Even from a design persepctive they don't fit. Think about that. On the campaign map you cannot build units everywhere, only in countries with a capital or war factory. But as soon as you go to RTS battle you can - oh suprise - suddenly build unit in this country regardless if there is a war factory or not. That's in itself inconsistent design. And it makes the production of units on the campaign map kind of "useless" because their weight against the units created in RTS is way minor.
This is a serious flaw of game design I haven't noticed before tbh. But now I fully understand some problems I had on the campaign map.
Well, the inconsistency in that you can suddenly generate troops in the RTS portion is pretty much insoluble. The relative ineffectiveness of units on the campaign map is easier to handle, though I fear not something that can be fixed before release.
I fear so as well. And I even don't see a "perfect" solution for the long run yet....
The simplest method is to upweight units on the field. If a hunter unit translates to 5 units rather than 2 a decent sized force will easily stomp the enemy before he can build an army up. As a result losses will be much reduced and the autoresolve numbers can be shifted accordingly.
Yeah, but that would probably cause serious troube for balance in RTS combat. What's the point of creating units on the field and conquering building spots if you can wipe out your enemy with your starting units in two or three minutes?
The other solution is to de-emphasise the impact the RTS battle has on the campaign map. If I send a trooper against a large force and actually win the battle I should still only do minor damage to his army, the rest should be forced into the nearest friendly square. Only if I manage to surround his forces should they be wiped out. Of course if I sent a similarly sized army of my own then a strong showing in the RTS map could wipe out his army at a cost of significant casualties on my own force.
I have to say I like this suggestion somehow. You would still have to find a good mathematical equation how many units survive such a battle but it's a good idea which should be further explored. But there would be still the weird inconsistency that I won an RTS battle with perhaps a huge remaining army (if I'm THAT good) but only one single trooper remains on the map and the enemy army got shattered over the neighboring countries.....
It's that weird transition between strategy map and RTS I have most problems with....they seem to be deeply connected but in fact, they can't be "really" connected. You could translate pure mathematical outcomes from an RTS battle to the state on the strategy map but it doesn't really fit. The units are still different. You lost your troopers early in the RTS map and in the end you won the match with a huge army of bombers? Well, on the strategy map there will still be only on single trooper after the battle.... It's like two things which can't be combined properly and which are nevertheless pressed together. But I don't see a proper solution o address that problem...
