Unit Variety

Discussion in 'Planetary Annihilation General Discussion' started by brianpurkiss, January 24, 2015.

  1. tatsujb

    tatsujb Post Master General

    Messages:
    12,902
    Likes Received:
    5,385
    what????

    dude this game figures more than one way to destroy planets and a single one is already mind blowing : removing the map has never been done in RTS before

    two ways!

    no I think that more ways aren't more primordial then more units.
    stuart98 likes this.
  2. lokiCML

    lokiCML Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,973
    Likes Received:
    953
    Yeah, neutrino should have stuck to hes guns and put it into the game. Also fielding suggestions from people but...:(

    Edit: this could have added some faction differentiation.:(
    Last edited: January 26, 2015
    theseeker2 likes this.
  3. drz1

    drz1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,257
    Likes Received:
    860
    FYI the PTE update just added an advanced fighter that can travel between planets.
  4. MrTBSC

    MrTBSC Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    1,823
    .... welp ... let´s see how that´ll turn out
    @mered4
  5. mered4

    mered4 Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,083
    Likes Received:
    3,149
    The same way it did last time:

    Completely OP.
    stuart98 likes this.
  6. stuart98

    stuart98 Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    3,888
    You have two different balance mods that have a similar and proven implementation of the T2 fighter, and you decide to go for the completely broken implementation that got it removed in the first place instead. What gives.

    I absolutely cannot understand the reasoning of this. Do you want us to return to the T2 rush days because the return of the Peregrine Phoenix virtually unchanged from its former implementation sure makes it seem like you do.
    vyolin likes this.
  7. MrTBSC

    MrTBSC Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    1,823
    so you tell me we actualy had a spacefaring aircraft before?
    kayonsmit101 and cptconundrum like this.
  8. stuart98

    stuart98 Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    3,888
    We had a T2 fighter before.
  9. MrTBSC

    MrTBSC Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    1,823
    ok and? the reason that one got taken out was clear .. this one has a clear difference ...
    kayonsmit101 and cptconundrum like this.
  10. brianpurkiss

    brianpurkiss Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,879
    Likes Received:
    7,438
    That's pretty exciting. I've been wanting a fighter like that for a long time.
    kayonsmit101 likes this.
  11. mered4

    mered4 Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,083
    Likes Received:
    3,149
    They borked it so hard. Oh my God.

    Talk about air dominance...
  12. MrTBSC

    MrTBSC Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    1,823
    good thing that it is in the pte were we can tweak stuff first before having it on stable ...
    drz1 likes this.
  13. brianpurkiss

    brianpurkiss Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,879
    Likes Received:
    7,438
    Bummer. Well, it's a step forward. Balance is a moving target.
    wilhelmvx and mered4 like this.
  14. stuart98

    stuart98 Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    3,888
    Gamma Peregrines are not a step forward Brian.
  15. Dementiurge

    Dementiurge Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,094
    Likes Received:
    693
    Sometimes I think "moving target" means "mistake we're doomed to repeat over and over again".
  16. mered4

    mered4 Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,083
    Likes Received:
    3,149
    You mean, like MISSING?

    YOU ST-

    oh right.


    I promised WrongCat. Must shh.
  17. drz1

    drz1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,257
    Likes Received:
    860
    Maybe it will be different now that there are other factors involved, like unit cannons and units that can attack orbital and air.



    Edit: after reading some other threads it seems people were more constructive, so I'll retract the comment about instant negativity. Hopefully it will help Uber balance the fighter correctly.
    Last edited: January 27, 2015
  18. MrTBSC

    MrTBSC Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    1,823
    seriosly guys had you ever have a unit that was 100% well implemented by its first appearance?

    yea we get it the damn fighter needs tweaking ... so lets tweak instead just dismiss it as worlds end first
  19. xanoxis

    xanoxis Active Member

    Messages:
    459
    Likes Received:
    238
    T2 Fighter just needs to be weaker compared to T1. Its already slower and more expensive.
  20. cdrkf

    cdrkf Post Master General

    Messages:
    5,721
    Likes Received:
    4,793
    Also before we jump down Uber's throat for the new T2 fighter, the only thing wrong with it is the DPS is too high. @tvinita has been tweaking things on the PTE as we go along- there's nothing to suggest he won't tweak this a bit too :)

    Also another thing worth noting- the new AA priorities do mean that having a very powerful air superiority fighter *is less of an issue than before* as all it does is break up blobs of t1 fighters. All that blobs of t1 fighters actually do is prevent anti land aircraft and kill other fighters. You could build 1000 fighters, and 500 t2 fighters and you'll never deal even 1 point of damage to your opponent. Then you go bombers, and a few t1 land aa turrets will ignore the 'op' fighters and kill the bombers :)

    Whilst it's annoying for the t2 fighter to be so much stronger than T1, with the way air works now there would be little point rushing it imo, as land based AA works independently of fighters now.

    Edit: Also I thought I'd mention, my *initial* reaction to the specs of the new fighter was the same as you guys "oh no not again", but as with the T1 pelican, *other balance changes* have combined to vastly change the impact. I've noticed it is now possible to *win a 1 v 1 against a good opponent without air dominance by clever use of ground based AA*. I've done this several times- people focus so much resources on air, that I simply out produce them on land / sea and win that way. What this new fighter does do is make breaking a defended planet much easier, although I would like to see them vulnerable in the orbital layer for a bit before they descend to air- if a player has a well defended planet with all layers covered invasion should be hard after all.
    byte01 and cptconundrum like this.

Share This Page