I agree with him in a different way. I would not be surprised if they scrapped every unit in the game on release date, and changed them all to multiple units that have balanced pieces of the old units. Just removed levelers, t2 bombers and fighters, t2 mexes, added new weird things to take their place in a totally different way, added two flavors of ants instead of one, added t2 anti air which is AOE air, added t1 artillery which is low damage AOE ground, divided orbital up into different units with nerfed versions of the previous orbital and available at t1... I am just optimistic while he is pessimistic. I believe they will make multiple units out of the ones we have, and hopefully add a few new mechanics because radar sure could use them. I wouldn't say he is unhelpfully pessimistic either, he plans on adding these things himself if he has to but he wants the correct completion of this game just as much as anyone.
Saying "all the units are missing" is overstating your point. So is saying the unit roster is "tragic". How many more tanks or tank types are you expecting? I am expecting similar levels and unit types to TA at release which we aren't far short of (plus we have the extra orbital layer - yes it needs work there). I don't see that the standard units as "up in the air at the moment". I am genuinely surprised at the number of people that are unhappy with the units we already have in the game so far and I am trying to think about why. Perhaps its a big topic so can we break it down? Lets use the trusty PeeWee as an example. Why do people think the Dox isn't a good version of that same unit type? It could be partly the art style (and I include sound fx as part of that). I think people really liked the Peewee for that reason, so any replacement goes up against that. I think this is partly nostalgia though. I had the same issue when I first played Supcom1. I thought all the units were bland at first, but over time they grew on me and then when Supcom2 came along I wanted my Mantis and Labs back. So if we rule out Art style as being a real issue in what other ways is the Peewee better than the Dox? I think that only leaves balance. Maybe the Dox is too fast or has too many DPS, but these are things that can easily be adjusted over time in future patches. If we apply this to all the existing units it comes down to balance and missing a few unit types. Not "all the units are missing" which is an over reaction.
TA units had character. The Peewee kinda sucked as a unit, yet everyone loved it because it was basically adorable. The rocko and jethro and most other units were built around concepts and weapons, rather than just "attack unit". They had subtleties to them - you could use the rocko as AA, but it wasn't very good. Jethro had homing but weaker missiles, as therefore covered both AA as well as being a good kite unit. The Thud was not only a good artillery Kbot but had a great ability to climb. Subtle things without being in-your-face abilities such as a starcraft-style RTS would have. In PA it's strictly Black and White at the moment. AA units are AA only. There's a single, generic "attack" unit. I think too the visual design contributes. While the art style is "simple", the unit models are actually overly complex in my opinion, and lack the obvious simplicity of purpose that TA units had. What I'd like to see is some thought put into the entire roster as a whole rather than on a unit-by-unit basis. For example, consider what weapons exist in the universe, then consider what units you'd build around them (and don't invent a weapon per unit like Supreme Commander had). For example, lets look at some weapons: Laser Cannon Missile (homing) Rocket (non-homing) Lets look at what we can do to make an army out of these without it being boring. To start, we think of the weapon characteristics to differentiate them. I'll just do 4 for this example. Laser - uses energy, fast, light damage Cannon - ballistic, requires a heavier chassis Missile - homing, lower damage, shorter range Rocket - non-seeking, high damage, long reload, long range Now we apply these to units, starting with bots: Laser - lighter scout units. Or maybe 2 lasers on a medium unit, or 1 combined with another weapon Cannon - heavy unit. Missile - light unit. Rocket - medium unit. This is still a little boring, so there's some additional things to consider: Define the characteristics of Vehicles vs bots. For example, maybe short range, direct fire cannons are only available on vehicles. Within each set of units (vehicles/bots) look for extreme overlaps in unit roles and try to differentiate them a bit (some overlap is OK), or if there are a lot of variants, remove some. Which may give us a roster of: Laser bot - laser, fast moving, low HP Skirmisher bot - laser, missile, medium speed, medium HP Artillery bot - cannon(s?) in artillery configuration. low speed, high HP Missile bot - 2 missile launchers, fast moving, low HP Rocket bot - rocket, low speed, medium HP Then test & adjust the units' attributes if any appear to be OP. The important thing here is the process, so don't look into my actual suggestions too much. The outcome should be a unit roster that is varied, with some units having clear roles while others are more grey/situational. Combine it with an interesting model and name, throw in some subtle characteristics (such as the Thud's climbing ability) and the units will have character.
