Beta is childsplay compared to alpha

remember this isn't a micro game. So while APM will always affect it that isn't what the developers are going for. They are making a macro level game. Mavor already stated that things were changed to test and check for information and that they would likely be changed again.

That's nuts. You cannot make more than one meaningful decision in a second. The only reason you'd ever need more than 30 APM is if the UI designers have outright failed, and it takes a ludicrous amount of clicks to actually convert a single decision into action.

dont bother bringing apm quotes into it, because regardless of how macro oriented the game becomes, there will always be enough to do to push the apm into the hundreds

Well said.

If it takes more than one click to make a single decision into an action, that's still ONE action on the counter, not several. You don't get higher APM because you click a dozen times to make one action happen. That'd be CPM (clicks per minute) not APM. Having a higher CPM is good, but if you don't get a higher APM out of it, it means absolutely nothing.

If you took two hundred clicks to get 60 actions in a minute while someone else took 80 clicks to get the same 60 actions in a minute, your APM will be exactly the same, 60APM for both of you. Not 200 and 80, respectively.

@OP I agree that the metal deposits are much too spread out, but it's theoretically better than having so many together. The problem lies in that irrelevant of little or many deposits, someone will always have an advantage. You have to specifically make them even like SupCom did in order to make sure noone got cheated, but that's not dynamic or fun, really. You could always make the whole map metal like TA's metal maps, and that would be far more versatile than SupCom's pre-determined deposits. If anything it creates so much metal that energy is what stalled. If deposits were somewhere in the middle between Alpha and current Beta, they would be similar to how far TA's were placed, and once we get the egg unit on top of the metal slider, we should be able to have games that suit most everyone's wants. (Metal planet being possible exception, unfortunately.)

You have never played Starcraft or Starcraft 2 have you? It is easy to get 100+ apm and pros often hit 300+ during battles.

Have you watched where they get those "actions"? 80% are pointless clicks for clicks sake. They'll quintuple click every single order, most of which are only necessary anyway because Starcrafts' UI is in the stone ages as far as RTS UIs go.

And no APM doesn't mean "effective actions", because there literally is no way to count that. APM means clicks per minute.

It's silly to reference how players warm up for a game. Look at what they can do at the game's peak moments. The ability and proficiency is 100% there.

That could very well be the case, but it depends on the game being responsive enough to cope. It's no good if the game bottlenecks before the player does.

I'm not sure I was clear, but I was responding to the OP. And my last statement was about the resource levels.

Sounds like someone who never played SC2 just commented. We refer to pro's rates as APM from old nomenclature but we actually mean EPM.

http://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/63467/what-is-the-difference-between-epm-and-apm

Code:

APM values displayed on the Leader Board are now calculated by counting every click and command that has been issued by the player.

EPM values displayed on the Leader Board are calculated by counting only actual commands issued by the player (Effective Actions Per Minute).

Starcraft's EPM is way higher than PA's needs to be, but you have to remember placing 5 power generators in a second is 300 apm. It's not that unreasonable when a lot of things are currently built in spam or in queues. 60-100 APM, which is what I suggested as a target, is a pretty reasonable value for the game to play well in a competitive scene.

I think i realized why the changed the metal so much, It's because if they had the same ammount of metal before alpha players would stomp on beta players so fast they would just quit the game and not play and that's the last thing they want

I like the less MEX, it makes it much more tactical and less spam up econ zerg zerg zerg.... it has made Air Power even more powerful though, as spaming a few air builders and flying out slapping out T1 MEX everywhere is even more needed as you wont be sitting next to 12 metal spots at start

Overal I like it, and would be more than find with a metal slider for the more epic games......as of right now, I could see maybe a 10-15% boost in metal spots, but wouldnt want to see anything like alpha had

This still happens. Not because of metal distribution but because of unit balance.

I will say again: LEVELERS, HO!

More to your quote..... so are you saying that its a good thing or bad thing? I cant tell.... and wouldnt chess be the #1 game to refer to pre determined outcomes from movements and "build orders"

That is a very narrow definition of skill. I say that skill is simply a measurement of how good you are at the game.
Skill in an RTS entails many different skills, such as:
Puzzle solving, finding a suitable or optimal way of solving a problem. This can be cracking an opponents defence or finding an optimal build order. Considering the procedural generation of planets in PA this means that players have to be adapt as they might not be able to practice optimized build orders before they start the game.
Mindgames. Reading the mind of your opponent and countering his moves.
Strategical goal analysis. This is similar to puzzle solving but requires dealing with unknown factors and overarching goals of how you should come out on top and win the game.
Tactical knowledge. Knowledge of different tactics such as kiting, dodging and carpet bombing for example.
Execution skill. Performing your intended actions.
Attention management. Your attention is limited so you might not have the time to micro or surveillance everything at once so you have to decide where to put your attention.
"Correct split second decisions" can cover many categories but an RTS certainly doesn't have to be all about that. I'd say you can very well have an RTS without it.

This is what You think RTS is all about. It doesn't matter if strategic decisions are made quickly or over an extended period of time as long as they are still strategic decisions.

I don't mind massive armies as long as they don't require massive APM.

Personally I don't think PA should be about overloading the player with the need for massive APM. If the player is overloaded with choices that has to be done in a short period of time then their attention is simply overloaded as they can't make enough choices in time. Especially if many of those choices are trivial choices and not actually interesting strategic choices.


About pacing of the game.
I think the strategical importance of early choices should not be big IE the opening build order or choice should not determine the outcome of the game in an Rock-Paper-Scissors manner. Some planets might promote certain strategies but I think it is up to the players to figure it out. However many different playstyles/options that are balanced to eachother is something that I think we should strive for.
As for the need of input I think that PA should strive to keep it as low as possible if we are to truly have interplanetary warfare. The egg can make the interesting choices be done right from the start although some downtime to chat with your opponent might be good.

The only strategy games that i have come across without split second decision making not being one of the leading factors of skill, is in turn based games, where it does not exist at all. I guess what i said was slightly wrong, because its true that its not the only factor of skill, but i definitely think its the main factor.

Making quick decisions is not as important as making the right decisions. For a long time people have been confusing thinking fast and acting fast, and that it is skill, sure enough if you play a game enough, or have a knack for it your actions will be faster, define it as 'skill' if you wish. but in PA it's being discouraged, because it wants to be a 'strategy game' and micro is not a strategy.

Maybe we are using different definitions. When I say split second decision making I mean having to make a decision in about 1 second and not doing so being detrimental to your gameplay perfomance.
I'd say that it is not essential in Total War games. The units might not even start moving until after a few seconds so your decisions really need to be done in advance making twitch micro and quick decisions less crucial.
There is a difference between having to make a decision quickly and performing the actions quickly.

I mostly agree and semi dissagree. Mostly agree.
As the game gets bigger I find that I am controlling my army more from strategic view and controlling flow of large groups. This comes down to my faith in the stats and im pushing numbers to flow around and do their work. I make balanced groups so that it is not killed by its counter as easily (like mixing some anti air and mobile arty).
When the success of a battle is more tight, i zoom in and control the very movement of the group on small scale, like kiting units in. Targeting individual ADV units that might be causing more harm, and pulling weaker units back as the full health units take some more beating. That is where micro becomes a tide turner in a statistical " number of A and B vs number of A and B". You can manipulate the success of units and have your Sinco De Mayo moment when using micro.

cheers

THIS
IS
BETA!!!!!!!
Mass Spot density generation has not been implemented yet...