Scale Megathread

Re: SCALE MEGATHREAD NEW POLL !!

probably not, french is my native language too (^^ remember me from the french community thread?) so I know for example that here you were meaning to say "language barrier" And I also know for what reason you put it in that order. he really is arguing reasonably to every one of your points and I can attest, he is answering them correctly even though the chance of your words being misunderstood were high.

maybe try to read trough you text and his replies again and you will see clearly that he understood?

this really is a goal? I can understand that goal as FA ( for example ) could hit 50,000 thanks to the unit cap mod (actually an unlimited number that varied according to the computer.). And on stock faf 12,000 (1000 unit cap, 12 players) was the most you could have. so a million sounds like something attainable today, especially with the kinda machines we can have nowadays. but I think even hitting 100,000 will be quite a challenge. But honestly the prospect of a million units in an RTS gives me side effects that I shall auto-censor.

Re: SCALE MEGATHREAD NEW POLL !!

The point was not about the strategic zoom which is obviously a really great, and really usefull feature.

The point is, if the range of units is extended too much compared to their size, we will end with a dot war. Since you need to see your units and the target at the same time, to properly manage your unit.

And if you extend the range of unit (keeping the same size unit), you will increase the DPS/m^2 (i hope you understand why because i m too lazy to explain it in english). This could lead to deadlier deathball. I m not sure it is a good idea. IMO T2 bot deathball are already too much deadly (best DPS/m^2).

About getting 1M or even 100 000 units under my control... i m not sure it will be interesting in term of gameplay. It seems exciting of course, but i don t see what this huge amount of units bring to the gameplay. I think 1000 units is already a big amount to manage in real time.
Don't turn the game into a total spam fest, this part of the game is already enough developped

Re: SCALE MEGATHREAD NEW POLL !!

:shock: :?: what is it about people mistaking a part of the game or an idea for a part of the game for THE game? tons of people are doing this on this forum, I'm serious.


it's not because there will be the possibility to have a millions of units that you should build a million units. if you are on a scale 1 1v1 map I guarentee it won't get there. You'll look for the type (or scale) of game that interests you.

as for the range it is also an assumption that range would increase. It wasn't mentioned in my op. I debated about it in earlyer posts where I said the same thing : that size shrinking isn't forcibly inclusive with range.

and I'll add this: if we do leave the range as is while shrinking the units. (which would make it seem bigger) the proportional difference in range even for the biggest scale change we suggested would be miniscule. it would not affect chance of hit or a tiny stat change would serve to fix it, what's more I also suggested in this argument along with Col Jessep (i think it was) that the speed be inscreased so as not to change gameplay at all. for an overall simply and exclusively cosmetic change.

Re: SCALE MEGATHREAD NEW POLL !!

I agree with this. I don't want the scale of the units to affect the gameplay much. The scale is more cosmetic. I mean, it just looks silly for a commander to be almost as tall as a plateau... I loved the sense of scale from the concept art, I don't understand why the units are SO MUCH bigger compared to the terrain in the real game. It just looks goofy.

So sure, keep or reduce their attack range, and scale down the units, or make the terrain bigger. Keep the gameplay and pacing as close as possible to what it is now. I get that the unit size was increased so that we could more easily see what is going on and it doesn't become an icon festival. But the fact that we play on spheres means that we can't zoom out as much as we could before anyway. I also didn't mind being zoomed out to icons most of the time in supcom/FA. It made me feel more like I was macro-commanding an army, than micro-commanding a squad.

Re: SCALE MEGATHREAD NEW POLL !!

The good thing about reducing unit scale aesthetically only is that tanks will do less scraping and rubbing up against eachother and more looking like they are actually moderately intelligent robotic war machines. You know, the kind that actually understand the word "spacing".

Re: SCALE MEGATHREAD NEW POLL !!

XD DERP DERP DERP

Re: SCALE MEGATHREAD NEW POLL !!

By the way I had to make up this story about increasing speed to help you guys along:

the truth is if you scale down a 3D model it does not change it's speed, that stat value is in another castle.

Re: SCALE MEGATHREAD NEW POLL !!

After a short time with PA I have to agree. I am a Super Fan boy of TA which was my first game and is still by far my favorite. The scale does seem slightly off to me. I am also not a huge fan of the almost cartoony graphics but that is in no way a problem or a deal breaker. I am completely about gameplay especially that of which made TA so good. (which I can feel in PA) this scale just needs a bit of work.

Thanks,

Sir Clint

Re: SCALE MEGATHREAD NEW POLL !!

Seriously can you people stop invoking StarCraft as religious people invoke satan/loki/cthulhu?

I mean, building strawmen is fine and setting them on fire with nukes is fun for all ages but it doesn't really help with discussing anything...


1. In the current game, a good sized engagement (some dozen to a hundred+ units) can be controlled through a zoom level that shows you all the glory while keeping a perfect overview of it.

