The Perfect RTS?

I like real time strategy games- but there is 1 big problem.

I suck at it.

Nevertheless, I still love the genre.

If anyone tried any RTS before, they will know how hard the learning curve is- for example, the first RTS I played is Command and Conquer 3- and until my friend told me to build more harvesters, I found the game unplayable with so little money.

So how can the best RTS ever be made?

To cut the long chase short, it can never.

Click on to learn why.

There are 2 aspects overlooking all RTSes- Micromanagement and Macromanagement. Both must work with the other to make the game fun.

Micromanagement refers to the unit-level commands. For example, switching the weapon of a unit to a bazooka to effectively combat tanks. This is most prevalent in the classic RTSes like Command and Conquer (TD-RA3) and Starcraft, where games between evenly matched players comes down to every minute command given to each unit.

Professional gamers love this type of game- since the games typically follow the few established build orders (ie. Macromanagement), the action- and the difference between win or lose- is all down to what each player does as the units shoot at each other on screen.

Many game punishes Micro-lapses, which is the failure to micro the unit in time. Take Napoleon: Total War- Usually, the game goes down to grand strategy, but the failure to notice calvary charging on your flanks may cause your entire line to collapse, allowing units to be picked off one by one.

However, with the high level of Micro needed in these games, the beginner will not be able to adapt to it so quickly- and will get trashed in online play, forcing them to quit the game.

So bring in Macromanagement. In essence, it refers to the grand overall strategy, in contrast to the unit to unit "every-mouse-click-matters" of Micromanagement.

Macromanagement usually refers to the resource base-building aspect of games- because the resources needed to build your units is the core of the game. By destroying the resource collecting, you will effectively strangle the enemy to death- thus deciding how much resource to gain and how much protection the resource collectors get is under Macromanagement.

DoTA is an important example- you only control a single unit and how you Micromanage that unit is your win/lose.

However, many games have another level of Macromanagement. The most glaring example is the total war series. Napoleon: Total War, for example, prefers Macro over Micro. There is nothing you can do to make your units kill the enemy any better- all you can do is make sure there are enough troops there.

Micro and Macro must work together for a game to be about strategy. While Napoleon: Total War may look like a purely Macro game, it punishes you severely for any Microlapse. Your flanks may fall just because of bad Macro to get your flanks covered, it may be because you did not put your men in the right formation when the calvary attacked.

So, what is the perfect RTS? One leaning towards Micro or Macro?

The answer is both. Different people like different things- Some like the intensity of Micromanaging every single unit in a battle which others like sitting back and letting the units hold their own in the position you told them to take. There will never be a "perfect strategy game", no matter what the PR calls it. But there may be perfect RTS with just the right ratio of Macro:Micro to suit you.