt stay what you guys want has the present information on the field?

Option 2-If the empire tree showld stay what you guys want has  the present information on the field?

Lets work on this .

Reply #16 Top

Quoting TAG_Utter, reply 16

Good we are getting a point.

Many think the same, the empire tree isnt't  usefull in AOTS, i think we all want all information in field right? or rong?

So what options we have in ower minds i already show 1 but what you guys like to have  ?




Option 1-If the empire tree showldnt stay what you guys want has the present information on the field?

Option 2-If the empire tree showld stay what you guys want has  the present information on the field?

Lets work on this .

I have a solid idea for this; just working on a mock-up after work later ;)

Reply #17 Top

My PC was down for a while so I'm just now getting back into the game after a brief hiatus.  After playing for a few hours last night, I think this thread is single most important one in the forums.  

First for the good.  One of the first things I noticed in the game last night is how VASTLY improved the meta-unit AI is.  I feel much more comfortable letting the meta units arrange themselves for and engage in battles without extensive micro.  I was blown away at a few points, as I watched the AI maneuver massive battle groups to send in an advance force of heavily armored units to hit a base, while leaving support units and a small defensive force back with my arty units as they pounded away at the enemy.  Meanwhile, my close air support bombers managed to hit targets that were not too close to enemy AA, my fighters kept enemy fighters off their backs, and my own AA tried to maneuver into position for shots at enemy aircraft.  This is some truly evolutionary stuff -- I have never seen anything quite like it.  I still had to involve myself in the battles here and there (e.g., units targeting static base defenses vs. construction facilities that are pumping out defensive units), but those instances are much fewer and far between than in earlier builds.  Besides, if I never got involved in a battle I would feel a bit left out ;-).

Now for the downside to my new freedom from extensive battle micro -- micro issues with more mundane tasks like resource gathering, production, and supply-line management have taken over my life in jarringly painful way.  The danger here is that players have to focus on boring tasks like supply line management instead of higher level strategy and watching the beautiful battles you've worked so hard on.  Thus, I think how you handle the resource gathering, production, and supply-line management issues in the current build will make or break AoS for a lot of players. 

A few things that I thought about while playing that tie in with the original poster's points:

  • Meta-group Templating -- this is absolutely essential; as is some way of either assigning specific factories to re-enforce specific battle-groups, or allowing the AI to do it on the fly.  I favor the prior approach, as I worry that too much automation in the game will leave players feeling a bit left out.  Said another way, it's not that I don't want any ability to affect my manufacturing/supply line operations -- that's where some level of skill comes in -- it's that I don't want to have to constantly micro which factory is producing what and sending it where.  Maybe this is in the game already, but I don't know how to use it effectively.  
  • Forward Base Templating -- how cool would it be if you could set up build templates for specific types of forward bases, fire up three engineers with some defensive units for a meta-unit, and send them on their merry way to go build the thing?  It would remove tons of micro if you could create a template (e.g., 3-4 smarties, a repair bay, and a production bay) and toss them somewhere on the map.  The skill would then come from base placement and resource control (i.e., not overbuilding) vs. how fast you click on the screen holding shift and hammering keys.
  • Resource Gathering Meta-Units -- PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE create a system where I can assemble a meta-unit of 2-3 engineers and some scout or other units to go capture and develop resource points by just creating multiple way-points to resource control zones.  Individually clicking on each resource point is completely untenable on larger maps, and I think it's time for strategy games of this scale to move away from the concept completely.  Honestly, I'd be happy to see the random mining shafts in the ground that currently appear vanish completely in favor of a resource icon or something, and then have the engineers go develop the resource by building the mine shaft or w/e when they arrive.  You would still only have x number of resources in an area, the difference is I don't have to click on each mine shaft.  Besides, I've honestly never understood why mine shafts are all over the place when I arrive on planet.  The metaverse thingy about neutral creeps setting this up has never made any sense....  
  • Keyboard Map -- can we get one please?  If I've missed it can you give me a link (I've been AWOL for a bit)?  I don't care about re-assigning keys at this point, I just want to know how to get stuff done in the game with fewer clicks and less keyboard mashing ;-)
I played tons of Sins just like Rapha320.  The empire tree in AoS does not seem half as useful as in Sins, but I'm not 100% sure why yet.  I think part of the problem is how big the icons are.  I'll give this one more thought in coming days.
+2 Loading…
Reply #18 Top

k3 :P .

And empire tree have to go,and be replaced for something else.

We just cant have the tree if we dont use it.


Select the units by click them on field i think enouth for now ,the only thing is missing its click the units and show all the information about that unit or build.



Something that i dont think its good idea ,you guys talk and try make the same steps has  Sins empire tree  .

Ok i get that is a nice game  ,but AOTS its not sins expansion its new game .


New game = new options and ideas  :beer:

 

 

Reply #19 Top

This is great feedback, thanks all.

Regarding the empire tree, I've been banging on it a bit internally and I think it can be useful in Ashes for a couple things:

1. Seeing which battlegroups/controlgroups are in combat quickly

2. Getting a very quick sense of relative battlegroup/controlgroup strength

3. Seeing what you have lying around as "loose" (non-battlegroup) units at a glance

I don't know that it'll ever be quite as useful overall as the Sins empire tree, just given how perfectly the concept fits the way Sins maps work (with discrete nodes rather than a contiguous map).

Hopefully I can sell Frogboy on what we've been working on and you guys will see it soon-ish! But definitely we're aware that the empire tree needs work.

