Infantry & Vehicle Gameplay

Many of us are suggesting that the tanks should be highly specialized raiding mongolians while the bots should be flexible rank and file infantry. "Game is a game", so I'm not going to worry too much about realism, but in more conventional warfare vehicles are used for mobility while troops are used for ground control. At the same time, in applications of most mechanical engineering robots with legs are universally slower than robots with wheels or treads. Legs are great for crossing unstable and uneven terrain, like stairs or rock falls, but rolling is WAY faster and more efficient.

If you want a large unit with legs, just give it a different name, like "mechs" or perhaps "striders" like Zero-K. Bots can be the little guys, with a separate category for very large units with legs. I do think being "infantry-like" implies a smaller size, making them more numerous and therefore capable of being spread across a larger area, in conjunction with a high-efficiency focus. Speedy units exert influence because you can go other places quickly, including moving a large group wherever it needs to go. Cheap units, like small infantry, exert influence by being present in many different places, which plays very differently.

The SupCom tier system sort of makes a symmetrical comparison between units futile because different units have different relative strength depending on the current tech level, where each tech level really is a strict upgrade from the one below it, and replaces it (with a few exceptions). Relative to T1, a Titan is a very big unit in cost and power. But at T3, with T3 economy, it kind of does behave like a small infantry unit.

I think Wargame really nails infantry as a cheap, high-efficiency, slow, and short-ranged defensive unit. However, Wargame uses two damage types to do this. PA can get the same kind of cheap, high-efficiency, slow, short-range unit by tinkering with bot cost, HP, damage, and movement speed. PA bots will certainly play very differently from Wargame infantry, but can still preserve the core gameplay of what it means to be "infantry-like." Spreading across space, holding a line, high efficiency, strength at close range, the need for support, etc. As Pendaelose says, what is important is how they play, not their actual model size.

Infantry's great handling, fast turn rate, and high weapon maneuverability is indeed very helpful in areas with obstacles, including wrecks and walls as well as terrain. Craters using deformable terrain is also a cool idea, tending to make the terrain rougher and less flat when heavily damaged.


And with regards to vehicles, a new 150 metal vehicle can fill the Pounder's current weight class. My thinking was that the Pounder as a main battle tank can have its armor and gun pushed even harder. 150 metal is nothing in PA because every mex is about five times as productive as a mex in TA. I love how the cheap units work in PA, and want that to stay. But do I think that a medium tank belongs at that weight class? No, in order to be a legitimately intimidating, armored unit with a tank cannon, it should be more powerful and more costly than just 150 metal.

In fact just now I played a game where I as usual went bot first to attempt to raid and my opponent went vehicles. Due to my larger numbers I was able to hold his slower growing tank army off just long enough to start cranking out a matching tank force. If they're so similar I don't see why I had to go vehicles to stay in the game??? The fact is they aren't, tanks own bots still. You yourself even described their differences so I really just can't grasp how they are similar.

A flamethrower bot could be cool!

Yes wheels are faster never said they aren't. But again like you say it's a game.... and most games your tanks are always slower than your main infantry unit, especially in the TA lineage. Not that we have to adhere to this but I kind of like it. Also things with wheels occupy more space, which quite obviously makes them horribly at cqc they will never be as nimble as legs like you said.

I don't think anyone is calling them identical, but if you compare the Bot-Vehicle relationship in PA to the Infantry-Vehicle relationship in many other RTS games you'll find the PA relationship pales in comparison. In many other games the gulf between infantry and tanks is vast and not at all a one way order of strength. Tanks don't have to be "better" than infantry, rather they should have wildly different application.

Look at Wargame, Company of Heroes, or even old C&C games. None of these games agree on one fixed rule of tanks vs infantry, but they all have a level of distinction between them that PA is lacking.

I still don't follow.... everything does damage. What are you guys after??? They still seem vastly different to me. Tanks are obviously better at base busting and killing defenses while more fragile bots can get in hit a mex of to and disappear in the fog of war. Not the best bet for charging headlong into a base but excel at making nice distractions of oh fawk I better deal with those

Just sounds like New unit suggestions which there is a thread for

No, it's definitely not a new unit suggestion. I'm working on a UI problem child of my own right now (sadly my paid job, not game related), but when I have a chance I'll see if I can better define the infantry/vehicle relationship that ledarsi and I are trying to describe.

That would be great. I understand the differences in real life its plain to see, nothing is still really better than boots on the ground. But as mentioned this isn't real, there's no cover system blah blah blah. Simply saying look at other games I don't see what you mean either.....

Some units are fast, low health, not the best dps. While others are slow high health, high dps. Others still are general use all around, pretty even in all areas.. while there is more difference at the t2' level they still follow those guidelines and generally excel at one area way more than others. You can always mix those essentially three areas to achieve different unit uses but I see the differences already. Just trying to see the similarities that ledarsi has claimed they have aside from beings basic general purpose tech, they are still very different to me.

I just can't see exactly what is New about what's being suggested, unless your want tanks to crap tacos or something when they get hit.....

Beer4blood, there are more possible unit designs than the two sets of characteristics you propose. Vastly more. Those "guidelines" are not guidelines at all. There are a huge variety of different possible units using different weapons, mechanics, and stats, without always assuming that a unit that is more expensive must be higher HP, higher DPS, and slower, for example.

One possible design scheme is a cheap, slow, high-DPS (for cost), high-HP (for cost), short-ranged unit chassis. Each individual unit is weak, but efficient, so a force of them would have a lot of HP and high DPS for little total cost. This basic archetype might be a foundation for multiple types of "infantry" bots by establishing functional differences between bots and vehicles.

