Natural events that hamper your strategy

It's not simply that binary, it could provide net nothing. And if you know the likelihood and the potential extent of things happening there is strategy, do you try to make yourself robust to those events or try to finish the game before they happen? Are you geared to take advantage of the potential events or just press through?

A part of strategy is exploiting opportunities, regardless of source. I'm not suggesting a single game winning/ending random event either. I'm suggesting things like: rainstorm in 5min for 2min, aircraft are at 90% in some area. And things like that could potentially happen several times throughout the game in different places.

Maybe Natural disasters can make some things interesting. But whats better, Is the ability to turn off "Natural Events" in the game lobby before the game starts.

That way, if you want them, you can turn them on. If ya dont, turn them off.

Like in FA, You can change if you have Prebuilt Bases or not, as well as Fog of War in TA.

Problem solved.

It'd be better for all involved if this feature was never implemented.

Yes! Thank you sir =)

I agree that having a random hurricane sweeping around your base is bad to the point of game breaking. I don't think that sort of thing should be implimented but I do think it is an extreme example.

The way I would envision weather working is as modifiers that affect both sides equally on a planet by planet basis. Say for instance an ice planet plagued with blizzards reducing the speed and viability of aircraft on that world. It could be periodic or a constant effect so long as it wasnt giving one side an advantage.

There is already the strong possibility of terrain set conditions like no land craft on a water worlds and gas giants, weather could be a soft modifier on strategy. Again if it affected players equally it could add to the way players within a match approach different planets.

Well having proceedurally generated planets will introduce an element of randomness based on the terrain produced that players will have to factor into their strategy.

As for AI, It should be unpredictable to an extent and be able to change strategies on the fly if it is a good AI. If it isnt subsiquent games are going to get very boring very quickly.

I can think of a few games that had random effects, Ion storms in C&C Tiberian Sun and meteor showers in Total Annihilation - but they were not nessesarily carried out well I agree.

Yes, but only on a few of the planets that players don't start on. In other words the ability for the map generator to add dangerous planets with higher than average resources or other bonuses.

I could see a planet close to the sun that gets hit by solar flare interfering with radar or an ice planet that has blizzards 24/7 at the poles the cut visual range by 3/4 and slow air units. They don't have to be random event just predictable natural events.

There shouldn't be a problem if the player knows what their getting into when entering that area.

Agreed. The developer time could be spent better elsewhere.

To paraphrase what I have said in another thread:

I have seen this response being thrown at ideas a bit much lately. Uber are capable of deciding what is and is not worth spending time on in the development of a game. They have that with the rejection of space combat, despite many people requesting it initially (much less lately as most people now know it is officially out).

It isn't helpful to a discussion to dismiss an idea on the basis that Uber dont have time to do it with everything else they are working on. I would rather see an idea rejected or developed based on its own merits (or lack thereof).

I thought that having random natural events was a bad idea because it would destroy balance. I also thought that having planet wide weather effects was an idea that had promise and tried to expand on that.

Thinking that time would be spend better elsewhere is fine - but why do you think that?

I think it'd be better for everyone if this were never implemented because its a bad idea that will only make this game worse. Randomness like this, is bad. It limits strategic depth, by reducing the successful options available. I don't understand how people could think that having a reduced set of options, is somehow better.

And yes, what deadmg said is correct, uber spending time to make their game worse? That's the very definition of wasted time.

I agree. The idea of random weather events that hit people inconsistently is bad because it introduces a variable that could lose a player the game through no fault of their own.

I do however think that weather implemented in the way I have suggested could be good.

I find the assertion that reduced options and limitations is bad a little flawed. Limitations are everywhere; Water planets and gas giants limit the kind of units are able to be built, resources have been said to be more abundant on lava planets than others and the procedural generation of what planets are in a star system and what the layout would be on each of those planets means that the precise layout of each game is not a given factor for players to memorise.

This requires players to recognise the shifting nature of the game and adapt their strategy to suit the conditions on a planet by planet basis. If players were not presented with any kind of limitations at all then strategies would become more homogenous.

Whether or not the inclusion of weather in any form would add to this and is workable, well that is what this topic is here to discuss and what Uber will ultimately decide.

We absolutely do not need unforeseen random events. Announced ones might be interesting, but the costs could be better spent elsewhere.

Little gravity environment cause jets to fly more easily
Walking units to move more easily
Projectiles travel less distance.

Little atmosphere causes jets to not work as well ie. less maneuverable, or accelerate slower.
explosions less effective.

From

From

Extra features in my opinion, weather especially needs to be made into a game-play mechanic. Usable by the player.
e.g. acid raid, could create lakes of acid that can dissolve units.

Instead of making this core gameplay, how about including this for a special game mode or a community mod?

I dont think I've ever seen a post against a toggle switch for the feature at the game lobby.

I'm not against it.

I think map hazards are great. But they need to be localized so that you can predict, use and avoid them consistently. Say there's a volcano that erupts now and then. The event is sort of random but it's only the volcano area that is affected and you know the event falls within a certain frequency range. That is something predictable that only affects you if you choose to go into that area.