Less Metal Spots - How is it so far?

Yes, but if you let everyone choose what level of metal they get Uber will have a really hard time figuring out the "Standard" level for PA.

Mike

I'd just take an even distribution at the moment. We just played a 2v2v2 and my teammate and I landed on a spot with just 1 Mex point. Everyone else had 4 each! Needless to say, we didn't win that one!

I'M COMING FOR YOU ZIMMERMAN + MAN MAD SHROOM WHOEVER YOU ARE!

I think the biggest thing that's missing in the current metal distro system is grouping. The new amount of metal is a good change, but to get a decent eco going (especially in the beginning) you have to spread yourself quite thin. A possible solution is to place the metal in groups or spots like they did in mid to late Alpha. That way you can pick one spot with lots of metal for your main base and expand to other groups as you need more. It would also make for better feuds over metal since there's more of an incentive to attack a group of metal. You could also defend your metal better with a few towers projecting each group instead of being spread thin across a large area.

I understand this, I was not suggesting that they implement this prior to release, rather I was pointing out that it appears to be planned to allow various start speeds. As the (default) number of metal points has the most significant impact in the late game, overlooking start times (to an extent) seems sensible to me for the purposes of this thread?

After reading LavaSnakes post, it may be a good idea to group metal points together more, however I think the overall number is reasonable as is.

I agree, bits of metal here and there are a nightmare to defend. It's why i mostly look for groups. 3-5 per patch would make a good start.

I'm not a fan of less metal. The game pace is slower and armies are smaller.

I also don't like how there aren't many metal clumps anymore. Metal clumps provided a lot of action and strategy to acquire and protect.

I believe metal should be increased a little and they should return to clumps of metal, not lone metal spots, even if that means metal spots are farther apart.

Has any one considered that the number and grouping of metal points has more strategic impact on the game, and less of an impact on income?

That being that it determines how spread out you need to be to be effective, how many metal extractors you need to build to reach maximum income, and how you attack your enemies - targeting metal vs energy, wide spread metal deposits are harder to defend but are also harder to take out simultaneously, but clusters are easier to target and have a larger risk/reward scenario.

While the total amount of metal income per planet is NOT actually dependent on the (average) number of metal points on planets, but rather the amount of metal gained from each metal point. This way, having fewer metal points could actually result in more metal income than we currently have, with the construction of less metal extractors.

I am not seriously suggesting the above will happen (although it might), it is important to note that there are many ways to balance things resources like metal in a game like PA (I have only named a few). It may be that any changes to the number of metal points will have an immediate impact on economy, but they are only starting the process of balancing things and are likely to tweak the income per extractor after setting the number of metal deposits for the most desired impact that resources have on strategic play concerning resources.

[To Developers] Am I correct in saying that the idea is to balance first the number and grouping of metal points from a strategic level, then the income per tick will be assessed later?

Perhaps I am taking a step sideways here but I feel it's important for people to know the impact of what is being asked, as well as what the developers intended when considering a question like this.

I like the current grouping and concentration which i noticed is adjustable, the big problem is being able to build on all of them. If they're near a chasm mountain or any environmental object they're impossible to reach. As far as the "less than alpha" affecting strategies. everyone is still rushing to catapults/orbital.

I think that your pain will be eased when Uber figures out how to properly distribute metal (they're working on it). Less lone metal deposits and more clumps would indeed improve gameplay, as it's easier to defend, more thrilling to attack (it's boring to chain an attack order for a bomber) and in general creates a smoother gameplat (better than collecting scraps of metal deposits which you also easily loose.)

Code:

 Ctrl+F "reclaim"
Phrase not found

Has anyone actually PLAYED Total Annihilation or Supreme Commander? There is no point saying the economy is incomplete when you aren't using all of it.

At first I was saddened by the fact that there will be less metal spots, but now I feel it was a right move. The game is a bit slower at the start, which adds more time for strategy making increases the skill cap in late game and, as intended, creates more conflict around metal spots.