"The Tanks felt Slow so we Sped Them Up"

I just watched the latest livestream again -listening more carefully this time - and I am actually quite shocked.
The whole balance plan does indeed revolve around T2 being better at everything and when to move to T2.
Scathis actually referred to the Starcraft project lead and how brilliant he is at everything.

So in the end PA will be all about direct upgrades, build orders and timing pushes dictating everything.

This is not the game we want to play.

We? Played some PTE Stream games vs AI ... this is going to be the game I want to play.

Fixed.

And while I'm at it, I disagree with your presumptive assessment of the style of play.

I'm just going to dodge before I reach China. You can have my shovel

Though this forums appears to be the only part of the active community with anything constructive to say. Head over to the steam forums, every post is basically "WHY ISN'T IT EXACTLY LIKE TA?!? MAKE IT TA!!!!" or, "I HATE THE CARTOON GRAPHICS!!!". I even saw someone complaining that it was spherical/planet maps and not flat maps... I mean did they even research the game at all?

/rant

Well u dont really use a unit that u make 1 min ingame in a 20min ingame game, u still use it. but kinda like lings since everyone is soo inlove with apm and stress everywhere. u mix it with good units. they are still good. they tank shoots and they do damage ofc, soo ur other good units woulde not die as quick

on topic of the title, the tanks did feel slow, there was a thread too about it. Air fabbers I think maybe got slower but generally I think air need slower as well. You can't react to air atm, it might as well strike instantly unless the as unit is already there.

I am pretty sure I am not alone with this opinion.
So how do you think a game where T2 is so massively dominant is gonna play out? Do you think everybody will sit tight at T1 and try to play it out from there? It will always be a tech race.

Name me one RTS that isn't.

You can put Total Annihilation on that list. Yes, there are stronger units in t2, but due to there drawbacks and cost, you could happily win with your t1 army over someone who had t2 out.

Except that we're not aiming for a 1:1 port of TA, though . . . unless we are?

You got me though, I asked for one.

My point was more to illustrate that in general, with very few exceptions, higher tiers involve higher levels of power, and that this design can (and does) work for providing entertaining, skill-based gameplay.

I'm saying that neither of us are alone in our opinions, so it is presumptive to say "we" want this, when you can't possibly speak for everyone.

To be honest, I'm not particularly good at this game, so can't get into the detailed, or even amateur analysis of the pros and cons of having a tech race. All I know is, I quite like the style of gameplay where it is about knowing when to upgrade and when to not.
In any case, Uber have already discussed how they want people to aim for T2 as an upgrade to SOME of the units, but also want to keep T1 mostly relevant, and make it tactical in when you choose to do so. This is the sort of game I would like to play, as long as it is balanced/implemented correctly.
In fact, the experimental build tried to tackle this specifically, in attempting to make remaining in T1 for a longer time viable as opposed to someone rushing T2.

P.S I'm not even saying you are wrong in your opinion, I'm just implying that there are people who will enjoy the game style that is developing already, even if it doesn't change.

I don't get why people always argue that "we don't want a 1:1 port of TA".
Of course we don't want this, but we still can do it by the same principles and end up with a totally different game (you know - with planets and asteroids and stuff).
The thing is that lots of people (including myself) bought the game because they were told it would be different. I was super excited for Supreme Commander back in the day and when it came out I dropped it after 4 or 5 hours because of the stupid tiered system.

Stupid tiers are one thing though. Tiers in general, aren't.

I mean, in general, if it had absolutely no tiers, which some people ask time and time again to consider it that way, then here is how it would play out: Whoever has the most territory would win. This is actually boring. If you claim the planet down, and they have more than you, then pretty soon their bigger army will hit your littler army, you will have even less planet afterwards... if you have less area you delete commander 5 minutes into the game. There is possibly a really high skill level that might be able to bend that, but by then you are pretty good at capping about half the planet anyway.

With tiers, you have a risk-reward median. I hear a lot of complaint about that, but assuming t1 armies stay viable, it also opens up different kinds of army. Instead of t1 army vs t1 army, it can be t1 army or artillery or t2 ranged units or air or orbital or nukes...

Back in alpha is what everyone quotes. Early beta and alpha. Guess what? Your memory must be poor, people used catas to win, people used t1 armies to win, people used nukes to win, people used sxx to win, people used pelters to win and back then pelters were viable. T1 armies were VIABLE back then, but as memory serves there were upgrade t2 back then too.

T2 is terrible game design, ONLY IF that is the one single only way to play and still win. If t2 wins sometimes and t1 wins sometimes, that opens the most variety. It is honestly fine. The t2 units aren't extreme upgrades, and they definitely shouldn't be that, but they are fine as a form of power that is limited in numbers while t1 is a form of early strength that is given power only through numbers.

