Why no Advanced AA?

But what do you suggest? Like I said, it's not about the name attached to the weapon as much as how it WORKS that really matters. What is there in the weapon toolbox that we can use that can safely work in large numbers?

I know people don't like it when SupCom gets championed a lot, but in terms of weapon types it have a lot different weapons and the possibility of a lot more as well.

There is room in my Trinity for doing things like instead of direct fire you can use a Beam(SupCom style Beam that is) instead as it functions fundamentally very similar but still with some unique characteristics.

I'm fine with the potential for new and different ways, but if you're gonna knock on my door and ask me to convert, you need to give me some details and not just tell me about the potential there is.

Mike

@KNight: I wish I could remember the name of the guy who had all of the little robots in his avatar who are jumping around firing beams into the air! That's what came to my mind as you mentioned beam based AA units.
Found it!


For ideas on alternative weapon types, I was hoping that I would get some help on that part. I might need some time to come up with solid ones. However, just off the cuff, without working out how each would precisely work at this time:

(I could see these being implemented in either Mobile or Fixed form)
-you could base them on focused Sound Waves (would rip apart air units in small areas with long cooldown periods)
-Microwaves that would melt or super heat units until they exploded (might fan out instead of being projected in a focused beam)
-Nanobot gun that would spread a type of "disease" from unit to unit after one was successfully hit/"infected"
-Acid bombs/clouds that might only soften up targets to make them easier to destroy with T1 strength defenses/fighters
-EMP array fields that could protect a small area for a certain amount of time, or knock out units for a short duration, and effectively ground air units, making them vulnerable to ground forces
-Disruptor beams that could slow down air units, or affect their turning radius, to make them easier targets for AA
-System Hack type device that could reprogram enemy units and make them do things like return home, turn on each other, attack allies (could have temporary effect)
-Limited cloak - not new, but could be used to defend
-Hollographic Projection array that could create false targets for enemy air, giving you time to weaken them with real ones
-Using teleportation device for defense, effectively teleporting enemy air units to other parts of the planet, or to other planets entirely
-Electricity based weapon with a chain effect that would surge through multiple units
-Concentrated Energy Ball type weapon (think Star Wars Episode 1) that could effect several units at once as it smashed through a few at a time
-Wind, or Magnet, based weapon that would push units away, or pull them apart causing damage over time and/or disrupt delivery of bombs/missiles causing inaccuracy
-Kamikaze type air bomb unit that would explode when it got close to an enemy air unit
-(and the list goes on)

Again, these are just off the top of my head, with no priority, without spending much time to think through the feasibility of each. I'm effectively just brain storming to spark some ideas in the interest of doing something different. So, try not to be overly critical of any one of them.

Edit: I meant Concentrated Energy Ball, not Focused Energy Ball

But how do they work mechanically? I'm gonna be critical because I asked for details. To me a lot of those are just basic weapons types;

Microwaves = Beam
NanoBot = Chained DoT
Acid Bomb, AoE+DoT
EMP is weird when applied to Air units, do they drop out of the sky? Freeze mid air? You'll need to explain in depth exactly how it works
Disruptor sounds a lot like an plausible EMP type effect for air really.
System Hack = Same as Capture but about 5x as gimmicky
Cloak = not a weapon
Holographic Projection = Not a Weapon again
Teleporting = Doesn't fit with the rest of the proposed use of teleportation in PA and again, not a weapon
Electricity = Beam with short lifetime high damage and with a bounce or 2
Focused Energy Ball......what?
Wind/Magnet = Hard to do on mass-produced units compared to an Experimental
Kamikazi = High Damage AOE single use.

See this is exactly what I'm talking about, Fundamentally these aren't really any different from "normal" weapon mechanics, all you've done is dress them up with fancy names. There is room for this kinda of stuff as I've said, but you of course have to aware that it can really change the dynamic of the interaction or the unit's use.

For example if for the 'flak' weapon in my trinity were replaced with your Acid Bomb, you need to be aware that because the damage is all/mostly done over a set period of time it makes more sense to deploy them as far out as possible, as if you placed them in the inner portion of your base even if the damage is enough to kill a give unit is still has X amount of time to do that it was ordered before it dies. It seems like a small change but it has far reaching effects on how the unit is used.

Mike

Sorry, I'm behind on some of my terms...DoT? In any case, Mike, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you here. First of all, it's easy to rip apart concepts that you don't give people time to develop. Like I said, just food for open minded thought/discussion. Essentially I am admitting their potential weakness up front. You can't demand details for brand new concepts and expect to get them on the spot. The things that you list as "not a weapon" don't have to be a weapon. They are meant to be alternative types of defensive measures. I think they are fundamentally different from "normal" weapons, but you seem to have the need to classify every idea into the mold of traditional weapon types, and if they don't fit then dismiss them completely. Just because weapon effects share some similarity, doesn't mean that they are the same, especially if the way that they are used is different. A Kamikaze type air unit bomb is AoE.....so what? Are you suggesting that it's just like a Flak Cannon, because it's AoE? If so, I disagree. Your Acid Bomb comparison to the Flak weapon really just proves my point on that one. Small differences fundamentally change the way things are used in the game and therefore could possibly make for interesting new dynamics in tactics and overall strategy, but that needs to be explored to see if it makes sense. That's the whole point.

