PSA: This is not TA or FA or SC2 or...

Then help fix it. Don't just keep yammering about how it's bad, come up with a change or permutation that is better.

Why not? nothing should be free of criticism, an idea is not good simply because it is new, and if it sucks it should be criticised. In addition this is rarely the only response that new ideas are subjected to, there is nearly always a valid criticism as well as comments discussing the ways it could be either improved, or replaced with another system.

This often includes, as is pointed out, a way that was used in the past which worked better. You cant argue not to have something simply because it has been done before. That is change for changes sake.

Like you I dont want "appeal to tradition" to be the sole arguments to have a concept in game, but I rarely see this. More often than an old idea is referenced because it worked really well, or only needs tweaking to be significantly better.

As others have said, new ideas have been favourably received when they are significantly better than the way that TA and Supcom/2 handled something. Ideas like area commands. The issue isn't that all new ideas are shot down due to tradition bias. What is happening is the vast majority of new ideas are either no good, or require significant discussion in order to hone them down into applicable good ideas.

I would prefer that we have less "NOPE" responses and at very least a referencing of an argument that the person agrees with if that person is not going to give a reason why they think that an idea is a bad one, but these kinds of responses are usually in the midst of discussion and is not an all pervasive issue as some are making out.

When your idea consists solely of this game isn't these other games it's a rather pointless debate, particularly seeing that this is a game very much in the style of those games.

This is a bad thread.

No.

Here's how this works. You think some change will benefit the game, I don't. I explain why I don't think it will work, if you still think it's worth salvaging then you need to come up with a solution to the flaws I have pointed out. If you can't, then give up on this bad idea. You complain about people 'yammering about how it's bad'. But if you actually have the core of a usable idea it is essential to figure out what's wrong with the first version of it in order to fix it. The problem is most of the ideas that you want to champion are utterly irredeemable.

The ideas that get donotwant.jpg are typically either horribly out of scope (FPS control? In a massive scale strategic RTS being built on an incredibly tight budget with the laser like focus on core gameplay that implies? How could you even begin to think that's in scope?) fundamentally incompatible with the philosophy of the older games ("Let's remove strategic zoom and inject extra micro into the game!") or actively counter productive - that is, they are proposed to address a perceived flaw with the earlier games (typically this 'flaw' is the sort of thing I described in my last post - "I want my favourite kind of gameplay to be the only sort that is actually possible") but would actually not have the intended effect at all ("Air sniping is bad mmm'kay? So let's give aircraft very limited fuel and ammo so they have massive burst damage but have to return to refuel/rearm!" Uh, seriously? Leaving aside the question of whether sniping is bad, do you not see how your suggestion pigeon holes aircraft into being the ideal sniping weapon and nothing else?)

None of these classes of ideas can be improved, they are fundamentally broken. They rely on premises that are false. All they can do is waste everyone's time going round in circles discussing them. So we explain to the best of our ability everything that's wrong with them and hope that people will take a step back, think about it for a minute, and accept that these ideas are wrong for PA.

This is wrong, and the hallmark of a closed mind looking to shut things down instead of foster discussion. Very few, if any, ideas are "fundamentally broken". Problem is, it's hard to work from a bad idea to a good one, and it's much easier to take potshots and say "put up or shut up" than contribute to a topic in a positive manner.

Who knows, maybe I'm shouting at a brick wall, I tend to do that a lot on forums. But it's worth the effort IMO. I still hold hope that shreds of humanity remain in the naysayers and I just want them to realize that all they do by spamming donotwant.jpg is suck any chance of most people even posting anything any more.

Haha ironic post from rcix. You're the very definition of a closed mind. You think just because you had an idea that it's got merit, despite pages of discussion proving otherwise.

Wow, I must have missed those threads, sounds like this thread has some posting history context that I've missed

Please don't resort to commenting on the character of people, it never ends well and it is better to comment on behaviour constructively than start talking about peoples humanity. Bundling people you disagree with into a group that is somehow less humane is not constructive or helpful, and by placing value on people who disagree with you rather than value in the opinion they hold and investigating why is hardly going to lead to a logical value judgement of said opinion.

I suppose i was imprecise. I mean to say that Erastos' type forgets that there are humans on the other end, and it's incredibly demoralizing to keep being told that your ideas are bad and no one wants to hear them. Especially when the ostensible premise of a given forum is to foster suggestion discussion.

Zordon following GIFT, it seems. Nothing to see here, moving on...

Ok, so rather than whining about how I never turn terrible ideas into good ones, how about you show us how it's done? How can FPS unit control ever be a useful proposal for PA? Bearing in mind what Neutrino said in that thread about how PA's limited budget offers absolutely no opportunity for 'fluff' type features that might be cute but soak up dev time without contributing to the core gameplay. I maintain this was a terrible suggestion because it is so out of scope for what Uber are attempting to achieve - it has no relation at all to core gameplay and even if they had the spare dev time to implement it would be of no actual use due to the scale of PA. Prove me wrong.

Harden up, dry your eyes, and man your console princess. Welcome to the internet, I'm so far from the harshest poster you're going to encounter it's kinda hysterical that you've gotten so worked up about me. You might not have noticed this, but I tear your ideas apart - you're the one who resorts to direct personal attacks because you don't like to subject your proposals to any kind of critical thought. Wanna know why people like me add 'your ideas are bad and you should feel bad' along side our explanation of why it won't work? Because you're making us do the analysis you should have done yourself before you posted! I don't post half-baked suggestions filled with logical flaws. I appreciate just how good TA and supcom are, and so before suggesting some significant change for PA I spend the time to be sure it's a really, really good idea. Something that's actually worthy of consideration. Something like Orders as First Class Game Entities. That was originally inspired by transport waypoints back when FA was new, it's been thoroughly polished in the years since. Furthermore it's a direct outgrowth of the sort of UI evolution we saw in TA and supcom so it fits both practically and philosophically with those games. Interestingly it appears to have been independently invented at least twice and our visions of it have converged on basically the same system, which furthers my conviction that it's damn solid and would actually enhance rather than detract from the game. I wish more people would show PA and Uber the same degree of respect, rather than the post-first-think-later attitude so many display.

