Metal Planet Death Stars Confirmed

i think metal planet death star ability should be only possible in galactic war

If anyone here has played Star Control II (spoilers!), the final fight of the game is with an ancient battleship of such power that nothing can realistically stop it. But that's okay, because it's actually turned off, you're just fighting the security system installed by a third party.

If you have ancient, powerful technology, I think it's a common trope in space opera to not give complete access, to only allow us to see glimpses of its real power in interacting with it.

For a death star in Planetary Annihilation, who says that we should be able to inhabit and control the system? Let it exist, give it a number of interesting effects, but don't give the player full access to its power.

Actually speaking of defense/security systems, I always liked the idea of Metal planets having some means to defend themselves.

Imagine, landing on a metal planet by a large "mountain" and as you're setting up your base, you notice that the "Mountain" is rising up...and has legs, and weapons and is staring right at you.

Mike

More = Better, isn't it? If you have random generation of planetary systems there ideally should exist infinitely many non-trivially different variations so that you're never playing the same map twice. I'm worried that without many interplanetary interactions and environmental effects the procedural generation will ultimately be pointless and in fact detrimental. Instead of having the finely crafted maps you can find in Starcraft, we will end up with the same generic single-planet system that makes the game look like it's unfinished. All in service of our quest to have balance and e-sports and perfectly predictable play experiences where nothing unexpected can ever happen. So why even have random generation then? Just to make scouting slightly more relevant? It seems like we should commit to either two instead of staying in the middle. Either real diversity and variation, or no random generation altogether.

Edit:

Some other points though:
- I don't know if I'd like a capture system for the death star, where if you control certain interest points for x time you are allowed to use its weaponry. It's very obviously lifted from various other games and I don't think it would fit thematically because it so clearly puts gameplay first over internal logic, as if it's an arcade game where it's acceptable to completely abstract reality in favor of representative gameplay tokens. I'm not sure if I can properly explain it, but it feels in bad taste to me, not fitting with the aesthetic feel of the game.

- This is a space game. I think it's good to emphasize that. I don't think the game is at the level yet where you naturally feel you are operating in a space environment: multiple planets are like island bases, asteroids are like nukes and circular planets are not new either. I don't think it's immersive yet.

- One of the issues with Starcraft is that the game is so compressed, it always takes place on the same scale. That's because you can't zoom out, the game requires so much micro, the supply limit etc. Basically your scope is fixed, which means that the scale is fixed. PA promises to have more solid control options and to take place on almost an arbitrary scale (not completely true), where you can either have small skirmishes on tiny planets or an intergalactic war. Keeping this in mind, there should be room for both small robots and planet destroying weaponry. If you're in a game with twenty players and forty planets, why not have a planet destroyer?

Glad that my suggestion was met with positivity.
A system like the one I mentioned earlier would also help keep the game varied since defending certain points on the metal planet and keeping your enemy away from those points in The first place can act as an extra side objective (Main objective being eliminating the enemy commander).

My idea for how metal planet super weapons should work

• Primary Fire: KEW Cluster - creates 1 cluster of multiple small KEW weapons that act as a single entity, requires control center be built to use, requires multiple anti-nukes to block, has slightly shorter cooldown compared to the secondary fire obliteration laser
• Secondary Fire: Obliteration Laser - uses multiple teleporters to provide energy to main superlaser, must be in orbit to fire, has long cooldown cannot be blocked, completely destroys planet
• Tertiary Fire: Teleporter Beam - creates a beam that teleporters on the metal planets can use to teleport army to targeted planet with out having to create a separate teleporter on targeted planet, immune to nukes, can stay active until manually shut off or destroyed, is 2 way and can be used by enemy, can be blocked by teleporter jammers.

those are my ideas tell me what you think.

Well if u dont want ur enemy to build a Death Laser, crash a planet into his metalplanet. Its called Planetary Annihilation and u should annihilate planets, in more than one way.

Thanks to @martenus !


Just never been a fan. And in SWBF2, they had a cloak that even the AI could take full advantage of.

So you hate them because you suck at SWBF2?

No. I hate them because the AI ignores them, they stab you in the back, and then nuke the AI in the face while you watch.

Just thought of a funny thing. What if someone on a moon, built 3 halleys. Then someone in metal death star planet had his laser.

What would happen if u changed orbit of the moon just before the giant deathstar laser fired?

Many Bothans died to bring us this information.

Good.

The metal planet Death Star ability should have limitations

In standard gameplay it should useable only once or twice , and should a have a disable option In pre-game menu

We do not even know what it will do exactly, yet. No need to smother a baby in its sleep.

Uber is aware of the concept of "balance" so don't loose sleep yet