Tanks vs Bots(No, this is not a thread of what is more efficient).

For me (at least), in PA Land(Vehicles) is your main Assault Force, when Bots are more to flank maneuvers, So I think that both should be improved in this way, like

Bots-improve Flank
+radar stealth
+underwater (amphibious)
Land(Vehicles)-improve Assault
+Hover (amphibious)
+Better intel(like Mobile Radar)

Replace 'Land' with 'Tanks' or 'Vehicles' and this will be much easier to understand for everyone.

Mike

I think a TA-like system where tanks behave a bit differently and have a bit higher weight class than bots is a good system. In fact, it might be further differentiated. The Flash was extremely similar to the Peewee, albeit with more HP for double the cost.

The same principle might be used in PA, where bots are smaller and cheaper compared to the larger and more expensive vehicles. Doubling the difference from TA to a difference of a cost factor of 4 or so could work. Light vehicles on the cheaper end as specialists, and with main battle tanks as high-end main combat units; expensive generalists.

Main battle tanks should probably have direct-fire cannons, unlike in TA where the plasma cannon was this plucky little plasma cannon with an absolutely pitifully short lob. An MBT should have a real cannon, with support vehicles with things like grenade launches for short-range lobs, autocannons, missiles, and the like.

Bots could be the reverse; cheap generalists, such as main combat Peewees/Glaives, and more expensive supporting specialists. In addition to different maneuverability and handling over terrain, and different specialized unit functionality in each factory, you get quite different gameplay depending on which factories you prefer.

There are already amphibious units in the game. Just not playable yet.

http://pamatches.com/wiki/units/vehicles/flux/

Uber has already stated they won't have stealth. Maybe I'm remembering wrong or they'll change their mind.

Bots are already fast enough for flanking. And they can be spammed out very quickly. Giving them stealth would make them way OP or mean their cost gets increased too much.

Mobile radar has been suggested. Wonder if they'll be added.

Bots are also a bit op now since they are cheaper and can form more dense death balls then tanks. That combined with their speed that allows then to evade a lot of incoming fire makes them a force to be reckoned with. Any bot with a minimum amount of micro will kill an ant sometimes it can go as far a wining a 1v3 or worse.

IIRC peewees got shredded by missile trucks. No one built them. Ever.

you talk about MBT's, yet from your description are describing the stumpy and raider - the T1 tank which, as you rightfully state, no one ever used due to how pitiful it was. When I think about MBT I'm thinking more akin to the Goliath - Core t2 super heavy tank with an AoE plasma shell and bucket loads of health.

I find it hard to generalise Kbots vs tanks in a sufficient manner. In TA, It was like tanks were the generalists - front line sluggers - whilst the kbots were the specialists (Maverick/shooter for Arm Morty/Sumo for core). I can't pin down why it was balanced (albiet it at the cost of 60%+ of the land units being useless) .

In the game right now, bots seem to be used for flanking and containment, and tanks for the "direct approach".
Again, No one wants to bring air into the equation. Yes, bots could probably form larger death balls. But surely that just leaves them more open to T2 bombers?

*shrug*

I don't think TA really had a classical MBT. Because they are called tanks and because they were regular troops I suppose the word applies, but they play quite differently from what I was thinking due to their short range, usually slow speed, etc. I was more drawing the gameplay behavior of an MBT from Wargame: EE and Wargame: Airland Battle. In Wargame, tanks are tough, decent fighters in most respects, for a high price tag, but you also have to account for the presence of specialized and highly effective anti-tank weapons which are inefficient (or impossible) to use against more numerous light vehicles or infantry. In PA, your expensive generalist tanks basically have to fear high damage single shot weapons, while smaller, cheaper bot generalist fighters do not.

That said, you are correct that in TA, generally speaking, higher-end vehicles were used as main combat units, with cheaper vehicles being supporting. With the exception of the Samson/Slasher spam situation, which most people agree was pretty silly and Uberhack eliminated wholesale by making them only shoot air units. Moving shot on a long-range unit with perfect accuracy which can attack ground and air, and fire through friendly units, was just too much. Add to this its individually low DPS and you have a deathball-ready skirmisher for endless spamming by both sides which kills absolutely anything in sufficient numbers.

But you are completely and utterly wrong about nobody building Peewees. The Peewee has to be just about the most ridiculously powerful unit in all of Total Annihilation, made even more so by the fact that the AK (the Core alternative) was just terrible by comparison. Peewees let you be everywhere on the map just because they cost nothing, and require a vastly disproportionate response in order to remove. You want to cap this mex? Bring 500 metal worth of troops and we'll discuss it.

But except in the very early game, Peewees cannot be used alone; you must also utilize appropriate support units depending on what your opponent uses., such as Zeuses for an assault element, or whatever other roles you may need.

Tanks actually worked in a similar way, where you have a large regular army of high-caliber tanks supported by relatively cheap support units for artillery, anti-air, skirmishers, and so on. Goliaths were a popular choice just for sheer durability.

I don't have the game yet, but can you tell me if it hover or crawl

Shields, not stealth.

Of course they are fast to flank, I am not suggesting to make they have like 9001 speed, but have other things(in advanced, T-2).

Stealth like> FA cybran radar stealth, not like, when you buy a bot, it have stealth.

The problem with stealth is building stealth, its worthless.

stealth is worthless?

It is with static objects, because you can't re-stealth.

oh i get what you mean now, it's a technical issue. why do you say worthless though? you coul say to no longer send the data for units in this zone because they are stealthed no?

well, Stealth is useless only when you is covering a spoted building

Yep, once a building is spotted, it's spotted.

I think stealth should be like TA stealth. It would be useless with buildings because of ghosting, but I really have no issue with that. Stealth is an offensive and subversive system, not a subversive defensive one.

Indeed, ghost army's would be horrifying to radar dependant players.

But I will admit to using much less radar in PA then in SupCom as I find that a proper sprawled base with units being produced can see enough to never really have to rely on radar at all.

I would actually like to have stealth units in the game but with a gameplay mechanic that hinders there effectiveness. Like melee weaponry so they can`t long range annihilate your base. With the advent of radar I guess it would be silly to have stealth but its a wishlist I have.

Yeah, I concur. Because of how important it is to keep an enemy from expanding, you usually have units just lying around everywhere. Kinda like how some bacteria use microscoping hairs to see. Except with war machines.

w/ Stealth I mean some like this:
http://faforever.com/faf/unitsDB/unit.php?bp=URL0306,URB4203
Not "Stealth", but Radar stealth.

Wait, are we going to talk about stealth only ?

hey I jumped into the fire I didn`t start it.