This is making me think...
Groups like wolf packs and such can form before sapience, so shouldn't we be able to access strategy mode before then? In a wolf pack, there is a leader who leads the rest of the pack, so(most likely simplified version of) strategy mode should be available in that situation, should it not?
In all seriousness, I'm unsure of all of the features of strategy mode, so I'd rather like it if someone disagreed(with reasons, of course).
-Waap.

Ugh, I hate the idea of strategy mode being available for animals. See, here's the thing: Wolves do operate based on strategies, but they don't give and receive orders in real-time - and that mechanic is the linchpin of Strategy Mode's gameplay justification.

Wolves do work together, and they do use teamwork to carry out complicated goals. I get that, based on that, people think they should get strategy mode. However, once a hunt is in progress, each wolf is acting autonomously and making decisions independently in real-time. They're not taking orders from a central commander - and that's what Strategy mode is intended to represent.

I'm inclined in favor of more advanced AI for pack-hunters, certainly - and the issue of how behaviors of any kind will evolve in NPCs has yet to be really discussed. I just don't think you should get a suite of real-time command options. Perhaps something squad-based? I haven't played a lot of squad-based combat, but that idea just feels... better. More appropriate.

Strategy and tactical controlls should really be different. Strategy needs quick large commands on large scale, while tactics need precision. I think we should draw inspiration from tactical combat games and milsims, these usually use F1-F12 keys to select specific members of the squad and then use number keys to select orders.

As to availability, I think tactics controls should be available to packhunters and similar, while strategy would get available later (maybe in the Awakening stage?). Packhunters really don't have any form of communication, but not giving player the control would be too limiting I think.

Quote:

I kind of worry that the game will become a confusing mess, with all these different control schemes to manage. Is it really a good idea to try and throw all this stuff together?

There are still two main sets of controls (Org mode, Strategy mode), all these discussed things are just possible extensions of the main two.

Just now decided to read through all the posts... kinda forgot about this. Any-who, I think just a normal strategy control scheme would work fine. Someone suggested that you could kind of do "suggested" orders, and I think that would be more realistic. It's not that you necessarily are an entity giving orders, but kind of the population's common will, or whatever the word is I'm looking for. (Which gives me an idea, what would the literal player be role playing as in-game? an ascended being?)
I'm not totally sure how constructive this post was.

Okay, I think the problem here is that people are confusing our defined strategy mode with the literal definition of strategy.
I do think that some limited strategic behavior should be available to many different types of animals - for toolmaking (Crows and other birds do it, as well as primates, before anyone goes off on me.) as well as for hunting/defending a territory from encroaching packs.

One of the simple ways to do it would be to give the group an option to "hunt" or to "defend," and then not be able to select the actual strategy used yourself. But we have to remember that pack behavior is not actually random - creatures are making decisions based on the situation and the actions of their leader.
Toolmaking is different... and probably not a huge issue in this thread. Creatures will use a rock to smash a shellfish long before they ever think to make a proper tool.