A problem with asteroids

Me too. Anything more would be a ton of work and I bet @jables has a long list of items with a better use/cost ratio. Riight? What's in the pipeline after Asteroids?!


vvv To the poster below: vvv
In my opinion the game could do with a lot less back-seat game designers.

You like them why? Because they took work? We need something that adds up to the gameplay, adds something new. What we have is just fine, its "meh". It works, but, why if we could do something more?

So it's harder to make the explosion effect look good? "Kill all units on the planet" is something even a modded nuke probably can do, I am however not sure how much work it is to make some shockwave effect that goes around the whole planet. Though it's surprising to me that it seems to be considerable more expensive than setting up a "planet explodes" effect.

The problem here is that it's not unanimous. We are seeing a lot of people on the positive side as well. Which is why we are feeling fairly good with where it's currently at/going. On forums, the most vocal folks are those who dislike what's being talked on.. and we do listen, but in this instance it is down to we go with the direction we have currently, or we'd have to simply kill the asteroids completely. We've seen enough positive feedback to move forward with it after bug fixing. I am sorry for those who want it the other ways, but it's simply where we are in terms of available resources.

I can see asteroids current balance usefulness in select moments. We have all been in a game where you and an opponent each have a planet completely covered in nuke defense, orbital defense, and a billion units. In this situation asteroids would be a perfect game ender and everyone is probably happy it ends.

However, I would hate to see a game where there are no planets left and you have people jumping from one asteroid to the next. Or a game that people rush orbital just to get a head start on asteroids. I am afraid massive army battles will occur less often because of the asteroid balance (no reason to invade that metal planet it won't be there for long anyhow). That is not in the best interest for this game.

Where exactly are these people? The forums? Because in this thread there are only two of people who're pleased with the current direction and like a dozen who aren't.

Well, okay then, but do you at least have plans to give us reasons to place Halleys on planets or try to build the annihilaser when 40k metal cheap and expendable planet killers are respawning all the time or are we simply supposed to play without the asteroids? What's the point of asteroids at all if they're mutually exclusive in practice with other mechanics?

A tiebreaker wouldn't need to destroy a planet, having a very large impact would do just fine.

I feel like part where you say people are fine about this you just try to say its fine. Its not, Uber also wanted what we want now, but it is hard, and now there is no money to try again and again. Just say that there is no money to try anything else, dont say that SOME people are fine about it. If there is NO way to change it in ANY way, well, then damn, that a shame. We only ask if there is ANY way to add that gameplay. We dont want it to be super fancy.

Edit. I mean, cmon Jables, people that play this game and symilar (FAF) are people that are really into strategy. We know what we want, and what is good for us. We are fans that gave our money to play ultimate competetive massive strategy. We just want it to work good. Ask engineers what you can do rather fast with what you got, give us options, if there is no option at all, even long run one, just say it, dont say that SOME people are fine with what we got.

Feel like I must chip in. Yeah I like asteroids as is.
That being said, maybe a nuke (or similar) counter would be good.

as for the reason for two 'riods in a one planet system? Somewhere to watch the fireworks from...

Well there are some people who are fine about it, and we have in fact no statistics that tell us which group of people is larger. A few people in the forums are no measure for anything, if they were PA would be a money grab according to the steam forums
And I think jables quite clearly said that they do not have the resources. That's basically saying "no money".

As long as the maximum number of asteroids is an odd number I think that this can be avoided.

NOBODY CARES ABOUT THE CRATERS.

Oh god pls no, asteroids are definitely still fun and it would be a waste to cut them. But for now they're really just a different type of planet that doesn't bring any new mechanics besides a spawn delay.

calm down brah

Then what are you asking for exactly?

Calm the caps bro.

Now here's my concern:

In the kickstarter video it took 7 halleys to move an asteroid. Currently it takes only one, which looks dork as heck. Reduce halley cost and multiply the number required by something like 5 or 7?

I disagree with you. QED

@stuart98

I described in detail what I asked for on the last post of page 2. Take a look.

I think by now Ubers stance simply is "we've build something that looks way better than the old system, does add something that at least some people do agree on and that checks one of those pesky kickstarter promises, let's keep it at that the list of other things is long enough".
Just coming back to maybe change everything about asteroids again would cost money and it seems Uber has decided the next big (?) thing that is already being worked on for whenever the next patch comes is more important than reiterating asteroids.
Constantly revising decisions is something very expensive sadly.

I know all that. And we both know that there is no way to know what group is bigger right now, and any poll that was done in this topic was in favor of craters, and not ultimate smash.

Yeah, its pretty bad with money, but I just ask about doing anything in the long run, even making something from taking nukes and maxing range, and giving that for asteroid with custom effect. It could be cheap, but gimmicky.

Asteroids could stay as they are, we could do it another way, and balance around them. Change how planet smashing behaves, change balance, do something.

As long as we have 1 asteroid that could be avoided . An asteroid hitting another asteroid to end a game because there are no planets lefts, is that great gameplay? Maybe if its two ubers playing at a high level. Not for me though . Ill host some 1 planet matches instead. People who don't like asteroids don't need to play with them. People who do like them, well good for them.

I would like to thank uber for trying and keeping up with PA's issues/features.