---

With regard to production automation like battlegroups being automatically reinforced to their original order of battle, that's actually harder from a design perspective. I mean, we could do it, sure. But it can lead to things like your economy crashing because a bunch of your BGs just suffered losses and fired up their supporting factories automatically, meaning you don't have the resources to beef up your defensive line for the coming counterattack. Worse, you now have a stream of units heading to their deaths as the battlegroups they're reinforcing are badly losing the fight anyway.

That's not to say we can't do any automation, but to illustrate that there are pitfalls that make designing a good UX for large empires a lot trickier than simply coding up some factory automation.

Reply #20 Top

Quoting TAG_Utter, reply 20

k3 :P .

And empire tree have to go,and be replaced for something else.

We just cant have the tree if we dont use it.

I don't know that I'm ready to throw out and replace the Empire Tree completely.  I think it has a lot of potential to work in AoS.  For the uninitiated, the empire tree in Sins was critical for navigating quickly to planets or fleets under attack -- often between multiple stars.  It solved the related problems of quickly locating specific fleets or planets that were in trouble and zooming in close enough to see them and micro manage the problem effectively.  The empire tree also allowed you to issue manufacturing orders to individual star systems in the midst of battle, fire super weapons, etc.

The Empire tree had other useful features too.  You could keep tabs on the progress of a battle by eyeballing unit health and other statistics; and tell when a fleet was about to jump as all of its strike fighters/bombers landed.  The tab also gave you a very quick readout when you jumped into a gravity well of the forces arrayed against you, so you could gauge the relative likelihood of success/defeat before fully committing your forces; or retreat in time to avoid the complete decimation of your fleet.  It was a stroke of genius and one of the key reasons Sins was playable as an RTS despite its massive scale, because Sins required a lot of micro across far flung systems.

So, how to improve AoS's empire tree interface:

  1. AoS obviously has no fixed "planets".  The planetary layer in Sins forced a certain level of organization on Sins players and "tethered" the empire tree so to speak. In AoS you can build a factory or various structures anywhere you want.  I think making the empire tree in AoS work like it did in Sins requires tethering it to something too -- say each control zone with a cluster of factories built within it or something.  I suppose you could also reduce the number of zones on each map and treat each one like you treated each planet in sins.  I can see a lot of value to something like this -- particularly if we can assign specific factories or groups of factories to support specific meta-units/battle groups.  I have not tried yet, but it is possible to assign factories a "group" number in the current build?    
  2. The empire tree images are way too big right now.  They need to be smaller like in Sins so more useful information can be packed in.  All I need to see is unit composition (unique icons with a number for each kind of unit in the battlegroup), overall health of the unit, and visual cues if it's in battle.  A statistic on how much damage the meta unit is dealing vs. taking might be cool too, so I can figure out if it needs to get the hell out of the current battle ASAP.
  3. Like in Sins, I think the empire tree should show any enemies within radar range of a meta-unit, even if you cannot currently see the unit.  This gives you a quick reference as to how much sh** your unit has just stumbled into, and provides more incentive to invest $$ in radar range upgrades.

I'll post more thoughts after spending more time with the game tonight.

Reply #21 Top

Quoting abiessener, reply 21

This is great feedback, thanks all.

Regarding the empire tree, I've been banging on it a bit internally and I think it can be useful in Ashes for a couple things:

1. Seeing which battlegroups/controlgroups are in combat quickly

2. Getting a very quick sense of relative battlegroup/controlgroup strength

3. Seeing what you have lying around as "loose" (non-battlegroup) units at a glance

I don't know that it'll ever be quite as useful overall as the Sins empire tree, just given how perfectly the concept fits the way Sins maps work (with discrete nodes rather than a contiguous map).

Hopefully I can sell Frogboy on what we've been working on and you guys will see it soon-ish! But definitely we're aware that the empire tree needs work.

---

I didn't even see your reply before posting my last essay!  Looking forward to seeing the revamped ET.  I think it will work in AoS too....

Quoting abiessener, reply 21

With regard to production automation like battlegroups being automatically reinforced to their original order of battle, that's actually harder from a design perspective. I mean, we could do it, sure. But it can lead to things like your economy crashing because a bunch of your BGs just suffered losses and fired up their supporting factories automatically, meaning you don't have the resources to beef up your defensive line for the coming counterattack. Worse, you now have a stream of units heading to their deaths as the battlegroups they're reinforcing are badly losing the fight anyway.

That's not to say we can't do any automation, but to illustrate that there are pitfalls that make designing a good UX for large empires a lot trickier than simply coding up some factory automation.

All great points -- and I agree that yes, some poison will have to be picked in the end.  For my part, I'm thinking less auto-reinforce than associate a specific factory or factories with specific battlegroups so that everything I create in that factory goes to that particular battlegroup, until the group gets destroyed or I change my mind at some point. 

In the end, the poison you serve up comes down to how you want players to experience/remember the game -- as a click fest where they spend most of their time scrambling to click on resources and cue up a bunch of individual buildings, issue build orders, and assign unit routes; or as an epic battle where some of the more mundane tasks either take care of themselves or can be handled all at once, so they are free to work on world spanning strategies involving land-based flotillas of death..... 

I'd rather lose because my flanking strategy fails miserable and I f***ed up my economy building too much or too often than because some guy with ADHD (I can joke about it because I have it) can click his mouse faster than I can ;-).

 

Reply #22 Top

Quoting tatsujb, reply 24


Quoting AoWFever,

The empire tree images are way too big right now.  They need to be smaller like in Sins so more useful information can be packed in.

too few people understand that smaller is better. (that's what she said)

yes! 

k1

NO TACTICAL ZOOM TATSUJB!  I was hoping you'd given up on that by now ;-).