I was just thinking about how uber has included 3 different variants of the commanders alt weapon (being the laser, uber cannon and missile launcher) and I came up with an idea for how these weapons could work. In my opinion it would be boring if all these weapons were exactly the same in function but different graphically. I just want to hear what you guys think of the following ideas. Uber Cannon: This weapon would remain in a similar state to what it is now. Basically one shot that has the same area of effect as it has now, but has a high damage output. Missile Launcher: would launch a spread of missiles that would each have a small area of effect and moderate damage, not as powerful as the uber cannon, but the multiple missiles would spread the damage over a larger area. Laser: (I have 2 ideas for this weapon) 1) The laser would have a high damage output but instead of causing aoe damage it would work similar to a beam weapon in FTL where you would draw a line and the laser would damage anything that is in the way of that line.(in this case you would draw a straight line from point A to point B) 2) My second idea is very similar to the first except the beam could be drawn in any shape but would be limited to a certain length as well. Let me know if you guys think this is a good idea. If you have your own ideas feel free to share them as I would like to hear what you have to say as well.
Ideas like this have been tossed around, in general people dislike it. Because things that make gameplay more interesting scare people, I guess.
I will honestly never understand people like that. If they want a simple featureless and bland game then they should go play their mobile games. For me variety is the lifeblood of a game. Without variety a game simply ceases to be interesting for me. I am hoping that in the end PA will end up being a game which is built upon variety and allowing the player to make certain choices which will prevent there being only one optimal playstyle. (If people want lack of choice and 99.99% balance then theres a rather bland game called starcraft "Yes I generally dont like the way starcraft works if you haven't worked it out by now") Simple features such as three differing commander weapons could potentially be one of the first steps to getting rid of the thing called optimal playstyle/build order. A bit of variety amongst the different players such as commander differences or a wide range of options (such as a larger unit/building roster eg solar energy, wind energy ala TA) is all thats needed to break up the monotony of the presence of an optimal playstyle. In the end I want variety so that not every player is limited to playing the game using only one strategy or method of playing the games. (Sorry I may have gone off topic a bit, have to vent a bit of rage every now and then.)
Uhm I must've misunderstood then because I though that that was what @neutrino's idea was in the first place.
Eh? I probably missed the post about it or forgot. Anyway I mainly wanted to list my ideas for how each of the weapon types should work.
I would like a giant minigun, well i say giant, as the commanders are much bigger than humans. But a minigun that would exceel at rapid fire. Good at hitting lots of targets, killing weaker enemies. Has spin up time. Not very accurate over long distance.
As soon as commanders get different weapons, I can no longer use the commander I want because I want it. I use the commander that has the best weapon because it has the best weapon. Kickstarter backers don't get three commanders, so having three different weapons negates the point of having the commanders. I'm nothing for giving kickstarter backers an unfair advantage (having 3 unique and good-looking commanders per tier, all with different weapons so you don't need to stick to one weapon because it's attached to your preferred commander), but it seems like a really good way to shove DLC down people's throats. Even if there were three default commanders, all with different weapons, that doesn't mean people would want to play them. Perhaps they like the look of the Osiris commander more, but don't want to give up the missiles of something else. That, or their favorite commander is given the worst cannon. There's no magic button that says "balance." No matter what you do, one gun is going to be better than the other. The uber cannon and the missile launcher have the same DPS? The missile launcher can take out a swarm of bots in one shot, while an uber cannon would need multiple. Considering how common bots are early-game, that lowers your chances of your uber cannon being useful. If you encountered tanks on an off chance, your missile launcher (the cannon designed to protect you against early game rushes) would be virtually useless, while the uber cannon would obliterate the tanks. The missile launcher and the laser beam have the same DPS? The missile launcher is still better for clearing bots, as stated before. However, unlike every other commander weapon in the game, the laser beam deals stupidly high damage to single targets, making it a weapon that'll give you the high edge when dueling with your commander. If the opponent doesn't have a laser, he's probably already lost, so there's no reason not to go commander dueling on a small world. If you change the damage to make it less effective against single targets, it'll become useless against multiple targets. It's a nightmare to balance, because the weapons are all so different. In a well-balanced game, like Planetside 2 (purely for reference), the weapons, vehicles, and classes are only balanced because they're bland when compared side-by-side. Sure, a VS scythe might have a cool AoE light assault cannon, but the NC have something that's slightly different; it just distributes damage differently. In Planetside 2, your faction choice is locked in for ~7 hours, so it's pretty hard to tell which weapons line up unless you spend time researching stats. In a game like PA, however, you can switch commanders in-between games, so it won't take long for everyone to switch over to one weapon. Perhaps everyone will use missile launchers to make early-game raids very nearly pointless, or they'll equip a laser before heading into systems with small worlds so they can rush to begin commander dueling. Honestly, I think that, as long as there's money involved, things in this area of the game should be kept the same. Variety can be found in units, structures, and the game's core gameplay mechanics, but not in a system designed for vanity. If somebody is beginning the game differently from another player, then they already have an advantage or disadvantage. There's no telling which, but the match isn't fair, and perfect balance is little more than a myth. For a mod or something, however, this could be possible. Just make note of the three factions that are used in most games. (Starcraft II has Terran, Protoss, and Zerg, Planetside 2 has the Terran Republic, New Conglomerate, and Vanu Sovereignty, etc.) It doesn't necessarily have to be in the style of humans, mechanical aliens, and biological aliens. The three themes there add fake diversity; gameplay-wise, there isn't much different between them, but they look different enough that you can be tricked into thinking they're different. Three is a very nice number to balance. With one, it's complete and total dominance. With two, it's essentially trying to even a scale; you can get it close to being perfect, but never perfect. With three, you can do it in the age-old style of rock/paper/scissors... with a small modification or two. Faction A beats faction B in more cases than faction B could beat faction A (This is an important distinction because it means that faction B can still compete against faction A, even if faction A is designed to beat faction B). Faction B beats faction C in more cases than faction C could beat faction B. Faction C beats faction A in more cases than faction A could beat faction C. See the pattern? Apply it to commander weapons and you have a great mod. There's no other faction-based influence anywhere else in the game, though, so it's probably best kept as a mod. You can also do it with four, but it usually ends up being too labor intensive. For something as small as a commander weapon, I can't imagine it being that tedious, but if you want to step it up to 5 or more, your factions will probably start to feel disconnected. That's because faction B, for example, only interacts with faction A and faction C; it must be perfectly balanced with faction D and faction E. If you put your mind to it, you could probably think of some balance system better suited to more factions, but 3 is definitely a good starting point.
I totaly agree with frank. I'm more interested by in-game upgrades, as Supreme Commander. In PA, there is only 1 "Faction". Everybody has the same units. That is pretty cool ; No balance problems between factions, just balance problems between all the units. I think PA is a good balanced game. ( Excluding T2 bots, I do not understand why they are weak when facing all the other T2 ) I think 9 or 12 differents upgrades should be good. With all of these upgrades you should be able to balance them, and don't using the same all games. ( I forget ; Create early-game and late-game upgrades must be considerated, with evidently differents costs. ) What do you think about this ?
@nicb1, I agree that having mechanical differences between the Commanders would be fun and interesting, like picking a Hero in Dota/League. While the Realm Community Rebalance Mod isn't going to stray too far from what Uber eventually implements, the Modpack that it will for the core for is very likely to include a vanity mod that will be a total Commander overhaul, giving each one a unique backstory, stats, weapons and non-transferable abilities. Hopefully it'll be enjoyable!