As someone who loves Quake almost as much as i love TA, if there came a unit like rocko but that actually was useful, pref vs ants, i would worship it. And just to clarify, i don't want it to be op or imbalanced, but i'd like there to be some scenario where they would blow up tanks rather than the opposite. A little anti tank bot with a huge rl <3 As previously mentioned, T1 artillery would be very useful. Especially with all the controversy surrounding walls. Make little arties that ignore walls and shoot long enough and i don't think there would be a need to nerf walls after that. Maybe they'd have crap los so you'd have to babysit them a bit and send scouts et.c.
@raevn: Thanks for a great post.... Some points on what you said: Isnt that just an Art/Style issue? Indeed it seems we now have a whole thread for this: https://forums.uberent.com/threads/units-design-and-textures.53880/ I loved everything you wrote on these various types. Would you say that TA offered all these types and we want to see them in PA as the core bot units?
We have all paid to be part of this Kickstarter so we are all part of the process. So please be civil. And this IS THE PROCESS. I'm sure the devs are paying attention to the forums even if they don't like what they hear. So are you going to comment on my peewee vs dox points?
raevn already did... but if you insist, here's my take. The Peewee is great for the same reason the Can is great, the Doomsday Machine is great, the Big Bertha is great and the FARK is great; they're a load of characterful units in a game that had a personality. Planetary annihilation has a bit of cognitive dissonance going on. The Art style screams character, that these units are supposed to be quirky and have a little personality. Unfortunately the game as a whole feels soulless and cold. The funny thing about Total Annihilation was that, even though the entirety of the unit roster was made up of robots, they didn't all feel like soulless lumps of metal. The Peewee animated like a little gunslinger. The Can actually felt heavy and cumbersome which reinforced the fact that it was a big heavy damage sponge. Every units had a unique animation that not only was was completely unshared between any other units, but also felt realistic and had a little character to it; the Peewee's swagger, the Can's plodding, unbalanced gate, the FARK's forward-tilting scamper. What do Planetary Annihilation's units have that's unique and characterful? When all your units are sharing the same proportions and animations you end up with mindless looking automata. The sound is completely different too. In Total Annihilation shots had a real visceral feel to them and the Peewee was no exception. The raw loud muzzle sounds, the heavy thud of impact all played a part in making the Peewee and the EMG that it wielded an iconic weapon that you are able to remember and actually get nostalgic over. The GAAT Laser was vicious-sounding and justified its heavy damage, the Bertha literally shook the computer desk with a decent Subwoofer. The unit command sounds were hard and short but they played into what you expected the units to sound like. Vehicles revved up their engines and Kbot servos whined in your ear as you commanded them to war. The gritty visuals were matched by gritty unit design and gritty sounds. What does Planetary Annihilation have that's iconic in its unit sound design? Does it even try to reinforce its aesthetic with sound? The EMG toting Peewee sound resonates with those that remember it, yet the Dox sounds so... forgettable. Also, Scale is a problem. The fact that to have any real impact you HAVE to spam these units out until critical mass is reached somewhere around several dozen (more for the weaker bots) has the follow-on consequence of them all blurring together and being even less unique than they already were. The fact that Dox are tiny and individually much weaker compared to the Peewee of old means that there's no real way to get attached to your units in the same way as Total Annihilation did.
Thank you. Thats a great answer. It beautifully describes what was great about TAs style. However .... ;-) I wonder if its nostalgia that makes them seem bland. Did you feel the same when Supcom1 came out? I know I did. But now I look at LABs or Mantis as the new Peewee. Also you said... "Whats balance got to do with it?" Your post above addresses the art and style aspects, but imagine it was just "a war of dots" with no unit art. Thats what strategic view was called in Supcom. Many people said that it was pointless even having unit models when the game was always played zoomed out. What mattered was the balance. Would you say PA is still miles away from TA balance?
I think SupCom's units are just as bland, even after playing the game for half-a-dozen years. The animations were atrocious (as they needed to be) due to the scale. Up scaling the game is a problem... and I'm not sure how to fix it... yet. And (unfortunately) the balance is currently way too close to SupCom's balance rather than TA's. It's a logistics game, not a strategy game at present.
@nanolathe I hope you are just trolling i.e. you seem to just say the opposite of what others say for a reaction. If not then you have the following problems.... You thought the units in Supcom1 were bland and atrocious, but you still played it FOR 6 YEARS? Sounds like you have some Cognitive dissonance there. You clearly have rose tinted glasses on when you think of TA. It had a great art style and ground breaking 3d(ish) units, but it had many problems in terms of balance and depth that Supcom came along and fixed.
