Super Units Being In The Game

I did not see any models for Super Units in the new whitebox sheet, will there be heavy or super heavy units in game? If so, when will we get a preview of them?

*edited by mods - all caps make our eyes bleed*

If you mean like experimental from supcom.

It is unlikely.

However heavy tanks aka TA heavy tanks I do believe is defiantly in.

Its a possibility if theres an expansion pack, as TA did with the Core Contingency and the Krogoth.

Theres also the possibility of a mod putting them in.

Experimentals will be reserved for an expansion pack most certainly.

I don't like them in regular matches but in some challenges and survival maps like in FA, they are pretty useful, creates lots of epicness.

Its been said that "there will be some experimental like units in PA" thats all we know.

They might not be there at release and instead added later.
They might simply be structures only (like the unit cannon).
They might be units like in supcom just weaker (they have said that experimental units wont have the same impact they hade in supcom, my brain interprets this as weaker units).

Or the control able astroids/moons may be considered the new experimentals, who knows.

Do however note that the "Unit Whitebox Sheet" doesn't show every planned unit. There will be more units at release.

Not sure how much I like the idea of super units. In my ideal world, The "peewee" would still be effective in the end of the game. Not because it can 1v1 anything, but because you could build literally HORDES of them, and that could be effective if your enemy doesn't have lots of AOE damage.

If there were experimental units, they shouldn't have splash damage, and they should be killable by large armies of regular units. So basically just a really strong normal unit is how I see them. Or maybe a really special unit that has an ability that nothing else does.

I think we all just wanna see a big robot, that when it dies, does so with grace and dignity (a huge fireball)

Not sure what you are talking about there not being superunits. You seem to have forgotten a few things.

First, and most importantly, the whitebox list is NOT final. They will change, add, and subtract units from that list.

Second, Did you not see the big cannon that shoots units through space? Looks like a super unit to me.

Finally, i know that it was not in the whitebox list but there is the ability to ram asteroids into planets and moons. If that isnt a super "unit" then I dont know what is.

tldr: dont get your panties in a bunch

First off super units aren't a main focus of the game.

Secondly they tend to have to come later after all of the basic systems have been built. There is point in us trying to build them until that point is reached.

I just asked because many RTS' from supcom to starcraft to C&C have an emphasis on trying to build heavy units and structures as quickly as possible to gain an advantage.

It's just something that is usually expected in RTS'.

Stop talking. "Heavier=better" is a pathetically boring design paradigm, and bigger, more expensive units are inferior in terms of gameplay to having many smaller, cheaper units. Certain units being strictly better is also dumb. And "Building heavier... to gain an advantage" is also a very composition-focused game design, and also counter-centric design, which are both boring. The fact that bad RTS games like the more recent C&C games do this, and that it is therefore allegedly "expected" (by players who don't know better) is not a justification.

Strategy games should be about how you use your pieces. Unit and structure decisions, usage, distribution, and positioning of numerous smaller, weaker, interchangeable assets that die and are replenished in numbers. Less resource-combat-density per space, with the ability to build huge numbers of different types of units and structures all over the map, creates a more interesting war with more areas of interest and more action in many places, especially spread over a very large map.

Long story short, super units are boring. They may appear visually impressive, and receive extra attention from art designers due to their size and scarcity, but in gameplay strategic terms they are just dull units which have big numbers in their profiles. Both players using them cancels out, resulting in a smaller war with fewer units, and more clustered deathballs of a few expensive units. It's just bad.

You are talking about in-game building, I'm talking about building the game itself.

Or to put it another way the added gameplay that they bring is not good bang for development buck. Super units are super expensive for us to create because they often present unique challenges to the engine. In the long term it's good to have that functionality but you really do pay for it in terms of development effort. We have plenty of time post launch to add more units.

I Like the idea of not having super Units simply because they make the game less fun. In FA and TA a super unit wasn't just a game changer it was a game ENDER! A monkeylord spiderbot meant instant death for your commander! I think the game should be based on how well you choose to use your units, not how fast you can make the biggest baddie.

Your first few sentences scared me. But then you got me all giddy again when you said "time post launch to add more units". I realize you guys are in a time crunch right now, and I'm super excited for the main release. But I'm even more excited for the continuing updates once the game is out. Nothing is better than having a fun game and then getting more and more stuff to use. Like in Minecraft. I played that since long before beta, and it was a great milestone to have the main release, but the continuing updates have kept me going back again and again.

