I am digging the new videos.  The concept of zone control looks good.  Not seeing much information on game structures.  Will there be point defenses to fortify areas of control?

P.S. I see you have already conquered 2 of the critical problems of previous large scale rts games.  A solid game engine and ease of creating maps to enhance replayability.

Am I reading it right that AotS may end up having the zoom out replace individual units with meta units icons, or something like that? If so, that sounds like a good middle road to me.

Watching the videos, I'd say it has a SC look, but more of a Company of Herose feel. Comparisons to SC look to be only skin deep, literally. By combining the elements from multiple titles, plus the advances with the Nitrous engine, I'd have to agree with Frogboy that this is really a new game, perhaps a new sub-genre of RTS. I actually hope it is, because then maybe we can look forward to the next iteration in 2021. People who want SupCom 3 will be disappointed, but I'm really starting to get excited! I think this thread may have also run its course.

imho that is a statement likely said by somebody who has not played (enough) SupCom?

Even in the short lets play video I felt that icons were missing after all. I basically felt "and now add icons so I can quickly tell what is going on from up here".

The minimap is small, the main game view is big. The movement of the camera via zoom nicely can be combined with getting an overview of what is going on via a zoom with icons. In minimap driven games it is a skill to be able to constantly look at the minimap. The player is forced to basically spent a considerable time their with his/her eyes instead on the big main view. An artificial limitation. Can be fun to play with (see starcraft 2), but for a game that wants to be more in the area of "the UI supports the player as much as it can" it is weird.

Now if it has to be "one icon per unit" or "abstract icons for meta units/whatever" is totally open. But having more than just a pretty view of the map when fully zoomed out is very helpful.

I am not saying in any way I expect or want a copy of SupCom btw. I realize by now I think that AOTS has some quite different gameplay aspects. Still the reasons for "no zoom" are still a little weird to me. Yes I can't make out the exact form of the map from high up. So what? The same can be said about a minimap, in fact there you can even make out less details as it is small. I also will know the map perfectly by heart anyway.

Also the modder in me wonders how doable it will be to mod in icons and whether such a mod would provide an advantage (I still think it would, SupCom is proof of that much in that many players basically disabled the minimap it had completely in favor of the zoom). I in the end did manage to mod in a minimap into PA -by reverse engineering the client and reading data from memory directly-, getting icons into AOTS would be a nice new target

Well I am looking forward to the alpha. 

@Frogboy

To be completely honest I am glad the team is taking the approach you are. There have been countless times I have seen games ruined because the player base whines and complains until something gets implemented. I want Ashes to be its own game, and not a clone of something else I have played.

With that being said, I do believe that community feedback is valuable as long as it pertains to the overall vision of the game. If you want the game to be a clone of another game then it's honestly an insult to the creativity of the team. As a founder I went into this knowing that Ashes of the Singularity would be its own monster, and really love the thought of having an RTS unlike the others I own.  

The only concerns I have really just pertain to the more tactical side of gameplay like artillery, snipers, units that can break a formation/line, etc. I just don't want the game to be two blobs hitting each other with the largest group winning 100% of the time. With the use of more tactical units a battle can be turned with some well placed shots.