Now I do agree that this takes a LOT of effort to think through and balance, and to insure that it doesn't completely change some other aspect of core gameplay. However, I think that is worth doing in the long run.

Edit: DoT=Damage over Time. Duh! Haha

Knight is right for the most part. You can't be thinking about weapons in terms of names and special effects. You have to consider them in terms of Damage, AoE, DoT, burst fire, front loaded, aiming, movement, turrets, and so forth.

The Unit Magnet is really not as bad as Knight makes it out to be. Supcom in fact showed two varieties of magnet weapon, one mobile-deployer and another stationary-reclaim type. Both weapons sported big health, a huge attack range, and instant death power, which accounted for their experimental status.

If one were to be partially realistic, a magnet beam is most effective against light weight units with little traction. Air units and missiles fit the bill. Air units are especially vulnerable as a little tug on their nose will send them diving into the ground. It may cause collateral damage, but it is an assured instant kill. Missiles take a bit more effort as you usually don't want them to crash at all, which means dramatically changing their course. Tanks and boats and such are much heavier and may not be viable targets if one desires.

A more comprehensive viper type unit can be very effective against an adversary that depends on either long or short range or even spinal weaponry to succeed (just flip it around, yo).

Any idiot can forgo the conventions of TA and hard code a bunch of crap like that. But that's not how TA did it, and that's not how PA should do it. Cheap hacks are a last resort, they don't belong at the forefront of balance.

I appreciate the feedback fellas! I still think some of those ideas could work. Also, some orbital layer (hence expensive) AA solution might work as well. That's an option we didn't have in TA or SupCom. Why not make use of it somehow?

I'm sorry if your feelings are hurt but I asked for details, what did you expect to happen when you didn't provide any? Look at my Unit Proposals to see how I don't only outline the Weapon's type but also lay out a lot of the functional details, range, rate of fire ect ect. Those kinds of things are the real meat when talking about weapons, you can throw out high concepts all day but unless you can actually figure out how they should work they're worth nothing. It's the same reason as why Game Developers don't accept outside ideas, because the average joe can't account for the realities of game design and they already have staff that have hundreds of combined ideas and a better grasp of the process.

The point is that everything is made from basic parts and that not all combinations work well together. It's less about coming up with funky weapons and trying to make them work and more about knowing the role you need to fill and figuring out what fills that role best.

For the defensive stuff, We're talking about weapons here, in particular weapons for offensive units, if we were talking about some kind of support unit that doesn't have offense as a primary role then yeah we could do some kind of defensive feature as it's primary defining factor, but when talking about AA that's not the case. It's why I didn't even talk about things like Unit HP, speed and such, because if it's not the primary defining factor it doesn't matter to the concept overall. The flip side is a unit like my Juggernaut where it's Slow Acceleration and high Top Speed were part of the core design so it needs to be mentioned.

The Acid Bomb proves that it's Basic Parts that can change things, not the wacky crazy ideas, Even with the acid bomb it can depend on how the DOT is handled, the more of the damage that is DoT based the farther out it needs to be, the more damage that is up from the closer it can be. It really does come down to the details.

I still think it's really hard to balance out overall, so you have a single unit that can kill another single unit while at the same time denying it the ability to do anything while it is being 'attacked'. It's the kind of thing that just tends to work better on larger units like the Magnetron, and the other one from SupCom2 and the Aeon Galactic Colossus from supCom1/FA.

Mike

Advanced AA is something we've been talking about adding. It's definitely on the list of potential units.

I'm surprised it's only a potential unit and not a planned unit with the way things are shaping up in the Air Tiers with the Advanced units having 5x the HP compared to Basic units.

Even Ignoring that, wasn't part of the idea to offer unit variety? Isn't there only being a single answer to Air kinda......not variety?

Mike

Haha, taaaaake it easy knight. They did hire a balance guy, so he's the one to yell at from now on.

It's easy to fall into the trap of solving "lategame" problems with "big numbers". Air power is something that scales up in a very unusual and powerful way. Bombers are front loaded; their first attack is virtually guaranteed. You can't expect a weapon to vaporize bombers BEFORE they deal their attack, nor to expect it as a viable solution against ALL bombing attempts. An advanced AA needs to operate with that in mind. Otherwise you get a race condition, in this case a DPS race for who can instagib the other guy first. Race conditions are just as bad in programming as they are in game design.

There are major reasons that I emphasize abilities that DENY the first strike capability of air, or which return that same capability back on its owner. These abilities target bombers explicitly, and help slow down the fast attack option until normal gameplay can take hold.

For example, take an area EMP that disable ammo recharge. It scales up masterfully, hitting huge swaths of bombers with ease. But it does not deal fatal damage, nor can it reliably prevent a first strike, nor is it effective against anything sans ammo bar. What it DOES do is it neuters a bomber's sustained damage, forcing them to deal no damage and get murdalized until they retreat for another pass. The attack was held off, and you didn't have to kill every last bomber to make it work.

