Don't fall into the pitfalls of SupCom

Er....
So you'll zoom out, and yet there will be no icons.
Then what's the point? Everything becomes indescernable specks moving across a landscape. You zoom that far out, all the prettyness in the world will mean nothing as you won't be able to see it. Might as well not have icons.

By minimum and maximum settings i presume you're talking about locking the strategic zoom into certain levels. Ok, I can't see anything intrinsically wrong with that as it's personal preference. Problem then becomes how you intend to be able to swap between planets?

That would be very handy. It definitely helps for the game to take away options from you if you're trying to play without them, rather than constantly manually trying to stop yourself from using them. I mean this in general.

"Everything becomes indescernable specks moving across a landscape"
So design the game so that doesn't happen in a normal match, ie by making the planet size/unit size ratio fairly small... as PA has already done, it seems to me. I'm not arguing for any change to the game since it seems fine already.

Swapping between planets, perhaps "excess" zoom out inputs snaps to the orbital map, or have a UI button or a hotkey to snap to that.

By "competitive", I mean "person who wants to win, and will do everything within the game's limits and allowances to achieve it to the best of his ability."

And as much as I would love to debate the point you're making... I honestly don't understand the point you're making =/

In TA you had the minimap which told you "something is there".
In SC, there is an option that allows you have to minimap if you so desire. Strategic zoom isn't a "must"... but I would be lying If i said i didn't find it preferable.

Maybe I'm getting this wrong, But are you basically saying you value the graphics, want to see them, yet don't want to be put at a disadvantage due to strategic zoom being available that others would use if it were there?
I'm not being condescending or anything (Or at least, trying not to be). I just don't actually know what stance you're taking at moment, and cant really comment with any degree of integrity until I do.

@sovietpride has more manners, decorum, common sense and intelligence than me.
He's better with words as well.
and if I met him in real life, I bet he looks better than me too.


I'll let you take it from here.

dont leave me...

You can zoom out ans see icons, that would turn it into a Strategic Zoom, not playable zoom where you move icons, you can zoom in and out of the planet to get a strategic view, more or less like an minimap but with capabilities of rotating and looking the battlefield, but i what i mean is that not everybody wants to play icon wars, someone said whats the point of making the game 3d if you playing on a 2d view, granted the map and the scope of the planets are 3d and more, but playing from god view its like playing a board game.

1. Because the game mechanics are still in 3D. Sphere = no map edges. Attack from any direction. We are on a planet! Interplanetary fights!
2. Because your monitor is 2D
3. Because your control interface is 2D

You are limited by your equipment.
Once I get a holotank and motion gestures, then yes, who want's icon and projection if they can have this?

My monitor is 3d ready, and i do play with forced 3d graphics and 3d glasses, SupCom looks amazing when playing in 3d, but thats just me and countles more like me, we do like the challange of real RTS and to be realistically immerse in the game.

you do know you're supposed to watch those videos in fullscreen, right? (preferably with a 1080p screen, yes that's a strong quality demand, but this game is all about high demands, if you look into it a bit. Technically speaking, so is PA.)

3d technology is a proven failure, it's a fad, and unless it has severe improvements, like for example not making people cringe and squint their eyes half the time, then it will continue to suck.

Plan for a 2d future stickmen.

wow that's harsh , I can't agree with anything you say there, especially since without it, the oculus rift would never have seen the light of day, and that thing does not have a darkening of the image because it doesn't need liquid crystal screens to split the image to each eye.
I've had one of a pair of nvidia 3-D glasses on at my friend's that he uses to play games and watch movies on his more than 1080P 120Hz plasma screen tv, and I gotta tell you it only made me want to own my own.

I know it depends on the person, and I may be lucky in that respect but I find they're just a question of adaptation.

being nearsighted, I have to use my accomodation muscles if I want to have a focused image while wearing lenses. ( a tad for glasses, but I don't even notice, that's how it works, if you want to stabilise view and stop loosing eyesight your ophthalmologist is going to prescribe you glasses a tiny bit under your exact needed correction to keep the eye muscles working, your body will look for any chance to slack off.)

3d becomes a problem when you try to see everything in 3d, a movie thats 3 hours long its enought for a day, a sport's game that lasts 2 hours it's good, a video game that lasts 3 to 4 hours it's long enough, you don't need to see your desktop in 3d or anything else that doesn't need 3d or that 3d doesn't inprove it... You would cringe and squint because you force your eyes to see what its not there not because of the technology but from forcing yoursef. I use 3d vision at least 2 or 3 times a week, for some movies and some games (sports and video combine time). The reason people say 3d is a failure, its because the technology is to far ahead from need same as 4k tv's, there is not enough content to support or needing it.

Trust me a good chunk of our global population literally can't watch 3d films, tv's, games. I know from personal experience, it simply uncomfortable. Like making lemonade, by squeezing them in your mouth and dribbling into a cup. But with your eyes instead.

More then 60% of the global population don't even know what 3d is, that doesn't mean the technology is bad or useless. Once agin 3d is far to advance for everyday people and hardware, but the ones that have it and have the hardware to run it, would disagree with you.

this is just like the 90$ deal, the real fad is saying 3-D is hard to bear with and hurts the eye/head. just like when we came out with 48fps blockbuster filmmaking, people were like it gives headaches compared to 29fps. WHAT? just WHAT?

3D isn't a fad. It's the next major step. The tech we have just hasn't worked very well yet.
Our eyes, our brain are built to perceive in 3D.
It's like we've been using black and white TVs.
Or listening to audio in mono.


Video games, a virtual world crafted in 3D is the perfect medium to truly explore 3D displays.

That is a tech issue. Those people live in a 3D world.
The are just more sensitive to a bad refresh rate.
Their eyes and brain just require a refresh rate closer to their real life intake.

It's like the problem of recording a TV.
You would see those refresh lines.
Except for them, that's what is happening.


3D is far from useless.

What was it called... Non-linear something. RUSE had it, where instead of icons, when you zoomed out, the unit models were actually scaled up and rendered larger. I think that would be a good alternative to strategic icons, but it would make PA the most cartooney sci-fi wargame in ever.

bwuahahaha. That would be playable, just a bit messy

I really liked the strategic zoom in RUSE, it was easy to keep track of units, if i recall correctly.