I'm so thankful you're a team that's dedicated to pleasing the fans and really making our money worth it! The fact that you respond to all kinds of stuff on the forums is great too!

Back on topic, super units. There will be all kinds of mods that will add units like this. I'd rather focus on balance and strong units. If you look at CnC generals, there were powerful units, but never super units. Like the emperor overlord tanks. Or the mammoth tank in CnC 3. You could take them out with smaller units like rocket troops, but they were still really powerful heavy units. That's the kind of balance between small and large that I like.

Like the emperor overlord tanks. Or the mammoth tank in CnC 3. You could take them out with smaller units like rocket troops, but they were still really powerful heavy units. That's the kind of balance between small and large that I like. <--this

Numerically large versions of common unit roles are simply boring. It's completely redundant, the appeal is shallow/uninteresting, and the payoff simply isn't there. Big, slow, costly, number-bound units are painfully easy to Solve, determining whether they have any place on the field or are a waste of everyone's time.

There are many cool types of abilities and unique methods of warfare that can be used in a physics based game. They may be impossible to design on anything other than a large, expensive platform. If the design is a "Shoot X to win" thing, then it belongs in the common factories with every other unit, as common units already represent the pinnacle of efficiency.

Please, nobody reference Command and Conquer as a guide for PA. Use TA, Zero-K, and Forged Alliance as guides- C&C is an utterly different animal; a single resource game on a tiny scale, based around unit composition and unit counter rock-paper-scissors. It's a terrible formula that the RTS genre has long since moved past.

Going off bobucles' above comments, every unit should be designed to be as small and efficient as possible to meet its role requirements.

For example, an artillery unit needs a certain amount of range and damage in order to do its job, and needs to pay for those features. This means there is a fuzzy minimal cost for this unit to fit its role. However should the artillery unit be paying for armor, speed, etc.? Or even more range and firepower than it needs? Cut them and make the unit cheaper, so players can build more of them. If there are other limitations available, such as limiting ammunition, then these can also be used to make a leaner unit, and can create new niches and roles based on what a unit needs with respect to these limitations in order to fill its role.

This principle is especially important for combat units, not just specialist units like intel, AA, artillery, etc. etc. Combat units should be as small and efficient as possible for their role. Having a fatter version that is fewer in number is redundant, and players will pick the numerically superior variant. That said, some combat roles need more expensive properties, like needing more HP for a heavy assault unit. Perhaps a main battle tank is completely different from a little infantry bot, with much better firepower, range, armor, and mobility, with a higher price tag. But these "bigger" units also should be minimalist and as lean and efficient as possible, allowing them to be more easily created and destroyed in quantity, and create more strategic and tactical options for their creation and deployment, more game state variation in their locations and density, and more continuous and consistent army growth and deterioration.

"Fat" units that have way more features and properties than are needed to efficiently perform their role detract from the decision-making of using those units. We want lean units where every player is building and destroying large quantities, spread across a huge scale. Not fatty, inefficient units clustered together in a small space. Fatter units also create a less continuous army strength function- army strength is effectively a stepwise function based on the number of units; fewer discrete units makes adding a single additional unit more significant. Five monkeylords vs six, as opposed to 500 Peewees vs 600. Not to mention the huge group of Peewees can be used in many more different ways, including splitting the group, building it gradually, or in pieces, or more ways to distribute those resources among other types of assets.

Granted, certain roles will have sufficiently high requirements that an expensive unit is justified. A Big Bertha type weapon that can fire extremely damaging projectiles across a continent obviously needs a price tag to match its effectiveness. But even a Bertha should be designed to be as lean and efficient a unit at its role as reasonably possible.

I did like the monkey lord. That unit was fun as hell. But I never like the Artillery in TA or SupCom. They were expensive and did no real damage because of the bad accuracy. For that reason instead of a super weapon I rather see a refined unit. For example a T2 mobile artillery like T3 mobile artillery in TA. good accuracy, good damage but needs setup, can not shoot while moving.

Regardless what I said above, I will buy the Monkey Lord DLC for Planetary Annihilation

I put my thoughts up about this in the general forums: