An issue that has been around here but few want to talk.

There's more micro in the current build than desired actually. That is, the APM requirement right now is actually fairly high to do well (higher than intended). That's vecause you have to currently keep on top of production, engineers, and unit placement far more than we expect in the final game.

We want the player to be looking at the war from a more global perspective. To that end, we are working on global abilities that allow the player to intervene in specific engagements.

Ty Frogboy .

Has always you fast to answer us ,keep the good work.

TAG_Utter, I feel it too. Granted right now I'm frantic making units and getting them into position, but when that gets better I fear it will just be throwing units at each other. Global abilities will help. It would also be nice if group composition was relevant, necessitating scouting to make the right units to obtain the advantage. I still wish combat could be similar to Sins, with fast units darting in and out. Or like COH, where units tactically use terrain for cover. Right now the only thing that seems to matter is whether you are trying to assault through a narrow gap, which favors the defenders. Hopefully that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Unit composition will have to be a key role and part of that will be up to the unit AI to make good use of that.

Re CoH, that wouldn't really make sense here. That was a squad based game, you'd be microing yourself into oblivion trying to do that here.

But I do think more needs to be done to make unit composition matter.  Let us know what sort of unit differentiation you'd like to see that isn't already in the game.

Yes, microing COH-style cover would be no good, good point. Retracted.

Differentiation: To be fair, my ideas are based upon untested preconceptions. I will need to stage mock battles to get a better idea of the situations in which each unit excels. If I put a group of archers against an equal sized group of Brutes, which will win? I have no idea. If you have a group of half arches, half brutes against a group of all brutes, which will win? I don't know.

My lack of knowledge and understanding aside, here are some ideas:

1. Brutes have 50% battle speed instead of 25% so they can clash faster, providing a buffer for ranged units.

2. Scouts (cannot remember the name, Aegis?) have no battle speed penalty, low hit points, a medium range low fire rate high damage weapon. They travel at the front of the group, but when fired upon they rush behind the front line of brutes, darting forward to snipe when they can fire again, then darting back behind the line.

3. T2 and T3 buffs and tactics mimic and support the role (Zeus provides a small speed and defense buff to brutes and fights on the front lines with the brutes, Artemis hangs back and provides a weapon range buff to archers, etc.) (I'm blanking on the actual unit names, I hope you get the gist anyway).

All these ideas would also serve to add a bit of dynamics to battles, all of it handled by the AI so no microing.

I think I recall in previous posts a dev saying they want to avoid rock-paper-scissors-like relationships. I could be wrong. I think it is an elegant mechanic, though, so some degree of RPS does make group composition relevant.

I will be sure to post more ideas if they come up.

Since the latest patch my micro and attention has been freed up to notice that the simple strategy of throwing units isn't going to cut it anymore. Now that resource gen comes prebuilt and smarty systems are...well...smart, the unit composition and delegation of forces is a necessity to win on any AI above Normal. I was originally not in favor of prebuilt resource collection but I've found the game more enjoyable now because of it. 

I also suggest seriously spending a few hours tinkering with your battle-group designs and sizes and maneuvers to see the benefits of not just adding random things on the fly. Having prebuilt designs in your head and executing them in games is a lot of fun and rewarding. For example I have a maneuver where I use three battle-groups. the first is four brutes 1 apollo to take the center, the second is two scouts, two brutes, one zues which takes a flank dependent on terrain and the third is four T1 range and an artemis which sit between and behind the two. Now you can probably combine all into one big battle-group but by separating them I'm able to target and move them depending on the situations. It's honestly a good idea to have some small groups instead of 1 large group in fights to lure the enemy in to traps or salvage part of a fight where the battle is disadvantageous 

Thanks for this! I will definitely start to using some of these maneuver tactics.

I would like to see more unit formations.

In Sins of a Solar Empire creating fleets around Titans worked well.

I guess micro will depends on how units moves, will it be like Sins?  Or more flowing like C&C/SC2/SubCom etc..

I'm struggling to get a picture of what the theater will look like in late game from what i have played so far.

edit: I see jawa105 posted something about battle groups, guess i have to explore the UI a bit more.