Hey, Psst, Uber...

The UnitCannon was confirmed, then wasn't talked about and look what happened there; de-prioritised to the point at which it looks dicey as to whether it'll even be in for a 1.0 release. And that was a major feature and draw in the trailer; one of the top 5 reasons I even backed this project.

Actually (at least for units/ buildings) the poly counts are very similar, it's more about the general aesthetic of PA being blocky and simplistic. If you mean the general graphics, like lighting, then eeeh.. I really like what they've done so far, the newest updates for the lighting make the game look amazing in my opinion.

We will get there, man.

I agree it was a big hook in the video. Still I think it's easy to focus on the 'things we don't have' when actually the game as it is now is fun to play and looking good. We are getting more interaction between ground and orbital too (which was one of the main reasons *for* the unit cannon), so I personally can forgive Uber for not getting it out for 1.0. I think they owe it to everyone to get it sorted in some form or other though post release if not, and actually knowing Uber it would be a nice excuse for a major update and nice marketing push so in my opinion a win-win

YMMV

No it wasn't. The main reason for the unit cannon was to get large numbers of troops on the ground in such short-order that you could invade a planet without a single spec of infrastructure on said planet. That is currently not the case in any way.

win-win? Are you ******* kidding me? When you're labeling a key feature that was advertised during the initial funding drive, but dropped since it turned out it would take a little while to code and instead put in a completely different mechanic (teleporters) that are a short-cut, as an "excuse for a major update"... that's when you press my angry button.

Fix the thing that is broken and certainly don't come up with half-assed replacements that don't even fulfil the initial role and say that we don't even need the UC anymore.

It's also worth mentioning that there was a lot of other domino effects due to the lack of the UC that affected Orbital in particular, like the idea that you need an orbital fabber that can build a teleport on the Surface and the overall theme of Orbital being very "Air2.0" instead of something better for the Surface Gameplay.

I do strongly believe that PA is much worse off due to the decision to go ahead without the Unit Cannon.

Mike

I know.. I played on the 2nd day they were releasing alpha keys. When this was possible

Whoa! The main point I was trying (politely) to make was that there are plenty of very good things about PA.

I like the concept of the unit cannon- and in an ideal world they would have added it already. On the other hand I do think it's easy to underestimate quite how much work has gone into PA (it is a novel engine written from the ground up, there are plenty of companies who basically *only* make engines these days).

I really didn't mean to offend you, and my comment about the win-win was from the perspective that I'd rather we get it and that Uber get something out of it as well (as it is evidentially quite a complex thing to add or they'd have done it already!).

I mean look at the work they've done to support modding (that you're making very good use of I might add), most companies simply wouldn't have bothered.

Yes, and that's great but at the same time I'd rather not have to make a mod to play the game as it was intended you know?

Mike

We could have had it already, Jon's original estimate was a month of dev work... but it was reasoned that this was too much time for too little pay-off. It was de-prioritised and now there's probably next to no one working on it.

I agree with @KNight here, the game as a whole has suffered from its lack of inclusion.

Allowing someone to do something isn't " support ". It'd be more accurate to say that they're not actively hindering us... Uber has a long way to go before I'll believe that they are actually fostering and supporting an active modding scene rather than just letting us get on with it.

Uber have explicitly made decisions and modifications to the game to enable easy modding. The game is written with modding in mind- how is that not support?!

This is what I find frustrating. You guys are two of the most active members of the community and are pushing the engine and what's possible- which is something I applaud. So why then be *so* critical of Uber? The way you talk about it is as if they've ruined the game?!

I would be more sympathetic if this was a new revelation, however the unit cannon not being in 1.0 has been known for months. This isn't some sudden u-turn, yet they way it get's discussed you'd think Uber took everyone's money then vanished never to be heard from again.

I was a KS backer just like you guys, and I really think they've kept up their end of the bargain. I guess my perspective is different to yours- I run a small design company so I spend my life dealing with compromises on development projects. It's par for the course if your developing anything new, and that's another key point here- PA is very much a new thing. It isn't a game built entirely on existing tech.

Because they could be doing so much more for the community, yet they choose not to... and in some cases, actually lessen their involvement

We have not been given (what I would consider to be) an adequate explanation of why the UC was put on the back burner and why they have allowed this decision to cripple other areas of the game by doing so.

A time investment is all Uber need to commit to in order to make the UC work. They made this engine and that actually makes it EASIER than using pre-existing tech; there aren't hard-coded engine limitations other than the ones they create. There aren't any excuses as far as I can see... just a mistaken judgement on how integral the UC is when it comes to making a game like this.

Ok I can agree with you on the fact that they probably misjudged this one, still the UC is delayed rather than axed...

The entire gist of what I'm saying is they have done plenty of good things as well.

Also I'm curious, what should they be doing for the community that they aren't?

From what I've seen, they reply to support requests, we're getting udpates from people like Varrak with some nice technical details of they work they're doing. Meta has given up quite a bit of his free time to cast *community run* tournaments as well as the fact they're running a couple themselves. I guess from your previous comments they're not actively supporting modding at this point, although I'd question the wisdom of them doing so until the platform is more stable?

Exactly, we've known about the UC being pushed back for several months, but that decision happened a long time before that. And this is far from the only thing one might say we've been "bait-and-switched on" to boot.

I'm critical of Uber when they make mistakes, I think that's reasonable.

Mike

• Listen to concerns without saying "check your premise". Many of the community are not stupid and we can identify problems swiftly; it's not a knee-jerk reaction, it's logical thinking.
• Engage with the community with more than just shout-casting.
• Detail plans and immediately come to the community when those plans change with sound reasoning.
• Push modding support further with tools and documentation. The modding scene is still struggling with some very basic problems that could probably be easily solved with an official liaison.

Those would be my top 4 things that Uber could do, and should do, to improve.

It all depends on what your trying to do. Some areas will change a lot and some won't. For areas that won't change, we just need a little information. For example, currently nobody outside of Uber know how to get a complicated model from 3DS Max into the game. This issue can probably get solved with 10 minutes of an Uber employee's time. It the small little things like this that are holding back progress.

Yes, I'd love for a tutorial, even a fully fleshed out written explanation!

I wouldn't go that far, all that's needed are some settings to complete the process from 3DS Max to inside the game. Once we have that information, I am sure there are plenty of people who won't mind guiding a few people though it.

True, I actually remember them saying you needed a specific thing, no idea what it is by now however. :/

Didn't someone say the other day there is a method of getting files in and out of blender and PA... surely you could go 3DS-Max -> Blender -> PA as a stop gap?