Interplanetary Nukes and gameplay solid ideas. MIRV's new idea.

So I'm a mechanical engineering student working on my astrospace degree (Which I will get in who knows when?)

. I post a ton of ideas on Steam and rarely ever post them here as I'm an innovator. I come up with ideas every day for inventions...Mainly Rare Earth Metals as a resource really should be a feature. I feel the economy is too easy right now especially too simple.

1. "I have compiled a list of solid ones and typed them up. Alright I know people have turtling planets. But I personally make my systems with 400-600 with 1 big planet, and can get 100-350 2-8 medium to small planets orbiting the larger planet. Now with the nuke. I will no longer due so. They need MIRV's Multi independently targetable reentry vehicle. Basically, cluster bomb/rocket nukes that are defensive that orbit the planet until needed (or they'll drop and blow things up at random..normally they would destroy London, Moscow, Dubai, Stalengrad, Geneva, Mexico city, Lenin, +5 other targets adding to 12, but random would be for balance)
   
2. There needs to be more separation in technology for example space travel at first could be rockets and changes eventually to space frigates, bbcs' and fighter cruisers. (Much better and balanced edition.)
   
3. -Or add another material called special metals which are used for special buildings, nukes -and units. I think you should add REMS Rare Earth Metals to seperate how many nukes you can have. For Rare earth metals you can implement a grid map on the planet highlighting areas in brighter colors for higher concentrations. Likewise there would be reasons for fighting over certain parts of the planet instead of at random. This would prevent people from simply nuking everone from the start. Nukes kinda defeat the whole point of strategy as they are a nice way to end stalemates, but are more for those who cant' beat someone in normal routine strategy in other words they are the cowards' way out. They do make uneven team matches more even and smaller planets pit players for more rival and bloodshed where I find nukes acceptable in 3v1v2v3. Thoughts? B) the other plan could be to add radiation effects on certain planets. If too much radiation happens then you can't build there or harvest etc. etc....
4. -I am still advocating for troop and fighter carriers. (Repeat info there other's have said the same.)
5. I also think you should be able to add 'wormholes' like stargates but allow fast wars accross planets. This would be completely an end game part but where at the end someone has a planet super far away and you build a gate. This IS THE ONLY WAY YOU DEVS CAN SHORTEN GAMES. This would allow troops to quickly transport to other planets, and likewise end the game. Interplanetary nukes would make more lag. These gates on the other hands. Perhaps or perhapsnot. Maybe they could be at random and appear at first randomly in space? Anyway it allows instananeous travel after a 2 hr game. Any longer and these games will take days. Eventually I could see where you create a 'death star' or a planetary destoryer or something which makes asteroids or launches planets at you without Halleys.
6. -Nuke's pathing in my opinionwould take more memory because they travel accros space and time. Linking units to transport from x0 to xf instantaneously---actually I don'tknow but I theorize it's better. Any programmers who would know??
7. -Lastly Race specializations. There are no real differences in sides or why you fight as a color or faction. You are you. I think your commander should be able to 'lvl up' or you have a rpg. You can make your commander look and have specials or passive increases in various levels as you play. It would be a slight advantage but not a op one where a Newbie couldn't beat a vet.
8. You need to fix the game right now you cannot have 4v4v4v4 but you can have 5*2 and 6*1 or 3v3v3v1*7v'''' which makes unique combination of games but deters larger battles. You should not have teams of 5 because it creates a large amount of lag and there's a bug with placinghte commanders with about 4 players. I imagine itwould be easier to fix teams of 4 and remove the issue permanently than fix it for 4 and 5 player teams."
   
   I'll be porting the rest over. (lag needs to be the top priority to reduce reduce!!!!! btw.)

I'll comment on a few of these:

3. Pretty sure there will be no new resources added to the game. Not sure if you have played TA/Supcom, but they have all had metal (or mass) and energy as the only resources, and the devs are pretty solid on sticking with this model (to my knowledge anyways).

