If you could change one thing about PA what would it be?

Discussion in 'Planetary Annihilation General Discussion' started by squishypon3, November 14, 2014.

  1. doud

    doud Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    568
    1) I would restrict orbital to the most basic units :
    - Orbital launcher to build and launch satellites / eggs. Both units being able to travel from one planet to another one
    => Basically, no orbital warfare. It brings useless complexity and does not help with battlefields visualization and understanding
    2) I would implement Unit Canon for massive surprise assaults in between planets or on the same planet
    3) I would implement large transport ships for massive surprise assaults (They would take off and travel in between planets or on the same planet)
    4) I would re-engineer procedural generation to produce awesome biomes with strategical impact on gameplay.
    sigmaul and planktum like this.
  2. elonshadow

    elonshadow Active Member

    Messages:
    322
    Likes Received:
    231
    Because someone has to say it:
    UC
    Maldor96 and stuart98 like this.
  3. m1dnightmoose

    m1dnightmoose Active Member

    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    114
    I want wild animals that wonder round on planets :p Crazy giant desert worm!!

    <3
    tunsel11 likes this.
  4. ace63

    ace63 Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,067
    Likes Received:
    826
    No that is wrong. The kickstarter trailer did not even show a single orbital unit and still had halleys and death from above (unit cannon). Orbital was a stretch goal and lived up to the expectations as much as naval and galactic war did - not at all.
    eroticburrito and planktum like this.
  5. Geers

    Geers Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,946
    Likes Received:
    6,820
    GIANT SAND WORMS.

    Honestly I'd change the art style. I always preferred the reality-focused SupCom type stuff.
    cmdandy, tatsujb and stuart98 like this.
  6. bluestrike01

    bluestrike01 Active Member

    Messages:
    258
    Likes Received:
    66
    Tough choice, I would go for adding a faction I think.
    tatsujb likes this.
  7. wpmarshall

    wpmarshall Planetary Moderator

    Messages:
    1,868
    Likes Received:
    2,989
    I might say change the original kickstarter; remove things like the unit cannon, somewhat difficult-to-deliver-on promises etc, indicate that it is more diff from TA than originally thought etc.

    This way I feel as though we'd have less forest-fires in the community and games media about what PA is and isn't, what it should have and shouldn't etc.

    (I might also suggest bumping the release date a smidge)

    These changes would have other knock-on effects as well, e.g. a greater chance for Human Resources etc.
    DalekDan and elodea like this.
  8. cdrkf

    cdrkf Post Master General

    Messages:
    5,721
    Likes Received:
    4,793
    Possibly, though they may have resulted in the pa kickstarter not succeeding in the first place. I think a part of the issue for hr was that uber were a bit too realistic about what they needed and what they could achieve with it.

    Unfortunately people expect a huge amount from kickstarter funded projects.
  9. GoodOak

    GoodOak Active Member

    Messages:
    323
    Likes Received:
    244
    I wonder if the sky high expectations for certain games is because of the initial funding goals. If you set your goal at $900k and say you can do all these features on this money, but in the end you get $2.2m, people are going to think that you're waaaay overfunded and this should be no problem to accomplish. Even if the reality is that 2.2m is a shoestring for this sort of project, backers don't know that because you said you could do it for 900k, and added stretch goals.
    cdrkf likes this.
  10. greysuit

    greysuit New Member

    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    9
    I would lower movement speed for T1 ground units, especially the dox, to the point where we get epic macro games again.
    planktum likes this.
  11. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
  12. mjshorty

    mjshorty Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    871
    Likes Received:
    470
    i would change BradNicholsons currently "offline" status, so we can have more of him and his incredible bot strategies
  13. thetrophysystem

    thetrophysystem Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,050
    Likes Received:
    2,874
    I might be okay with getting rid of orbital, if there was a teleporter, half the cost of a nuke, and could open an "exit" absolutely anywhere, and let out exactly 100 units when it does. Maybe, make teleporter jammers, expensive AS a nuke, and short range, but to keep enemies from tele-dropping your com or superweapons.

    Then, make the pelican t1 and only able to pick up basic fabbers and infernos with very weak health like so, but able to travel orbital.
  14. cdrkf

    cdrkf Post Master General

    Messages:
    5,721
    Likes Received:
    4,793
    The downside is though, that if your *not overly optimistic* then people don't back. The successful projects almost always promise a *huge amount* whether it's realistic or not. I think in the case of PA Uber planned to release it early access from the get go- and that the Kickstarter was in fact only the initial funding (though they stated it 'was enough')....

    They appear to be sticking to their word of continuing with development though. I think people just need to get used to how a KS backed game works.
  15. JWest

    JWest Active Member

    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    89
    This. All the likes on this.
    Remy561 likes this.
  16. elodea

    elodea Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,694
    Likes Received:
    3,040
    Agreed. Uber's business execution is often clumsy and naive, and it's probably been the biggest detraction so far. In addition to the HR timing, for example that early access boxed stunt really did them no favours either.

    I'm sure they did everything with good intentions, but good intentions does not always mean good perception if you channel it wrongly.

    *But it seems uber is alot more savvy now adays. Very conservative when it comes to announcing features before confirmed etc, and focusing on building PR back up with a communication effort.
  17. xfreezy

    xfreezy Member

    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    16
    dito.

    Orbital units and the current multi planet gameplay are the reasons why PA is no fun for me. They are sadly a mess and it will probably take a huge effort to fix their problems. On the other hand, removing them would be removing a major aspect of the game, so I know it won't happen. Well, then on to the hard way I guess^^
    Last edited: November 16, 2014
    stuart98 and tatsujb like this.
  18. Crembels

    Crembels Member

    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    90
    A massive, high definition art upgrade.

    More lights, textures, planet details etc etc. Basically a major aesthetic facelift.
    sigmaul, tatsujb, warrenkc and 2 others like this.
  19. Auraenn

    Auraenn Active Member

    Messages:
    128
    Likes Received:
    36
    I'd put in multiple asymmetric factions and a commander customization thingy.
    sigmaul, tatsujb and warrenkc like this.
  20. warrenkc

    warrenkc Active Member

    Messages:
    542
    Likes Received:
    191
    Put permanent stargates on each planet.

Share This Page