The only, ONLY arguement anyone ever uses against t2 is "no tech race, all it is is a tech race, first to tech wins...", it really shouldn't be a tech race or balance failed us, and t2 being what it is does not have to make the game a tech race, there are tons of games that have power in t2 and getting that t2 is not the main goal of the competitive game.

AMMENDUM: In PTE, I actually doubt one would use the t2 eco as fast as possible if they were maining t1. The reason is, they would have to make damn sure their reserve of standing t1 army is enough as is before they tech as when they do, they pretty much must shut down t1 production meanwhile, and then they can resume it about double what it was, but it will take them 2 minutes to finish t2 after starting it, 3 or more if they had to stall to do it, and then it takes them 6 minutes to have caught up to what they would have used would they have just left t2 out of their plan. Basically, t2 takes 6 minutes out of their t1 production, and that gives 6 minutes for someone not using t2 to overpower someone establishing t2. Even if 1 person never establishes t2, they would only lose if they never establish it over the course of a 25 minute game, and if they don't establish it OR score enough damage in attrition then they sort of lost anyway because that is more than enough time to push pelters on top of armies waiting outside enemy bases if you absolutely had to.

That was the problem with even early beta t2, you got that eco, in order to spam t1, and it was risk free and huge income boost. T2 in PTE is not risk-free, it isn't an instant boost to t1 production and is in fact a t1 production reduction until 6 minutes after establishment. If you were doing damage with t1 you would keep up the pressure without using t2 because you would forfeit all your aggression if you did. So t2 eco no longer unconditionally benefits t1 production like that.

Imo bots and tank should be fast. There is lots of other ways to make them different.

Tanks.
High top speed
Takes time to reach top speed.
Slower at turning.
High health armor.
Slower attack.

Bots.
fast but not as fast top speed as a tank.
mobility can turn at their max speed.
Reach max speed instantly.
Weaker
fast attack

Not to mention that when if there is actually coming mountains and high ground and deep canyons. well bots having arms and legs can actually scale such stuff, albeit at a slower pace. That would be like the huge different between bots, and would be fun and unique.

Its not fun having tanks moving at a snails pace, when infact tanks can and should be able to move pretty fast, they just need some time hitting their top speed.

Tanks vs Bots
I think mimicking the current differences between tanks and humans is a good start. (RMJ had a good list and I will start with them)

Tanks
High top speed
Takes time to reach top speed.
Slower at turning.
Takes less damage from Area attack weapons
Slower attack (rate).
Effected greatly by the environment. Slowed greatly by forests and rough terrain.

Bots.
Slower than tanks (but not as slow as real humans)
mobility can turn at their max speed.
Not effected by forests and minimally effected by rough terrain (some terrain should only be passable by Bots)
Reach max speed quickly.
Low hit points.
fast attack (rate)
Small hit box that reduces chances being hit by direct fire weapons.
Takes more damage from Area attack weapons (and fire)
Stealthed vs radar?

Edit: Missed RMJ's text detailing terrain before I posted, so it looks like we pretty much agree on most everything.

I used to like this, and the tank idea I still think should be what naval does.

I am fine with it now, and by now I mean with faster tanks. Technically it nerfs towers too. And walls, instead of 2-3 you need a few to prevent tanks from rushing through their fire range for acceptable losses to hit it from an open side.

It's called a strawman attack and it is best to ignore it.

TA has many good features which is the reason this game exists in the first place. Supcom changed a great many things about it, some good and some bad. So you look at each of the games to find out what worked and what didn't. Take the lessons learned from the past, use them to make the future better. The argument is really that simple.

TA did do many things right, and some of their work is practically invisible to the untrained eye. It is not until your TA-inspired duplicate keeps falling apart that you realize that TA overcame an enormous number of design challenges for this type of game. So learn from it. Get better from it. Some of their workings were incredibly graceful and solved a huge number of problems you didn't even know could exist. Some of their mistakes were very obvious and have to be fixed anew. That's just how it is.

TA had a great mix of T1 -> T2 direct upgrades and T1 -> T2 with similar but different roles. You had units like the Stumpy / Raider T1 tanks that had a direct upgrade in the form of the Bulldog / Reaper T2 tanks (though the T2 versions were slower, so they weren't better in all areas) and then you had stuff like Thud / Hammer T1 arty bots which were pretty different from the T2 Dominator which was a missile arty bot. Thud / Hammers could be counted on, due to their lower trajectory to acutally hit other mobile units (not perfect but not horrible either) Dominators fired a very high trajectory non tracking missile that was great against stationary targets, not so much against mobile units.

So... not a direct upgrade then.