How is planets and interplanetary a gimmicks?

Your micro skill is a constant during a game, and some units favor micro while some units are not, plus unlike RTS games with researches, unit stats in PA can't change during a game, so if APM is a important resource in PA, how can we keep the unit balance in good shape throughout a game that go from several dozens of units to thousands of units without simplifying the unit interactions or making high tier units better than low tier ones like SupCom did? Not to mention you have to fight the interface in a 3D RTS.

That should only be temporary....

I think the problem is a semantic one.
Micro-management doesn't means "doing dozen of clicks so your units quickly escape fire". It can, but it's not only that.

Micro is all that Macro isn't. and Macro is only managing things.
Macro on PA is pretty much inexistent currently (due to the UI that doesn't allow any automation).

On FA, macro would be to set factories assists to replicate queues, managing patrols points, ...

Making the queue themselves is both macro and micro : micro because you set it a entity level, macro because you decide what units to do to fulfill your big plan.

The problem I have with PA is :
- The total lack of macro.
- The micro is only tedious and/or dull.

Interesting micro would to decide what formation to give to your units, moving the arty to a plateau so they can fire & be safe, put your T2 tanks in front for meatshield, .....
FA is full of interesting micro (like your examples).

And if I really like micro, I should be able to build a kiting unit and own my enemy with my better micro skill, because it's my strategy! (ie. on FA, doing rocket bots instead of rhino tanks, or playing Aeon
These things are just not there. There isn't any choice.
There is no decision/order I can do that will give me an edge in battle.
Mostly because once two units are in range, the battle is already over.

So I hope in the next build, the UI will bring some macro into the game, and some units (or changes) will be added that will allow some interesting micro moves.
For the terrain... Well, I don't have much hope :-/

I still don't understand why people think it's a bad thing and should be avoided at all cost. That would solve so many problems and make the game so much interesting. If done correctly (so not like supcom but like FAF )

I feel that people are against the idea for bad reasons.

Lower tier units is your basic tool. Fragile but highly efficient if used correctly. (T1 in FA) At some point, so cheap you can use them just for the sake of it (because they could potentially kill the "no brainer" units mass for mass).

Some higher tier units are your micro units. Highly efficient if used correctly (T2 Rocket bots, T2 mobile Bombs, T3 snipers or T3 loyalist in FA).

Some higher tier units are your no brainer units. You don't need to be attentive to them, they are not always more effective than T1, but easier to manage. If they are more effective, they cost way more. You pay more to care less. But they can be overcome by the "micro" units. (T2 Rhino, T3 bricks or T4 in FA).

By the way, T4 is obliterated by T3 in FA (and probably by T2 too). They are only good as support/meatshield/damage dealer, but used alone, it's just giving your enemy free mass.

Then you have your support units (T1 AA, T2 flaks,... that are complementary), and your siege units (T1 arties, mobile missile launcher) that are only good to kill defenses. And the advance siege units (T3 arties) that fill that role but are also effective to deny an area.

Again, unlike a lot of people seems to think, supcom (or, well, FA) did it almost perfectly. We've pushed the limit further in FAF, but the basics was here.

+1!!!

And to bring it allllll back to the beginning.
It's a gimmick if we get a solar system, and don't have what zep just said.
But if we do, and we have it on the scale of Seton's ^3 x # of planets, then we have awesome.

Has always your words are a open eyes ,but not all ppl understand.

Have any of you played Spring Zero-k? Micro dodging can be built into the unit code, allowing your units to dodge and kite automatically. It isn't quite as good as a player, but it is 80% as good generally. I assume this will be implemented, since it is obvious the technology exists.

I'm totally confused.. Are we talking about planetary & interplanetary gimmicks? Or microing stuff..


This is why I don't like when threads are derailed because the sub topic could of easily been another discussed thread but instead is buried in this one and makes it harder for readers and developers

Zero-k, is a free rts open source game,no one pay for make it ,and yet when i dont play FA its the most enjoy free RTS game for now.



http://zero-k.info/Wiki/Manual

Eh. People are dumb.

The big problem here ,its no one realize that, there is a big problem on PA.

And you ask? wy you say that.
And i say!
We arrive to this point ,and no one realize where is the problem! Then forget its too late.

Im Sure i will always see (The game just isn't done yet.)
I agreed but......

AT this point game, showld have all ideas structure done.
Iff dont have ,its because PA game wont have mutch diferent like it is now.