5. Teleporters between planets have been confirmed, they are working on the tech for them currently.

7. I don't think any racial (I think you mean faction) specializations will be added in. There also won't be any leveling up or "upgrades". The devs have stated this a few times.

8. Max game size will be increased as they work on load balancing tech for the servers. It is already possible to play 40 player games, but it currently causes other games hosted on the same server to suffer. (you can find a few replay videos if you look here: https://forums.uberent.com/forums/gameplay-videos.81/)

I see you're new to the forums, and welcome! You should do a search before posting in accordance with forum rules as much of what you're suggesting had been talked about a lot on the forums already.

Poll is pointless. What if I believe none of them, or multiple of them, or something different should be added?

Multiple resources have been suggested and have been confirmed as a no.

2: space combat like that is a confirmed no and gets talked about a lot on the forums.

3: confirmed no and gets suggested from time to time. Although there will be gas planets with some sort of gas harvesting stuff. We don't know too much about that though.

4: Carriers have been discussed a lot on the forums. No word from Uber on those. I doubt they'll be added. Instead we'll rely on the unit cannon, astreus, teleporter gates, and the egg.

5: The only way devs can shorten games? Not really. Besides, teleportation gates will be in the game.

6: I don't follow you.

7: This gets talked about a lot. Race specializations are a no, for multiple reasons. Balance being one. People will figure out the best race and stick to it. More races will be added through mods probably though. There also won't be levels, nor upgrades for the commander. Confirmed no.

8: If you don't like larger games due to the lag, don't play on larger games.

Performance updates come with every game. Performance updates are one of the last things to be done in game development. It's pointless to focus on optimizations when you'll have to redo your work as game development progresses.

Seriously dude. Do a search. Everything you brought up has been talked about before, and much of what you've brought up is a confirmed no.

Check out the confirmed features list: https://forums.uberent.com/threads/confirmed-features-list-2-0.44950/

Special Materials are kinda micro man.

I don't really see it that way. to me it's more so just an arbitrary required resources that would be used to try and balance something despite having plenty of other tools available already. Basically a 3rd resource just adds more complexity without adding any significant depth.

Mike

To put this more meaningfully...

What can you do with a 3rd resource that the existing 2 can't do? Turns out it's not that much.

There is one thing- currently energy and metal are plentiful, to the point that expansion for economic reasons isn't needed on larger planets. A seldom used, rare resource could create a bit of land contest, which was often a feature of ta maps.

Of course that type of play will probably be more feasible once we have more fine control over metal deposits on planets....

Asteroids?
Land?
Metal worlds?
Reclaim?

Resources aren't just things you can dig out of the ground.

To me that just sounds like fixing the effects of a problem instead of just fixing the root cause you know?

If there is a problem with metal and/or energy the first thing we should be looking to "fix" is metal and/or energy.

Mike

The only 3rd Resource I found this game (and all its predecessors) really had was time.

How much time would you spend planning your base vs managing an attack for example?

I do however feel a similar way at the moment, I think most of the reason for this is that there's not much to spend your resources on right now and after mid-game you either have plenty or you don't have any.

I know 99% of people will disagree with adding any additional resources but I will however voice an issue my brother raised with me while trying to argue the game was kinda sucky still, and that is that Nukes aren't made of just metal and energy, you need uranium and stuff, these arguments are why i always preferred the term mass over metal.

But on the other side of the fence it does kinda make sense in some ways that special weapons should have a special pre-requisite but i fear it will just make the game harder to balance between players of varying skill levels.

Agreed

uranium is a metal. All fissile materials that I am aware of are metals.

You already bring up the problem though, adding special resources makes it more complex, for no real benefit.

Also makes the planet generation even more complex and difficult. Distributing metal points, which are common is hard enough. Distributing a rare resource that is needed for the most advanced stuff would make this dam near impossible. Even if they did manage it, you would still get people screaming they lost a game due to unfair resource spawning.

You can't add less lag.