Tactics vs Strategy

[syndicated44]

I have been playing RTS games since I was first introduced to PC gaming. I love them I truly do. However I have started to notice a trend where we have moved away from the old strategy model and moved to a more tactical model. Small squads fighting small squads. Eventually one side either destroys the single construction building (Warhammer 2) or simply kill more guys then your opponent does (World in Conflict). We have moved away from workers economics to more build guys shoot other guys.

I dont have much of a problem with this and more old style RTS games are still being made but I was curious as to what everyones thoughts are as to if you like this new trend of "RTS" games or are do you prefer building a base and the like?

Another question is what do you think the reason for this move is? I personally think they are trying to put RTS games onto a console setting. Small squad based combat and micromanagement works out better with a console (I have yet to play a console RTS but from what I can understand it just doesnt work. correct me if I am wrong).

So bottom line do you like the new tactics style or the more classic grand strategy? Bonus points are given if you give your two cents as to what you think sparked this new trend.

Edit: The more I think about it the more I think a good merge of the two ideas is Company of Heroes.

A lot of people seemed confused as to what I am going for. I just think that RTS games seem to be going for a faster approach over a longer drawn out battle.

Let me get into more depth. A perfect strategy game to me is Homeworld. You start out with your bare bone basics. Your main production facility and miners. You then gain resources and start out with light strike craft. You then progress to bigger and better weapons. It changes the game through time. Your strike craft are not going to do much but you can play some light guerilla warfare against enemy mining operations. You then move up to corvetters and frigates and eventually to capital ships. All the while fighting different fights all over the place. You need to protect your mining operations while assaulting enemy operations. The game is constantly changing and your strategy must evolve around what your enemy is doing. The fights themselves fall under a tactical category, you need to figure out what ship is going to fight what and what is most effective.

The trend that I am starting to see is moving away from a longer battle. There is not as much progression and you get the biggest shiny toys right away. Its all just a matter of what works against what straight away. There isnt the chance your going to get rushed ten minutes into the game or your resources be cut off because you were stupid and didnt defend them properly. Instead of having resources which are collected they are given to you. Or you have to build up a defense around key points. You then need to balance out what units are going to be defense and what is going to take new points (thinking of warhammer 2 here). Howeve your unit cap is dwarfed so it is imperative you figure out what your enemy is using and how to counter it. You need to micromanage each unit so you never really get into a huge battle of the titans. By the time you reach your end game units you can potentially push through to the enemy base and conquer it.

Last but not least lets look at World in Conflict. This is a true RTT. You have no base you only have units and your objective is to wittle down the other teams lives. Each player gets a specific role and can borrow units from another role to fill in the gaps. There is no progression you have everything right away. It is only a matter of what is going to work best against what.

I guess that might help with my ideas of what Tactics are Vs. what Strategy is.

 

[replingham153]

i confused by this topic and i demand an explanation! However, i will share my tactics. Turtle. Build a huge base, loads of units, loads of hero/leader/bad ass people and charge!

 

[Cody211282]

Hate to tell you but RTS games always only used tactics, strategy is the overall plan for winning the war and tactics is just how you fight the battle. so really if anything they haven't changed that much and gotten rid of the retarded base building.

 

[Muzza-Maaate]

I don't understand why they say that console controls are incompatible with RTS games. I used to have Command and Conquer: Red Alert on PS1 and 2 and I found the controls to be very easy to use.

In my opinion I always loved building bases. Setting up a huge defense before your even bigger offense.

Good old Red Alert Tesla Coils <3

 

[Slaanax]

I always preferred RTS that didn't involve base building like Mechcommander and Close Combat Series. I really enjoyed playing DoW2 I wish I would have experimented more with making my squads different than the norm. I do a play through where everyone is a shooter or close combat.

 

[TOGSolid]

...Uh, Yea, dawn of war and world in conflict aren't built around strategy. They're built around "select all units and steamroll."

its all about making the format "accessible." Which is newspeak for "piss easy."

Young student, you have much to learn in the way of Relic-jutsu.

 

[monkyvirus]

Base buildings a bit dull for some people I think, well for me cause I'm really impulsive (but then again I can't even manage to play Splinter Cell without running right through the middle of the room guns blazing) my brother was definitely a base builder. So I'd go for the build guys kill guys whereas my bro would deffo prefer to settle himself down first before unleashing death upon his opponent. He was always better at RTS than me... so that might say something

Good old Red Alert Tesla Coils <3

those were the greatest <3

 

[syndicated44]

Hate to tell you but RTS games always only used tactics, strategy is the overall plan for winning the war and tactics is just how you fight the battle. so really if anything they haven't changed that much and gotten rid of the retarded base building.

Personally I consider strategy games build a base etc. Grand strategy is like Total War. And tactics is you have one building which builds or you get men from off map. Thats just the way I think of it. I am probably wrong so sorry.