I agree that it can be demoralising, and I have had a few of my ideas upon joining the forums be ignored or unfavourably received. Upon reflection and finding more information/discussion about PA I have found that some of these ideas were less than well formed, and I have adapted and learned and try not to make elementary mistakes in my posts/ideas, some of which I'll outline below.

The weighting of criticism to ideas is a result of it being far easier to criticise/find flaws with a concept than to come up with a concept. Someone may not feel comfortable coming up with an appropriate concept (or simply prefer an older solution) but they are able to see small or gaping flaws in another idea, and their voice and analysis of the flaws should be heard. Because of this it is to be expected that there is going to be more criticism than agreement, unless the idea is near flawless and thus appeals to most of the community, much like area commands where most of the discussion is about specific implementation rather than the core concept's validity.

The only issue then is the way that people frame their criticism. Whether they are making their through process transparent/showing their agreement with someone else thought process, in addition to the tone in which it is delivered. It should be remembered that there can be reasons why the tone of criticism can be so negative, generally on these forums it is because an idea has not been properly thought through, or because it is effectively a repost of an existing idea/thread/post. Of course there may be negativity that is not related to these justifications but this being the internet I dont think you are going to get away from the latter.

This is a more extreme example and I'd be willing to venture that it's one of the few broken ideas. However, I'm more than willing to try.

I think a cool feature would be a first person camera option for your units, so you could see what the war is like for your peon units. Not exactly important and a fluff feature, but it's an idea. Plus, it's much easier comparatively (basically turn off UI, create camera and slave to appropriate bone on unit model, ???, profit). You have to think laterally to change bad ideas into good ones sometimes.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA --

Sorry, you just reminded me a bit of this:

Rcix, what are you even doing? You managed to ignore the meat of Erastos's post entirely.

As for your attempt to make first person cameras for units relevant, it was a good try, but you can't get past the fact that there is no logical reason for it to be implemented in the first implementation of this game.

His meat is "man up, shut up, and take it" -- the entire topic is devoted to responding to that attitude already.

Congratulations, you've missed the point yet again. See that stuff about respecting PA and Uber and actually putting some thought into it when you propose a significant change to the way the previous games have worked? How I don't like having to tear apart bad ideas the OP should have recognised were fatally flawed, and that's why I give you a hard time when you post something terrible? That was the point. The other bit was me taking a brief aside to laugh at how worked up you've gotten about me, especially considering that you're the one resorting to personal insults while I'm just here to discuss your ideas.

And you accuse me of being a brick wall... At least I read what you actually say and address your points rather than constantly crying about how the mean internet people are picking on you. The victim act got old a while ago.

"worked up"

"constantly crying"

Neither apply. I'm asking for a little common courtesy and positive tones. That's all.

The moment Uber Entertainment referenced Total Annihilation and Supreme Commander as progenitors to their pet Kickstarter project- and indeed, there are currently eight instances of "Total Annihilation" plastered on the main webpage- they placed certain customer expectations on their product. These franchises produced a lot of good will over the years because they exceled at what they did. What people are looking for in a successor are the jobs those games fulfilled.

If Uber Entertainment doesn't want those expectations looming over their shoulders, they shouldn't've made references to any other game and instead pitched their project as a completely new, unrelated game. Good luck gaining the same level of press coverage as it has under the presumption of being a spiritual successor though, because it only got the attention it did due to people liking the prior games!

This entire thread is you crying about the mean internet people picking on you. But regardless, all you have to do is put some thought into it before you suggest abolishing a well loved feature or greatly changing the nature of the game. You will find well thought out suggestions receive exactly the reception you're asking for. Half-baked ideas that don't fit the game get donotwant.jpg and people explaining to you why your idea is so bad. If you read the early history of this subforum you'll find we had more patience with terrible ideas at the very start, but by now we're all heartily sick of the never ending torrent.

I just realised I haven't commented on your attempt at fixing the FPS control suggestion yet. It's about as good an attempt as could be made but there are two fundamental problems with it - firstly supcom had a free look camera which could give you a unit's-eye-view, so you're not actually suggesting something new any more. But more importantly, how did you decide how it needed to be changed (or in this case, gutted entirely) to create something that's not so utterly ludicrous? You read my brief analysis of what was wrong with the initial proposal! You can't improve any idea if you don't know what needs fixing. Tearing it apart is the very first step you need to take to create something better. Personally I don't think most of the ideas that get torn apart here are ever going to lead to something worth adding to PA, but if any of them do it will be because people have brought the flaws in the original concept to light.

Essentially you have two options, either stop taking criticism of your ideas so personally, or post better ideas. I'd much rather option two, but given your resolute refusal to even acknowledge my point on that one I'm really not holding my breath.

If you had more of

and less of

then I'd take you more seriously. All insults and arrogant preening does is make you look like an idiot.

Then do it in a way that shows this, don't just "DONOTWANT.jpg this is a bad idea and you're stupid for suggesting it". From what I read you're fairly mild and I'm not entirely why you're sticking up for people like jurgen, Zordon, and ACM.

Even though I don't care for this thread/argument, DoNotWant pics (or any reaction pics) are plain obnoxious.

Take your filthy memes to another forum erastos. They're not as funny as you think.

Theres a fair bit of sand in this thread.