You do have hero units, however, who can give bonuses to nearby troops. The game fails to model things like command and control or morale which seems at odds with its otherwise authentic modeling. Pathfinding can be a real problem for your units as well, with units sometimes going the long way around certain obstacles or, on the other side of the coin, plowing right through minefields you've already identified. Every once in a while you can exploit the enemy's "intelligence." More than once I was able to attack enemy units without triggering them to look for me (or even retreat - or move at all - in a few cases). If not exactly smart, the enemy units are positioned on the map in such a way as to present a challenge to you. While it's a hell of a reward and a real enticement to explore all of your options within a given mission, the fact that you don't know what's being asked of you can make searching for these hidden objectives quite frustrating. Though a neat feature in theory, the force balance is usually pretty good to begin with and you run a real risk of leaving large gaps in your army if you just start buying the units you think you'll need (not that the game gives you much to go on in this regard.) A prestige system gives you access to super units if you manage to complete hidden mission objectives.
The game offers pre-built forces for each mission but you can use points to buy additional or different forces. Though most games of this type eschew resource management and base-building, Desert Rats does have a few new interesting things to manage.
Still, managing the different kinds of infantry (and even telling them apart on the battlefield) is one of the game's biggest challenges. Though the game doesn't go out of its way to point out where and when each asset should be brought to bear, the scope of the battles, particularly the early ones, are small enough to let the player get used to a few unit types at a time. Infantry, tanks, AT guns, artillery, reconnaissance units, supply and repair trucks, off-map resources like air strikes and a host of other toys are here. The historical battles represented in Desert Rats follow a similar approach but the number of units involved are much higher. Most gamers are comfortable with the rock-paper-scissors approach of Age of Empires where certain unit types trump others. Combine that with distinct and dissimilar unit rosters for each side and you've got a game that's much more intimidating than that found in most other RTS games. Not only do they have to be aware of what each unit's purpose is they also have to coordinate those purposes in the most efficient way possible. This is typically where games like Close Combat and Sudden Strike bog down for some players. Where gamers might have to juggle a dozen or so different unit types in Command and Conquer or Warcraft, these World War 2-themed games often require the player to manage upwards of a hundred different types of units. This is a roundabout way of saying that the concept of historical battlefield realism doesn't necessarily jibe with the traditional presentation of most real-time strategy games. I bring this up to make a point, namely that the guy leading his rifle squad in an assault on an enemy position doesn't necessarily need to worry about whether or not the supply trucks are able to reach a friendly platoon of tanks who are sweeping around the enemy flank. A strong hierarchy of command ensures that company-level commanders can direct their platoons into battle without necessarily leading each of them by hand.
Everyone, from tank drivers to artillery spotters to supply officers to riflemen, understands the overall mission at hand and how their separate role fits into the overall plan. In the real army they spend months training individuals to instinctively react to changing conditions in a way that supports the goals and objectives of the army as a whole and the other individual allied soldiers.