SharkD (425) on 7/12/2008 7:55 AM · edited · Permalink · Report

Wow, I never realized there were so many games where chickens figure prominently!

Back on topic, if I were to try to create a definition of the group, I would say the group would consist of games were the focus is on small-unit tactics and maneuvers using only resources at hand (e.g., minus the logistical concerns of larger, strategy games). This means: no resource collection, no building and construction, no diplomacy and national economic stategies, little or no research, etc.. I would say it would possibly consist of small one-time bonuses of funds or troops, capturing cash bonuses or prizes that can be spent on new troops, liberating stockpiles of equipment or troops, etc.. Other things it might contain are occasional reinforcements, persistent forces, unit advancement, changeable equipment/inventory. If the game were at a squad-level then you would control individual people and the game might incorporate RPG characteristics such as meeting new characters and recruiting them. If the scope were slightly larger you might control squads of troops and individual tanks or vehicles. Also, games might feature both strategic and tactical layers. X-COM, for instance, features both a battle and geoscope mode. The two layers are dissociated enough, however, that the game could be safely classified into both categories instead of some kind of mixture of the two.

To recap, the focus of the game would be on controlling individual units and directing them in battle. Combat wouldn't be abstracted to the point where you simply send a single mass against another, click only one button and have the outcome be determined automatically.

-Mike