2 months to release and the game feels like pre-alpha and is a letdown. Please delay the release.

People don't like having bumpy maps?




People like having map terrain that define gameplay.
Terrain should create natural choke points.
Especially with a physics based game, elevation should play a huge role.






I keep referring to this image...



I can dream right?
- Narrow chokes
- Terrain that dwarf your buildings and units
- Multi-tier elevation that defines how you play.


Like in TA



and Spring.


Now THAT looks like a fun map....

Here's one more.

Because it's not only TA, it's only not PA

This picture is taken from Medias available on Main Steam PA page.
Hopefully we get this sort of planet or i anticipare a huge disapointment

Having continents, islands, oceans & poles would be a start. That doesn't need any bug fix about height.

I'd love having height differences as in the pictures above.
Makes things more interesting.

I'm definitely +1-ing on the height variations. We need cliffs and slopes, and we need them to function as such (unlike FA, where units at the bottom of a cliff can usually shoot straight up and kill turrets on the ridge).

That really depend of the height of the plateau.

You know the side cliffs in Badlands 4v4? If you put say a T2 arty on the edge, it will get killed by Mantis at the bottom of the cliff. Here's the map for anyone that doesn't know it, the cliffs I'm talking about are at the top and bottom in this picture (claimed by red at the top and yellow at the bottom).

M

Mwo? No. Hawken yes. No need to feel sorry for me "son" ive got way better things to do than worry about a video game.

Yeps, because the mantis turret can pitch at 45°.
It's really a blueprint value.
Some tanks can't do that (ie. aurora is only 20 degrees, thaam 30 degrees).

Could be for faction diversity, but if you think it would be better that they are not able to do it, you can propose it as a small change here :
http://www.faforever.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=5689

That's also why light bots are able to fire from transports while other units can't by the way (turret can go below 0 degree)

Im not sure that having plateaus rally counts as a proper hill.

It much more like a StarCraft hill that is really just elevated terrain as opposed to actual rolling hills.

I think if they just accentuated the bumps already in the terrain and, more importantly, made it more obvious where the hell those are, you'd get the terrain you're looking for. I've already seen one replay where a turret couldn't hit another unit due to a bump, but you'd be damned if you could see the bump without the laser fire hitting it.

I find SupCom infuriating to play like that.
Gentle bumps make for pretty, but I'll be damned if I can tell my optimal attack route or turret placement because of those rolling hills.

That's a lack of context in the UI and poorly conveys the battlefield to the player.

I actually think the PA concept renders would be much better.
Set plateau heights make it clear to the player what hills will interfere with firing lanes.

Set plateau heights also make for a lot of walls, and not a lot of hill traversing for units like bots. Historically bots have better all-terrain capability than vehicles, but it means nothing if there are no inclines anywhere, only cliffs with plateaus on top.

PA really needs to add procedurally generated hills and valleys- the planets are just crying out for procedural terrain and procedural biomes together.

1) Will be solved with 3, when unit diversity and multiple flavors of unit are added, and they spread out balance amongst the unit terrains and types.
2) The modders have pretty much made the better ui. All Uber really has to do is add their works to the game, and add the hooks to the ones that are sketchy hacked in versions (mex counter actually counting mexes instead of changes in metal rate)
3) Will solve 1, and the game needs and will by all expectations have more than ONLY 5 UNITS of each terrain, derp. They will add different flavors of unit, different unit-to-terrain interactions, and hopefully add tons of use roles and spread balance amongst different terrains to accomplish successful warfare.
4) Performance ATM is different for everyone. Some get large multiplanet games with 30fps, others get 10fps even with expensive systems. At the end, they have to optimize to see what the average will be. Did you know they haven't even combined some things that are running as essentially multiple attached pieces? It will run a lot better when some objects are made a whole item instead of 5 individual pieces each item.
5) You are referring to the graphics. They need neat effects and shine and detail. As far as scale, that's the way the game is. Kerbal is far from realistic scale either, they are just closer than PA.
6) How do YOU purpose they add a minimap? THEY purpose they add multiwindows, and then you can have window in the corner zoomed out over planet, window in other corner zoomed out over opposite planet side, or if you prefer a row of windows all on one side or the other, you can see multiple planets instead if you want, spin the planets around, bounce around them, use one window with hotkeyed camera points to cycle through them like a security system... But please, enough about that, tell me about how you can magically wrap a sphere onto a piece of paper and not confuse people in the process of doing so?

Matter of fact, I can't stop hearing about that last one. You know why the earth map is layed out the way it usually is? Because there isn't much in the pacific. I am sure the few people who DO live on the edge of the portrayed map, the Alaskan archipelago or the south pacific island, probably are endlessly bothered by how standard maps regularly make their lives difficult.

I think there should be a strong mix of both hills and plateaus.
Both make for a lot of cliffs and chokepoints which is fun.

I'm really excited to see what Uber has planned for the transports.

- Aerial assaults
- Creating a beach head
- Air superiority to get your air fabbers in close to start a firebase and get entrenched on the opponent's doorstep.
- Taking high ground


I am waiting for the awesome.

Who gets confused going from this




to this?






Didn't you learn this in grade 4?

Units on that un-wrapped planet would appear to all be going different speeds, and weapons fire would move oddly, as it's warped. It's not a suitable solution.

anything around the edges appear scrunched up. if stretched, anything around the edges appear stretched instead. Either way, you have no way of knowing how large that army will grow as it move torwards the center of the piece of paper. The cuts are divided, it would hop across space itself, before you try to use that example instead.

Also ninja'd, as raven said, ranges will appear deceptive. You won't think that artillery was close enough to hit you, until you notice that artillery on the planet is closer than it appeared in the corner of the map. Fun fact, did you know Alaska is the biggest state in the US only a little compared to Texas, yet the map appears to make it look as large as half the continental US?

An interactive rotating planet would be better. That is essentially an extra window, which I support Uber putting in as the default to start the game with 2 windows and 1 is a zoomed out view shrunk in the corner.

A hologram has been mentioned, but see-thru-ness might not work for everyone.