And you tell me ?
You rong ,there is many things to do......



And i say?
Really!

Then i can play my Littlebigplanet, and make with editor my own rts flat maps.

KNight i agreed with Zepilot.
The currently planets , doesn't bring anything at all to gameplay.


You talk about different types of terrain brushes, sry but the editor its really poor.
Even the old Beta Supreeme commander editor its mutch bether,and its really old.

I keep see speculation.

The currently gameplay got no tactic at all .


Tell me im rong and wy?

You say things are wrong (which is off topic) – but don't say what is wrong.

Planetary Annihilation is an INCOMPLETE GAME. THE GAM ISN'T FINISHED.

Uber knows a lot more than we do.

Claiming that the game is a bad game because not all the "ideas are done" (or whatever you're claiming, hard to tell) not only is illogical, but untrue since Uber knows a lot more than they're telling us.

You're wrong that the planet doesn't bring anything to gameplay because we're playing on a sphere. There are no map edges, so you can go anywhere on the planet.

If you think playing on a sphere doesn't change gameplay, you must have never played a match. Spherical gameplay with no map boundaries DRASTICALLY changes gameplay.

Pure speculation,dont sell games.

Thhiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiissssssssssssss

But that's different from what pilot said, he Said "The sad part is that currently planets are dully completely flats, so it doesn't bring anything at all to gameplay." which just flat out isn't true. The planets aren't flat in the slightest and there are some terrain features (Primarily in the Desert biome thus far) but do have some vertical elements to them. Now if Pilot was trying to be more factual and less sensationalist I'd probably would have agreed with him.

In the end, Terrain does have a part to play, even if right now it's really small the potential is there and given how much we're missing in terms of unit and weapon types along with more variety in Terrain brushes it could have a much greater impact than what we have now. Yes it can go both ways and in the end it could have an ever smaller impact than it does currently but I think it's much more plausible that in the end Terrain will play a much bigger role in gameplay.

Mike

... huh?

Uber's original plan was having distorted rectangles that look like spheres instead of real spheres, so it seems they at least know some potential problems that can caused by spherical maps. Hope they were really prepared for those problems when they changed that plan under the pressure of player feedbacks.

In terms of macro vs micro and PA being fun, I think a key problem right now is just that the game is waaaay too much about artillery and nukes and not nearly enough about unit combat. In TA, I won many-a-game by relying heavily on unit based attacks, even on larger maps where my opponent had time to prepare defenses. I would hit him from multiple directions and the "fun macro" was basically managing a multi-front war.

In PA, I feel like units are just plain weak. Defenses like the Pelter murder them. I mean a hoard of Ants gets crushed quite nicely by a pelter and a couple of missile turrets -- a defense that, in TA, would get overrun because the Pelter-equivalent was powerful but slow and inaccurate (and missile launchers were really only good against planes, which meant you needed laser turrets, which meant you had to choose: anti-air OR anti-ground? In PA, missile turrets are both). TWO Pelters? Forget-about-it. You need Levelers now. In TA, turtle defense was layered and defenses structures were primarily just a backup for units that were supposed to rush in there to save the day. In PA, the turtle doesn't really need units. It doesn't take very much to make your base totally invulnerable to T1 ground attacks and it doesn't take much more to give T2 ground attacks a lot of grief.

Consequently, PA seems to consist mostly of nukes and artillery duels. Build some simple defense, build your economy, build your nukes/arty rush and Bob's your uncle. I almost never die to units in PA. Most people don't even try. I die because I lost the nuke rush or I lost the arty duel. Generally I lose because I stubbornly continue to try to find a viable way to win with TA style unit pushes and it just doesn't work against anyone that knows what a Pelter is.


I'm sure this is one of those "polish" / "balance" things they intend to work on later but in the meantime I agree with the people saying PA is lacking in fun. Not because it lacks micro but because mobile unit battles are so pointless in the face of incredibly powerful defenses.

(The good news is that the solution is really just a few tweaks. It's not like the game is inherently broken. Giving the Pelter a swift kick in the accuracy would probably be a great start.)

You can't seriously say that you've already played a game where you spawn, look carefully at some terrain features and said to yourself "I will use that for doing this!", or actually changed your strategy because this or that on the map.

At best, it's some stuff that are getting in the way, but like my bed was in my way when I was doing puzzle on the floor as a kid.

They are some brushes that bring some height, but the game will play exactly the same without them.