Catalysts should burn up after one use

And I don't (as I previously said). Doesn't mean that I shouldn't talk about trying to improve and better balance PA.

I just think the Catalyst need to be a little more expensive and slower to build.

True, but all I'm saying is there's a pretty easy bandaid solution if your that unhappy with it.

Bandaid fixes are never satisfactory fixes.

Better than bleeding out and dying of blood loss.

Why not make cooldown an option (like number of Haley's). Seems like this would easily address both groups of players. Mandating a endgame scenario that many (including me) see as overpowered and tending to force gameplay into a single direction, just doesn't feel like the best option.

Just my 2 cents.

I think this analogy is working less and less...

I saw a game with color's orange and blue.. I think it was a PAX game. Blue shot like 6 simultaneous nukes.. and had lots of build power. They took out the anti-nukes and if had another 5 minutes would have destroyed the catalysts. Damn that game was exciting to watch. If the Annihilazer had a cool-down I would have said the game would go to Blue.. but since Orange could take two shots, the game was over then they destroyed the two planets that Orange was on. It was a real nail-biter of a game.. and an ending that I wish would have gone another five minutes to see if Blue could have stabbed Orange in death.. (Think Wrath of Khan)

For now it's feels like Catalyst it's real weapon that was designed to shot more than once and I would seriously upset if it's blow up with no reason. So personally I'm would rather to see more risks added for player who using Catalyst that discussed in previous topic about Catalyst destruction in shooting process.

PS: And yeah sudden Catalyst destruction would be seriously against "What You See Is What You Get". From my point of view once-time weapon should be for example rocket while massive object can't just blow up with no reason.

If you don't want to get annihilasered, I'd suggest playing in systems without metal planets.

Or we good play in a game with you. Since you'll just miss .

Not if Zaphod's around to take my mouse.

You must not have read my posts since I said I don't play with them, but it doesn't mean I can't try and discuss ways to improve the game.

as seen in the games you had at pax, it's more interesting if the fight continues beyond having constructed them.

what about week-long games? why have the game end abruptly, like END ......ENTIRELY ...seems kinda off, no?

one "map" out of the system is already enough, if it's the one that counts it ends the game either way.

why does this already OP weapon need any supplementary help for being even more OP?

Question- what does giving the laser a cool down actually accomplish?

They already successfully defended the planet WHILE they where building them, with the full strength of their enemies.

After they fire, they now have additional build power to defend with that is no longer consumed by constructing the catalysts themselves, AND their enemy is now missing a planet.

It's even easier for them to defend the metal planet.

Adding a cool down will, I think, only prolong the inevitable.

Still, contemplating the effects of the laser can only go so far. Let's get some real evidence in here where having a cool down would have meaningfully changed the outcome of the game, like that game at PAX. If there are lots of those turning up, then yea, maybe it needs a cool down.

It gives the remaining forces a chance to come back. I have played many matches where an army just barely is able to get it built and then takes out the solar system. A planet exploding could change the entire game dynamic (especially in games with more than two players where one player is taken out by the laser).

It forces the army having it to defend it for more than a minimal amount of time, and increases the chances that a halley could be used to take it out... thus making it a part of a larger strategy... and not the endgame that it is now.

Basically it makes the game more than just about controlling the laser and foregoing everything else.

For me, personally, the base race towards the laser lacks the deeper strategy that was in the game up to this point. I know I can just play without metal planets... but with a simple optional tweak (for those of us that want it) it could be a really cool component that is part of a larger strategy.

So far the developers seem pretty set on having it just act a automatic endgame... which is their prerogative, but I do wish they could consider the opinions that others might have.

I disagree with this. In a free for all, the presence basically turns the game into a king of the hill, which is totally fine.

Aside from that, the longer a game goes, the closer it approaches the boredom zone. Metal planets as a game-ender ensure that in most cases, matches will only go until one player is dominant enough to get the laser up. Faster game turnover means that people can get back into new games faster, and the effective availability of games increases because people are coming out of games and opening new lobbies more often, rather than being locked into a match for hours. If friends are playing together in a ffa, then whoever the first person eliminated is, they have to wait till match end before they can jump back in with their friends. The metal planet as a Game-ender can, in most cases, effectively limit the time a match takes to complete.

Tl;dr: Metal planets add a king of the hill dynamic, if you don't like that dymanic, don't use it in your system, you still have plenty of annihilation options available without them. But don't cry about getting stuck in a 3 hour stalemate orbital game because you took out all the game enders.

Asteroid Belts.

Problem solved.

I like it how it is personally. You know its being built. You have time to prepare. You are also preparing without having to dedicate resources to defend/build the catalyst. The other player(s) can dedicate their resources on a myriad of other things that could end the game before all of those are built. Remember....the catalyst are the longest thing to build in this game. During that time they are doing nothing for the player while whatever you build in the meantime can actually have an impact on the game.

It's super fun in my opinion no changes needed...and I like how it prevents super long games usually.

The problem I have is- as it is- it's really easy to focus all your efforts onto one planet to turtle to hell and back. This was incredibly annoying, but they traded offensive power for defensive power. Nobody could easily invade them, but with such a large investment in defenses, armies were bound to be a bit lacking. Throw in the fact that planet smashes are out of the question (for the defender- why waste a good planet?) and the difficulty with establishing bulkheads on other planets (Seriously, we ******* need unit cannons for glorious battles- not these pansy nukes and halleys) and you have a planet that requires you to throw a planet at it. In smaller systems, good luck with that. Mind you, in smaller systems, if you let someone super turtle up, then you have other things to worry about.

I thought that the annhilaser would fix this. It didn't. It made the problem worse. Now, obviously everyone's going to go for the metal planet, because it's a giant, *******, red button with the words- in neon green and bold- I WIN.

Now, I like the idea of having one planet which everyone fights over. It would theoretically reduce turtling and all that jazz. Unfortunately, one can turtle on the metal planet, same as they did before, with one big difference.

They have the ultimate in offensive power. The Annhilaser is completely and utterly broken to all ****. Now, I can believe in a game ender- an anti turtle. But the annihilaser having a 15 second cooldown? What? I thought that was just a lack of balancing- merely only a basic test of the mechanics. But that's INTENTIONAL?

Sorry, but at least have a basic cooldown. Or something else. Perhaps it's a side effect of the inability to invade planets- (UNIT CANNONS) or simply that the annhilaser is a better halley in almost all situations.

And Brian. Asteroid belts are nice and all- but I want to pose a question- if we have asteroid fields- how will that work? are there an infinite amount of them? What's the halley count? Because if it's one, and we have an infinite amount of them, then we have an Annhilaser 2- Halletic boogaloo.

I think the a solution to this problem- and really, something that should already be in the game- a better way of invading planets. I suggest the unit cannon.


Addendum- A little piece of advice, Brad. Saying that something is balanced just because you can opt to not play with it doesn't really advance your cause. It suggests that there was a reason that you made the ability to play without them available, and most people (especially in a thread about this) will assume that's because they're unbelievably overpowered.