More details on upcoming Asteroids update!

These are the kinds of comments that aliens in the mothership above laugh at.

I wasn't mentioning any particular ideas. I was just saying there are many different ideas floating around. Communication with community about why things have been done a certain way is what I am trying to highlight here. We are yet to see anything, so only time will tell how well it is handled.

FYI - my recommendation for asteroids included the removal of craters. You can see my recommendation in an earlier post.

Just an update on this: we're working through some bugs in the editor currently for placing asteroids in systems. So no PTE right away.. will give another one once we have an estimate for that getting fixed.

Does this mean you are fixing bugs what there were before asteroids or bugs what were caused by asteroids?

READ:

Asteroids SOON

Bugs for placing asteroids, so these are new.

#Hype! Any news about the effects?

I'd still expect programmer art. This is a gameplay PTE. Those who remember the first unit cannon PTE will know what I'm talking about.

It'll probably look better than the unit cannon PTE, as we are waiting on bug fixes which gives him more time

It would be great if asteroids worked like the current crater system while planet smashing still worked but was changed to the complete destruction of both planets.

I agree with a previous comment that metal on asteroids would just increase the camping/stalemates, unless it was not (usually) worth it economically. Also, for continued crater type smashing it would be cool if there was a shockwave that went around the planet and destroyed all weak (ie. Tier 1) units but left other stuff damaged but alive. Or if Uber really wants to get rid of the crater system, just eliminate craters but make asteroids like massive nukes with the shockwave that goes around the planet but makes no crater.

@jables

Will planets go POOF like from an Annihilaser beam ? or will they turn into a ball of lava like in the Kickstarter trailer ?

Can't tell if I'm more excited to see the effect or see how the effect is made

Easy, how it's made.

So it's wireframe asteroids with a smiley face and a SOON label?

Do want.

I had once suggested asteroids should be usable with cheaper and smaller halley-like-units, but I am exited to see the current model...

So what is the current model and how has it changed for asteroid terrain and csg?

EDIT: I mean with the system editor

This is the first time I've logged onto the forums in years. I guess, since I played it way back and just a couple days ago, I can give a less attached overview.

It seems to me that too much indecisiveness is what crippled a lot of the game's development. You had the annihilation style collision, then you made craters, now you're going back and adding asteroids at the same time... feels messy and inconsistent.

It also looks like not a lot of care has been taken regarding gameplay balance. Even disregarding the current Orbital situation, where a Dyson sphere of sattellites seems to be the norm rather than something both teams would have to make a truce to reach. The game has an absolutely blistering pace at the beginning, requiring players to build by the seat of their pants, very much unlike the more relaxed, but far more strategic battles of the other Annihilation-style games. I haven't ever been able to not focus exclusively on getting my army out ASAP. There's no real incentive to do so, as a little raiding party will ruin my infrastructure far too fast. There would be a great benefit in increasing the health of all units and buildings, so people would actually see a battle, rather than two opposing salvos followed by the winning side performing a demolition sweep. And in a very clashing way, the build times for units in the same tier is far too similar. There should be more difference between building a light bot and a light tank. There should also be more difference in their stats.

Since we don't have different factions, the four unit types could be way more different. Bots could be Zerg-y with hordes of cheap stuff and more dakka, navy would probably feel a bit like Protoss, with setup costs being compensated by staying power (and possibly some extra cleverness in aiming or health regen), vehicles could have a more "nomadic" feel, with harassing parties able to return and be repaired, then go back into the fray. And air, of course, would rely on superior maneuverability above all else, with hit-and-run tactics where the minimal losses are expected ones (using scouts to screen bombers from AA, etc). Orbital doesn't really fit, of course, but then I always thought Orbital was going to be less important., rather than literally what determines who wins (which was what happened in every game I played since returning). I love the current units, and I actually wouldn't want different ones, but as they are now, the fights are too fast. The grind is amazingly good, both in visuals and in amount of units getting involved, but it doesn't last long enough for "frontlines of devastation shoving forward and back", as a friend of mine once said.

The unit-to-unit combat is good, but there's no easy way to tell them to spread out to avoid artillery. Tanks keep a healthy distance some of the time, but it'd be better design to allow us to tell them how far spaced we want them. There's still a lot of clunkiness in camera control. An option to use pole-locked camera movement would help a lot, along with an easier switch to the orbital level. Zooming out works as well as I'd hope, but zooming in is sometimes jumpy, with the planets changing focus a bit too quickly.

Moving orbital units feels like it should require more work, like the unit cannon. Maybe force them to use the orbital construction platform to start a transfer? They also move WAY too fast. The orbital "turret" thing that hits both orbital and ground units feels too convenient. Umbrellas could be bigger, or have a movable version.

In general, despite the actually quite important elements of map control, intel, and logistics, it still feels like the aggressive player with the higher APM and a single-minded strategy will win an inordinate amount of games versus the defensive player who seeks counterplay and a resource-denial-based conquest.

Sorry for the wall of text. If you want I'll post it elsewhere.

There is an option for pole lock camera since alpha days. There are also hotkeys to switch to certain zoom levels.
Though pole locked camera is pretty much a noobtrab, being able to play without pole lock, navigating by camera hotkeys, is a lot better long term.

I disagree, it helps to be able to read the map the same way every time, orientation is important. Only problem with pole locked camera is trying to navigate near the poles, it gets wonky.

Try tilting your head by 15 degrees and just look around you. When you don't tilt too much, it doesn't really look like the world's orientation has changed, up still feels like up, even if that's not up relative to your eyes. What I am trying to say is that adjusting to small changes in orientation is something our brains can do quite well simply because those smaller adjustments gets lots of practice. The same applies to planets without pole lock, eventually you start orienting on features rather that some assumed orientation.

Camera hotkeys are the way to go for reorientating your view if you become disorientated. Pole lock causing more problems than it's worth.