Planetary Annihilation: Y U SO UNDERATED

Yeah FAF is constantly patching.

Not sure if we can even say "pa is underated" there is lots of positive stuff on steam know, and I think it's quite a high seller....

It's definatly improving and I think a lot of that is due to jables and sorian for there forum input.

Jorgenpt has also been a breath of fresh air too.

It's cool that there are some people who believe there are nazi's on the moon, not sure how this is relevant to me saying there are FAF players who prefer a more realistic design?

While it's true games never get balanced, one game can be considered more balanced than another. In FAF we go into very minor details with unit balance, while in PA we are still working on the T2 transition and bomber snipes...

I'm not trying to talk bad about PA, I'm just saying those are the main reasons why most FAF players prefer FAF.

I'm saying everyone has their own preference and it's not possible to cater to everyone.

And I'm explaining the preference of FAF players and why they don't come to PA. No need to attack me with metaphors that bring zero contribution to the topic. If you want to chit chat go to the IRC

Agreed, I felt kinda bad as soon as posted that as there has been lots of other people that have helped also, not to mention the people behind the scene's.
basically big up for the whole team.

Not balanced? Has 'balance' been redefined to "I don't like the specific mechanics involved in this game"? I don't understand how PA isn't balanced. Everyone has access to literally the exact same units and buildings. How is that not the definition of balanced?

Now if the FAF players wanna whine about how T2 transition isn't fast enough, or planets need to be larger or whatever, I can't take issue with that. But saying PA isn't balanced is just abusing the word balance. If its so unbalanced then please, tell me what commander/color combination is the bestest.

Or are we gonna get into a debate about 'vehicles/bots/air too OP'? Cause I can kill that argument now: You have the exact same units. Adapt.

There are always gameplay mods.

This game is respectably growing, nitpick as they try, the problems are liveable at 20 dollars and the problems constantly get fixed with new content added as well. Not a big deal.

Well one definition of balanced is that all unit types are balanced in their usage and power, which PA does not have at the moment. At the moment the game leans much further towards land play, and often the majority of units on the field being bots.

Just for some perspective into the minds of others.

Pretty sure that (post) wasn't an attack in any way. Just an analogy of how there will always be people unhappy with any given balance.

The player base that’s interested it multiplayer improvements, is far too small to support this game or any multiplayer focused RTS. PA is in desperate need of story/lore. I will quote a famous 80’s catch phrase (where is the beef) Where is the story/lore, where is the different factions, where is the immersion?

FAF doesn't even work on my computer. I mean, it does, but it doesn't launch FA properly and, I sit in lobby, with half of the lobby just not appearing. Can't see map, players, etc.

That is very strange, have you contacted their forum about the issue?

Yeah, thy said upload a file that I couldn't find and then people quit replying so I gave up.
Here it is

Well to be fair it is a quite valid complaint if the game's balance means that nobody ever builds naval (and actually wins against an equal opponent) or grenadier bots. Yes ofc those units are build in random games by random players, but the moment the players play to win they quickly realize those units are completely useless.
Having useless units in the game is definitely an issue. Doesn't matter how you call it.

While a deep story and lore with a really cool immersive campaign is going to be nice to all the people who like that (who are more numerous than the MP crowd), making such a campaign is so crazy expensive you could make another PA from it.

Balanced against what? Their current usage and power is their current usage and power. It becomes unbalanced when one player has to deal with a different set of stats for those numbers. But they don't.

Useless units sucks yes, I'm not gonna disagree there. The rarity of naval is a function of the rarity of large oceans and the terrible stats that naval uses (I love the PTE changes to naval though!), either way, thats not a balance issue, as everyone is dealing with the same problems.

C'mon colin, I'm taking a stand against fuzzy definitions of words here XD
Weren't you just taking a similar stand about micro/macro in another thread?

Ehhh Yeah I'm all for that stuff too, more than just the snippets of backstory on the planet cards in GW but... What does any of that have to do with balance? Those are valid complaints if you consider them valid complaints, but they have nothing to do with PA being 'unbalanced'.

Well you can consider it a form of balancing between the units.
"Balance" just means making stuff equally strong or weak in the game. Doesn't matter if you balance a tank that everybody can build vs a bot that everybody can build or if you balance 2 factions that players have to chose from.
In both cases if the balance is bad it will result in a part of the game not being used at all: A useless grenadier is never build and a underpowered faction is not going to be used in competitive play.
So a single unit roster can be imbalanced within itself, which results to some units being useless and other units being overpowered within that unit roster, even if all players can access it. Yes that kind of balance strictly does not effect competitive play, but it does affect gameplay and very likely how fun it is to play the game.

In Response to the OP - Here is a movement I want to lead:

Anytime anyone complains about PA being a terrible game, post one of these.