It's probably a 95% probability unit if you want to put it that way.

Currently there is the base rocket tower, mobile AA and two levels of fighters. So that's 4 solutions to air

We could just slam in a flak cannon or something but maybe we can come up with something cooler if we think about it longer?

Random thought: AA weapon that does little damage but high aoe and massively slows down planes resulting in a massive increased efficiency of t1 AA since it can hit far more often.

Anti air mine, which clears lots of aircraft that enter the space by going POP.

Nukes have been a popular IRL anti air option for a long time. Shockwaves bring planes down, yo.

Any unit can counter itself by having a large death explosion or by shooting itself.

Any form of disabling attack can render units helpless with no option but to retreat.

And so on and so forth...

speaking of idea's for what could be advanced AA...

laser = single target high damage long range slow recharge
flak = small AoE low damage medium range slow recharge
missle = single target medium damage long range medium recharge
chaingun = single target high damage short range very fast recharge


also, on an unrelated note, why not take this a step further with the orbitals?
orbital: debris field. encases planet in a field of debris that makes air travel near impossible. any air unit in affected area takes DoT (damage over time, for the previous person that asked)
and the counter:
Sky Sweeper: complex area of magnets and lasers designed to keep an area of the planet clear of debris for air travel.

the idea being... one can make the debris field to make air travel very hard... but it is permanent, and affects EVERYTHING on the planet, not just the enemies. you could also have some planets start with this... would make for a very interesting change of pace going planet to planet.

also... air lanes.

Haha! You're kidding me, right? I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but it takes a LOT more than you can dish out in a forum to hurt my feelings man. haha

Wow, so what am I supposed to do now? Did you want me to bow before you "oh great one"? haha So, everyone else's ideas are "worth nothing" because they don't present them like you do? Just because I actually have a life, and I don't spend it coming up with concept art and working out all of the math behind a new idea? I'll tell you what's worth nothing....it's slamming people for trying to start a DISCUSSION about new concepts as potential solutions to commonly accepted problems, just because they only have the time to throw out high level ideas, and ask for help to flesh them out. It's actually kind of sad, how desperately some people here tend to cling to the traditional, and argue so vehemently that anything else just couldn't possibly work. Then only offer a completely invalid justification for it such as "average joe's" couldn't possibly grasp the "realities" of the process of game design. haha Remind me again which game you developed (not modded, but actually developed)? Sounds to me like someone is really full of themselves. What you've said here just sounds like code for "I am happy with the same thing, don't try to use your imagination to come up with something different, because I don't want anything different. The only things that could possibly work is what's already been done!". I don't know...just sounds kinda narrow minded to me when you boil it down.

I'm pretty sure I grasp the "role that needs to be filled" here. Just looking for a more interesting way to fill it. Why do what's already been done many times before? That's just a bit dull, which was the essence of my counter to your particular argument. Hell even Neutrino agrees with me on that one.

And I quote:

And you even said it yourself:

Why not? Again, just very narrow minded thinking. The options are completely open here. Why limit them to specific classifications of what's a valid weapon for defense? When I think of defensive strategy, I don't think of traditional RPS (only 1 counter for everything). Are you suggesting that the AA in the game now is not a defensive support unit and serves some kind of offensive purpose as well? How exactly would you use a Missile Turret offensively? I don't get it.

Yes, unit HP and speed are essentially just balancing mechanisms for any unit. I agree with that part.

Again with the "wacky crazy ideas" comments. So, would smashing moons into planets and blowing them up be one of those "wacky crazy ideas" that didn't fit in your mind if Uber didn't already put it into the game? The core feature of this game, and the feature that it's named for, is a pretty damn "wacky crazy idea" to begin with, and in my mind that opens up the possibility for more to be explored. If this was a WWII military simulation, then that would be different.

Thanks for trying to flesh out the EMP idea, bobucles. I completely agree with you on that one. Layered defense is a concept used to great affect when protecting vital assets worldwide. Something like this could easily work in PA.

@neutrino: Please, if you can, try to "come up with something cooler" than the standard Flak Cannon option. If you can't, I understand, but at least try.

Yeah, I brought up the orbital layer option in an earlier post on this thread. I think it presents us with some interesting options against the Air Power problem. So, I'm with you on that part.

I too threw out some ideas in this thread along the lines of affecting Air speed of T2 Air, and even maneuverability, to make T1 defenses more effective against them. I think this is a perfectly viable option, even if the effects were only temporary.

Or even an exploding Kamikaze air unit?

Not really. The mobile AA is useless. The 2 levels of fighters are just one with the t2 being the upgrade that is better in everything and more cost effective.

Basically we have an AA tower (that is slightly interesting as its the only thing that can shoot both air and ground) and fighters.


2 solutions are still more then 1 but much much less then TA.

I like the idea of the chain lightning stuff and not just as an AA weapon.