I played SupCom because friends played it. Anything can be elevated to fun if you play with friends... but I never played it solo except for the once-through for each campaign. I have no particularly fond memories of the game itself, nor for any of the game elements. Experimentals were a complete waste because we gave up the uniqueness and individuality of all the other units for just a few at the top of the ladder. Couple that with race-to-the-top lgoistics managment rather than strategic felxability of choice and you have an inferieror game. Total Annihilation is a better strategy game. The sooner you accept that the sooner you can stop posting such utter drivel as " it had many problems in terms of balance and depth that Supcom came along and fixed. " Seriously that statement is laughable.
The first thing to fix that would be reducing projectile speeds and increasing unit health, aswell as reducing turret power. (I won't stop posting this). This is also the reason why I didn't play supcom at all except for the first singleplayer campaign - units were so tiny and without soul that it completely irritated me. The fact you had to build dozens and more of a unit type to even have the slightest effect would naturally make units feel weaker and less epic.
@nanolathe: You ignored my troll comment so I should assume you are, but here goes anyway.... So TA is the holy ONE TRUE RTS and all others since are useless in your eyes? Are you saying there is nothing in supcom1 that improves over TA? And to focus it back to my earlier comments and the units in PA... Other than art/style, how is the Dox not the same as the peewee?
In the interest of a starting a dialogue... I can accept the premise of your comment (that TA was better than Supcom in every way). Can you try to not be so rude about it? And when you do say such sweeping statements can you give at least one specific example?
I do not like being called a troll duncane. I gave you the benefit of the doubt and ignored it. If you think I'm trolling you then I have absolutely no interest in discussing anything with you. You're obviously brushing aside my arguments as ' fanboyism ', or worse just an attempt to irritate. This is not the case. If you don't want to have a dialog with me because you can't accept what I'm saying is anything but ' trolling ', then stop having this dialog. I'll be polite when you stop saying that my opinion is worthless because I'm blinded by nostalgia. Ok? --- I never said that SupCom was useless. I am saying that, other than the lifting of some engine limitations most notably the fixed camera angle, SupCom did not significantly improve in any way over Total Annihilation as a strategy game. Specific examples of why TA is better than SupCom are completely wasted here, there's literally too many to list... but apparently I have nothing better to do at this moment so I'll waste a little time... Just of the top of my head, these are the most major problems SupCom had that TA avoided: Tiered obsolescence A lack of detail due to scale Stagnant, pro-turtle gameplay A race-to-the-top logistics focused style of gameplay Adjacency bonuses Shields Arbitrary targeting restrictions between Ground units and Air units
Apologies for that. I just find your comment style... direct ;-) Not blinded by it, just more extreme than I would expect given the current state of PA. Certainly PA has move back towards TA on most of these. I imagine the first 2 are you main concerns with PA at this point. Is that correct? As an aside I actually liked Adjacency as it forced to put volatile power plants next to your factories. It made for some great explosions after a well timed bombing run ;-)
Nanolathe only comments in heated debate threads and ignores all others, and as a result has cultivated an abrasive reputation. If you look at his comment history though I don't think you'll find much deviation. I very much agree with Nano's review of TA's unit personality. Sound played a big part, but also the naming and unit icons I think were more fun. PA's unit names could just as well be randomized every game and they'd always seem adequate, they're all so generic. They're either complete devoid of personality, and in most cases function as well: Skitter Spinner Ant Sheller Leveler Stinger Dox Stomper Slammer Sun Fish Narwhal Bluebottle Dolphin Barracuda Leviathan Stingray Firefly Hummingbird Bumblebee Peregrine Hornet Avenger Astraeus Jellyfish Pelter Holkins Catapult Umbrella Avenger Arkyd How many can you guess their function or placement on the battlefield? I just wrote this list from the wiki and I've forgotten half of them already. Part of a good unit name isn't just that you can guess it's function however, but that when you see it, you can see the connection and if it's instantly memorable then it already has some degree of personality. I think it was mentioned that these unit names are just slapped on and not permanent, but I think that was mentioned long ago, and I hope that they are not final and Uber still plan to have another pass.
Sound did indeed play a huge part in everything in TA - whoever did those sounds was a genius I also think the pictures in the build menu played a big role. In PA we just have little renderings of the actual unit model while in TA we had pictures of the unit (not the actual model, but a stylized version) against an environmental background.
