One "Feature" in Sup Com 2 that was introduced was a research tree that was used partly to unlock units. This led to serious one-sided games depending on your choice of research path vs your opponents. You couldn't tell what they were researching, and this felt like luck had too big of a part to play in determining the outcome. Is a research tree planned?
Why not just have upgrades instead tough? And when I think of research trees I think of a skill tree with different abilities like Age of Mithology (godly skills, meteorits etc) or C&C Tiberium Wars (UAV) or boosts for the units such as better Air units or faster build rate for tanks.
Research would only ever be tedious if you weren't scouting out, I personally found the research brilliant, it kept the early units relevant throughout the game, allowed massively different playstyles, someone could turtle if they so wanted, someone else could be really aggressive, neither is really punished for doing so. I completely changes how you have to attack an enemy depending on what research they are going for. research also streamlines the upgrading of units as it allows for all units to receive the upgrade passively rather than only select squads having the upgrade.
Lore-wise research doesn't make much sense if they are following the lines of TA. Game-wise I guess it could be done, but I wouldn't want anything past unlocking units. Even then, I'm not a huge fan of research.
I am against "research" and research trees. Limited, one-off upgrades like in Generals and Starcraft 2 are good, though.
No Upgrades, no "Tech Tree"!!! For me it completely ruins immersion and unless I have a way to visibly see every single upgrade I don't want them!(BEFORE they attack) Even then, they aren't needed to begin with. Mike
I think you are a bit overly harsh with the SupCom 2 system. If there are a few visible unit upgrades, like adding personal shields or adding obvious new cannons to some units, it could help some early units be more useful in the lategame. Without anything like that, it seems to me the only way early game units are going to be viable later on is by massing them. Obviously massing tier 1 units is a good tactic to have available, but I'd like more options than just that. I have to agree that passive, stats upgrades is not really something I want to see. It's much better when you can accurately evaluate the enemy force by seeing the units, without having to guess which upgrades he has purchased etc. I suppose you could argue that it could work by having researched items visible in the enemy base to encourage scouting (say on mouse-over of an enemy research building), but I don't really like that mechanic; it seems more natural to have all upgrades be directly and clearly visible on units.
Well that's looking at it from the SupCom/FA perspective, where the difference in stats between the tiers(in particular I think it was the Damage-to-Mass Cost Ratio that rose exponentially) made it so that lower tiers are obsolete compared to higher ones. I think we're more likely to see the TA system, yes the Teir 2 Units were stronger but combined with them needing a special Factory, higher cost and build times and how they were generally very specialized units let the more generalized Tier 1 units still be teh staple of any big force. Mike
I managed to down a Krogoth, from having 8 factories spamming out tech 1 units in TA. Early units remain relevant throughout the game, if your prepared to build them
Nope. It wasn't that: it was the fact that higher tier units out-damaged, out-lasted, out-ranged, and out-moved lower tier units. They were better in every damn way! Once you had critical mass of higher tier units, opposing armies wouldn't be able to get within range to return fire... no matter how many there were. Also, veterancy was poorly implemented.
I did say in particular, not only, but yes the end result is that it's no the fault of Tiers, but the Balance. Mike
My comment was a response to damage-to-mass ratio. From memory, lower-tier units were more efficient too. Still, they got curb-stomped by larger units.
I think it's important to note the scale of the game; there's a spectrum of options between ground-based positioning combat and blowing up the planet. To make that kind of power gradation work, there needs to be some mechanism to pace the game. Research is a valid way to do this, provided it is appropriately streamlined.
I've always liked the research / tech tree of the game M.A.X. - it was kind of two-sided. On the one hand you could 'buy' upgrades for individual units types - more hitpoints for your tank, more range on your missile crawler, faster scout, etc. On the other hand you had 'research centres' which over time would research a particular stat and increase it by a percentage. Research is great, but my only quibble is that it should be clearly visible to each player what the other team has. Have an 'enemy intel' screen that lets you see exactly what the enemy has invested in. Visible unit upgrades are, frankly, the poor half brother of proper information gathering systems.
My biggest gripe with research is still the fact that it is usually an irregular factor. In most games you are not constantly active in your research screen. In games like Sins of a Solar Empire research works well because it is part of your routine. You are constantly switching to the research screen to keep your researches going. But if research becomes even slightly less then regular, you run the risk of players forgetting to periodically check the research screen. This was my problem with SupCom 2. By the time research required my attention it was too far in the back of my mind to get it. Another problem with research is that it is very hard to quickly get an overview of someones capabilities if you need to click on individual units and/or check research indicators. Without it an L1 Tank is just an L1 Tank. Rather then an L1 Tank with +2 attack, +1 defense and rocket pods. It makes for a less micro-intensive game. In my opinion it's a far better idea to let the buildings BE the research. Let the upgrade or existence of a structure be the indicator that an enemy has gained new abilities. Keep the units as simple as possible(i.e. no upgrades). That way it's far easier to get a good overview, it keeps the basics simple and puts the focus on what is there and in what quantity.
That was a great game. A good balance between units and how they interact/support each other is way more important. Chess are an awesome game since the VI century despite the simplicity of the game itself. In PA right now I don't see players combining different units in order to exploit their combined potential. In M.A.X. it was fundamental to place side by side different type units, otherwise just sending tanks (for example) ended up being quite a poor strategy. But M.A.X. wasn't in real time, the player had plenty of time to think. Which makes me wonder if I would ever see units like an AWACS or Anti-missile Gatling Gun implemented in PA at some point. Specially the latter would be able to neutralize the infamous Catapults. About research, I would be fine if that could be limited to a simple factory upgrade so that it could produce *veteran* armies. Or of a better quality. Indeed, the upgrade could be automatic. Once that specific factory produced a specific amount of a specific unit, that unit produced by that factory receives a sort of quality bonus. Which could grant the unit with some kind of powerup, like range or damage or speed, or armor.
I actually liked how research worked in Supcom2, but I'd rather not have research in PA. It doesn't fit the feel of the game, and there's more than enough stuff to pay attention to. To the extent that research might have some gameplay value, it could be replicated through the construction of structures. Like...an orbital fueling station, that decreases inter-orbital travel times.
Let's look at the Confirmed Feature List! Research as in "Tech tree" or "Research menu" is not happening according to Neutrino. Here are some quotes from him: "No tech tree, don't even worry about it." "The word tech tree is pretty overloaded. No menu where you research stuff." "You may need to chain together buildings to get to the place where you can build something. Also since there are things that are dramatically more expensive you also need to build up your economy." Also Researching goes against the WYSIWTH idea of the game. No hidden surprises, no tech rushing, just plain old war. Research adds too much micro, when the game is about Macro!
