Micromanagement is not the same as tactics. Constantly adjusting your party in micro increments to what the enemy is doing, is not particulary tactical gameplay. its reactive gameplay. You constantly can make the "Ideal" move, its just very very tedious to do so.
No, micromanagement doesn't necessarily mean "tactics". Like I said, it is just one of the things that differentiate RTWP from TB. Simple as that. And I got that you don't like micromanagement. That's fine.
Originally Posted by Sordak
In a turn based game, you observe the situation, you plot the correct course and you execute an action. Then you see your action play out and see if your gambits paid off. In a RTWP game, you judge the current battleifeld situation and react to it, then, you immediatly pause again to see the enemy reaciton, and you adjust your maneuver accordingly.
Do you see the fundamental difference here? And do you see why one of these would be judged as superior by someone who enjoys thinking about his actions before he does them?
Yes, you made this point with your archer and fighter example. I got that. I'm just surprised it took you this long to start making clear and agreeable arguments.
This factor, however, is in no way the single factor that makes a game "tactical". There are plenty of tactical decisions to be made elsewhere. If you let this one factor stop you from enjoying RTWP games as a whole, it's your loss. Big loss, seeing as there are some amazing RTWP games out there.
Last edited by Try2Handing; 26/06/1901:30 PM.
"We make our choices and take what comes and the rest is void."