2. In the current game, strategic zoom allows you to get quick overviews over tactical situations, the overall situation and for large scale commands.


Thus all kinds of zoom level are used but the zoom level where you not only get icons is useful to play in too without it being restricted to a zoom level which you only choose to see stuff explode, you can actually play with it. Nobody is arguing that you only play through the non-icon zoom level.

And finally, the game doesn't need to be changed for that. Thanks to its current scale its right now, at this moment in a place where you can play with a multitude of zoom levels and see the action while still retain control.

You do know that increasing the units footprint has the same effect? An units footprint is a deliberate choice and when they'd reduce an units size they'd also reduce its footprint.

Yes, but unit stats are chosen relative to an units size. You can't just change size without changing aoe (as if you make units smaller aoe automatically gets better). If you keep unit speed they automatically would be better at dodging shots. Etc. etc.

You can't just change scale without it having an effect on gameplay, it doesn't matter how much you wish it wouldn't.

Re: SCALE MEGATHREAD NEW POLL !!

You can't ?? :shock: is there a moral obligation here that i'm missing?

Re: SCALE MEGATHREAD NEW POLL !!

He means exactly what he said;

Which is true, AOE weapons in particular come to mind. You can fix it of course, but that doesn't mean it's not an effect of changing the scale.

Mike

Re: SCALE MEGATHREAD NEW POLL !!

Mike, I must disagree, tatsjub never implied that the scale of units should be changed without changes to other parameters like AOE.

The whole problem of unit scale is the feeling relative to buildings and mountains size.

You can well have reasonably small units with respect to mountains and some buildings,
and keep the balance almost perfectly where it sits by altering other parameters which only regard units.
Maybe unit range and fire arc would be little trickier, but in the end it's all design choice, and fire range is not particularly realistic right now (planet-wide artillery ?!)

Though, my own opinion is that I don't care about the scale, it won't get anywhere near realistic anyway since we're dealing with tiny planets compared to reality.

Besides, after watching PACIFIC RIM, I must admit I actually find Commanders TOO SMALL.

Re: SCALE MEGATHREAD NEW POLL !!

I never said that, I was just informing tatsujb on the full meaning of smallcpu's comment as he only quoted a portion of it.

Mike

Re: SCALE MEGATHREAD NEW POLL !!

Seriously, i never criticized starcraft, i just used it as it's the perfect example of another (and quite opposite) RTS style, much more focused on smaller and closer tactical micromanaged skirmishes than the larger macromanaged strategic battles of the TA/SupCom and obviously PA RTS game type.

What you actually want is a good graphical display of the battle, with units that can be identified and admired while fighting each other instead of just playing some wargame style "icon war".
It's interesting because that's pretty much exactly the same global objective a good proper scale pursue: depicting a consistant and pleasant game, graphically speaking.

A good scale, with units of a proper size, not completely oversized relative to their environment (mountains, trees, planet...) really help making the game feel more real.
It helps us imagine and feel the game.
That also help us wishing to play with it, because for me it's hard to wish playing with some childish cartoon oversized goofy game, exactly the same way it's annoying you to play a boring icon war.

What i cant' understand is why do you think PA couldn't achieve both as TA & SupCom already done this before: depicting a nice game with a proper scale without breaking anything on the gameplay.

Indeed if you watch TA & SupCom you realize their scale is pretty good related to the environment while the epic battles are still pleasant to the eye while completely integrated in the gameplay.
Why PA should be limited to have either fun close range battles or either be limited to an icon war?
Shrinking unitsize won't break anything seriously, that's an unfounded fear.

You said that "Nobody is arguing that you only play through the non-icon zoom level" but it sounds like you fear that PA will transform into a complete icon war if the units were of proper scale, which is equally senseless.

The difference is that PA happens on spherical planets, but there are solutions as already demonstrated, and reducing the unit's size is one of them.
I can't see how this would break anything, units won't suddenly have giant ranges that would make the game unplayable because of this, and even if that was the case, all is subject to modification and nothing is cast in stone.
About the ranges, some units are designed to fight at close range (peewees, tanks...) while others fight from long distance (battleships, artillery, berthas, etc.)
Like in TA, like in SupCom.

really well put, I don't think I could have put it better.

+1 to the above.

By the way I'd like to highlight that we are about to hit the 187 we hit with the last poll and this time I plan to leave the poll up untill we get at least double this amount of votes.

another example of what is wrong with scale currently : Nukes are flying above the planet atmosphere. Actually, arty are firing almost as the same height.

If they were flying inside it, they would fly just above the commander head.

Don't ICBMs do that anyway?

yeah but again not ALL of them do and it would look nicer if it had a smoother lower ark rather than a square path and realism VS awesome and artillery for certain doesn't do that.

Neutrino, has the process of shrinking the units started?

We have never stated we were going to shrink units. Merely that it was an option being considered.