 

[crobulator]

hmm dawn of war 2 and C&C4 can deny it all they want they were just trying to differentiate themselves from the upcoming behemoth that is starcraft2

 

[Enagan]

Well, the total war franchise seems to have both of the trend you mentioned..

In that game you have to make a good strategy and a construction and attack plan in the strategy map.

But when you go down and personal to fight a battle, tactics are very important.
You can win outnumbered 1:10 if your tactics are miles ahead of your opponent.

I like Total War ^^

 

[DividedUnity]

Hate to tell you but RTS games always only used tactics, strategy is the overall plan for winning the war and tactics is just how you fight the battle. so really if anything they haven't changed that much and gotten rid of the retarded base building.

Personally I consider strategy games build a base etc. Grand strategy is like Total War. And tactics is you have one building which builds or you get men from off map. Thats just the way I think of it. I am probably wrong so sorry.

I think strategy is your movements of troops in large groups and the steps you take against enemies and that tactical is using different units to counter the others eg the rock paper scissors type system were archers beat swordsmen etc.

 

[Brutus03]

Well don't forget Homeworld and Homeworld 2.
They used both Strategy and Tactics in the gameplay.

Distract a battlecruiser with fighters and bombers then bring in the frigates to flank it.

 

[Cody211282]

Hate to tell you but RTS games always only used tactics, strategy is the overall plan for winning the war and tactics is just how you fight the battle. so really if anything they haven't changed that much and gotten rid of the retarded base building.

Personally I consider strategy games build a base etc. Grand strategy is like Total War. And tactics is you have one building which builds or you get men from off map. Thats just the way I think of it. I am probably wrong so sorry.

I was just saying what the definitions for each was(it sorta bugs me when an entire genre is called the wrong thing). and going by your definitions I really don't like old RTSs oh so much and prefer the tactics of DOW2. Honestly if they could make an actual strategy game I would be rather happy.

 

[Cody211282]

Hate to tell you but RTS games always only used tactics, strategy is the overall plan for winning the war and tactics is just how you fight the battle. so really if anything they haven't changed that much and gotten rid of the retarded base building.

Personally I consider strategy games build a base etc. Grand strategy is like Total War. And tactics is you have one building which builds or you get men from off map. Thats just the way I think of it. I am probably wrong so sorry.

I think strategy is your movements of troops in large groups and the steps you take against enemies and that tactical is using different units to counter the others eg the rock paper scissors type system were archers beat swordsmen etc.

"In military usage strategy is distinct from tactics, which are concerned with the conduct of an engagement, while strategy is concerned with how different engagements are linked."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy

Basically tactics=winning the battle(small picture)
Strategy=winning the war or campaign(bigger picture)

 

[syndicated44]

Hate to tell you but RTS games always only used tactics, strategy is the overall plan for winning the war and tactics is just how you fight the battle. so really if anything they haven't changed that much and gotten rid of the retarded base building.

Personally I consider strategy games build a base etc. Grand strategy is like Total War. And tactics is you have one building which builds or you get men from off map. Thats just the way I think of it. I am probably wrong so sorry.

I think strategy is your movements of troops in large groups and the steps you take against enemies and that tactical is using different units to counter the others eg the rock paper scissors type system were archers beat swordsmen etc.

"In military usage strategy is distinct from tactics, which are concerned with the conduct of an engagement, while strategy is concerned with how different engagements are linked."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy

Basically tactics=winning the battle(small picture)
Strategy=winning the war or campaign(bigger picture)

Personally I think its the point of view. I like to view my games as a large war over a small battle. A more traditional RTS game seems to have different fights throughout. Your units are getting better and so are your enemies. Your fighting a technology war, a resource war, and an actual war. Whereas with a tactics game you dont have a city or a base to defend you have a building, an HQ. So to me you are fighting a war. With a game like Supreme Commander you have a huge map with large islands seperated by a sea. You can completely build up your land and in the end have a huge slugfest of experimentals and large forces. A smaller map would fall under a tactical battle. Its more about immediate attacks and cutting your foes off from resources. Supcom has a very Rock paper Scissors style gameplay immediately and those lines blur as the game progresses. To me thats a war over just a battle.

 

[Yureina]

When I want to play tactical games, I play World in Conflict.

When I want to play strategy games, I play Civilization IV.

If I want both at once, I play Total War games.

That's my position.

 

[olicon]

I can't say much about where the genre is heading, but I generally prefer "tactical" type of game, because I usually get to kit out my own squad. I also like the squad based action, because I like how the fights are the focus--and that each one are often more cinematic, and slower. So things like Dawn of War are the stuff of my dream.

 

[Legion IV]

I love games where you need to mine. Thats why my favorite game is starcraft. Theres no victory i love more then an econmic victory where i get expansions and soon just out money them then starve them! Yes! so rewarding!. love iT!.