Instead of a suggestion for a specific unit, I am interested in the differences between how the bot factories play, and how the vehicle factories play. And how the units in those factories can be used together in different styles of combined arms, such as mixing and matching main combat units, support units, and specialists from various factories. Like forming a large defensive line of bots with a reserve force of tanks which can be used as reactive reinforcements, or as an offensive force to attack somewhere, allowing your defensive line to advance. Or having a large bot army with big howitzers and SAM vehicles supporting them from behind.

Bots and vehicles have become more distinct in the most recent patch, but the similarity of their price points (90 as opposed to 150 metal) as well as the approximate similarity in strength and efficiency mean the difference between bots and vehicles can be pushed quite a bit further.

Again with the reading. I said they can be varied to different combinations. But it all boils down to, cost, health, speed,, range and dps. There is nothing more beyond that. Perhaps terrain limitations can be counted as well.

What you seem to be really be talking about is applicable tactics. That can be performed with any units in front or behind another or creating your lines. Bot or vehicle is no matter. I still don't see how you think they are approximately similar. Yes we need more unit types no doubt about it, and we are going to get them. So again I ask for how exactly are they similar??? I don't throw dox at my enemies defensive line because the casualties are to high. I don't pursue my enemies forces with tanks because they're to slow.......

I'm seriously trying to see the light here but you're failing to explain it.

beer4blood, forgive me if you already explained this above, but just to be clear, how would you differentiate bots from vehicles?

How would you justify having a bot factory chain *and* a vehicle factory chain, and not just a single "ground-unit" factory chain ala Supcom?

We're not saying that bots and vehicles are the same. We're saying that they could be much more different... much MUCH more differenting stuffs.

I want to describe an extreme hypothetical... this is not the literal balance I'm suggesting, but rather an exaggeration to make the idea more direct.

If doxen fired 1o times as fast, with one tenth the damage their DPS would not change at all. Now, also give them half the health and half the speed, but half the cost too. Now, they are tremendously more vulnerable to enemy fire, but much easier to build in large bulks and have double the DPS when you spend the same metal.


If Ants had 10 times more health, 20 times the damage, but one tenth the fire rate, but now cost twice as much. Finally, Improve their range and mobility. For your current metal investment you would have the same DPS with ten times more health on the field. Between the two units, they got buffed WAY more than the doxen described above... but they would suck at killing doxen. Every shot would have huge overkill and nearly all your huge DPS would be wasted. Ants would fall to doxen every time. Artillery on the other hand would demolish doxen while being helpless vs Ants.

I'm not suggesting we take it all the way to this extreme, but these are the kinds of changes that we're talking about.

I feel like this thread is a little early to the punch..the Patch was like... 1 day ago?

I know you have a vision for infantry but at least give this patch some time to sink in before you hate the direction. Not all infantry have to behave like infantry in other games.

I personally loved the infantry in World in Conflict with how they can go through forests and certain urban structures, taking advantage of the land to make them more powerful then their tank opponents, even though the tanks can outright run them over in open field.

However I'm not putting a suggestion that wic traits need to put in... maybe referenced.

I'm certainly not hating the current direction. From what I've read they may have even moved bots in this direction a bit and I'm super excited by it, and the dev comments about further differentiating the two classes.

My posts are largely hypothetical, but on principal I stand by wanting to see bots and tanks as different as possible. I would even back ideas like having special "rough terrain" that is impassible to vehicles, but open to bots. Maybe even making wreckage count as rough terrain until destroyed or recycled.

Alas my life as a busy adult with many important things to do often prevents me from playing when I would like,, but I hope to get some time in this weekend.

There isn't much that can be done for the T1 level. If you don't have similar capabilities, whoever picks the best factory wins. However, you can absolutely separate the specialty units between them. That's what TA did. The T2 k-bot lab had a sniper bot, fast assault bot and the T2 vehicle had arty and superheavy tanks. There's plenty more directions to go from there.

Talking about cost, health, damage, range and speed is level 1 design. There's only so many ways you can combine these attributes before the units turn redundant. That's why so many ideas focus around themes and theater specialties. Terrain specialists. Stealth specialists. Abilities that do not fall into a level 1 category. It's the tricks and gadgets that turn a basic rock paper scissors system into a more advanced and unpredictable one.

@ledarsi I'll have to think on that and my suggestion as I don't really have one atm perhaps I will later.I was merely trying to understand how they are so similar. Bobucles is correct however about the T1 to much separation makes the best factory win, right off the bat.

I would think that the TA approach as pendalose suggested would be fair. Truthfully though you could differentiate all units of same class from each other. The norm is to have a separation of robots and vehicles.
Again to TA the kbots had tanks of their own like the famous sumo and can. Which was kind of redundant with the goliath. Forgive me my arm knowledge is null, to this day I'm strictly a core player. The vehicles had artillery just like the thud. The major separation factor was the mobility,kbots could handle extremely rough terrain with ease while vehicles had an extremely difficult time pathing such obstacles. The thud especially it could climb almost vertical faces, which was awesome to march a squad in or on top of a hill or mountain and rain death on your opponent.

As far as infantry separation, we could use the diverse roles infantry fills in real life, a squad is capable of almost anything, tank busting, infiltrating single asset elimination. The list goes on. But I digress these are roles befitting T2 over T1. Which you haven't exactly implicated your ideas necessary at T1 because I'm sure you realize huge diversity there will throw the games in favour of one particular unit type.

I will try to elaborate more when I get in front of my pc. My phone battery is dying.

One more thing however before I simply read til it does die. Real life dictates that people with legs raid. You don't send a mess of vehicles in to clear a city block, you send a squad of legs, with wheels or tracks as support, and air ( wish we had a T1 gunship).