Please modernise the combat mechanics

So far I am loving PA because it reminds me so much of TA (which I still play today)... however in the years since TA we have had more modern games like Starcraft (never a huge fan), Company of heroes/Dawn of War and others which introduced new ideas. Some of these new ideas don't fit with TA/PA, while I believe others are crucial to modernise the combat in PA.

When I play TA/PA, games generally boil down to: "Who has the biggest army and/or whose army can shoot the furthest".

Why don't we have some other, more interesting mechanics, like fast moving kbots that use close range (or melee) attacks and have a leap-style assault (auto activated as they close the gap to enemies) ala the Starcraft zealots (with the dash upgrade). If you don't want "melee" specially, then they could just have a close range flame thrower or something. Ground units in PA suffer from the same problem as TA, they are just too slow and outranged way too hard by plasma cannons. They could even be upgraded to automatically use their leap to dodge slow moving plasma projectives (so something like high powered lasers and walls... which their flame thrower is ineffective against) would be a good counter.

Why don't we have an"armor" stat for units. Company of heroes does this very nicely with their tanks. A light rifle/machine gun has no penetration so it cannot hurt a tank, whereas an anti-tank cannon has very high penetration, meaning it can punch holes in tanks but its low rate of fire and non existent AOE damage means it is very ineffective against scattered/lighter units.

So far in TA/PA we have 3 types of weapon, plasma, laser and rocket. They all basically do the same thing (damage), just with a different rate of fire and range.

Why can't we have a more modern combat design with some interesting counters that allow different strategies. What I am NOT talking about is a SC2 style system where I need to scout his units and build counter units (e.g. my roaches are weak vs his maraders !!! oh no I should now build zerglings or whatever!).

But when everything is just a HP pool, and the more guns/longer range guns you have = you win. Its going to get boring.

So far however, this game has great potential.

We have talked about armor types and such before, the general outlook as been that it provides more complexity but little depth and generally there are better wyas to go about it.

Keep in mind that things like the unit and weapon roster are still very very basic, even the balance isn't really something that hasn't been seriously considered/worked on yet, Jon has talked about hoping to have 4-6 units per factory by release and weapons and exactly how they function will play a big role of making things interesting.

Mike

I had a look around for the armour thread. Here it is: https://forums.uberent.com/threads/armor-systems.44744/ It's a pretty good read.

I would be all for more complex unit behaviours and the animations that come with them, though having such units is almost pointless if you have 500 of them. I'm sure Uber will design more specialist units that are as interesting to use as both you and I desire as we move towards release.

define modernise
all the examples you gave doesnt realy explain to me what modern combat in rts games is
it rather asks for putting different versions of stats into the game
that arent neccesarily transparent to the player

consider that the unitrooster is not done yet
there will come more units and counters later

Hi, I'm surprised you found this with ta. Having played it online for years, followed more recently by ta spring, I would argue the depth of play surpasses sc2 (which I also play) as it isn't a simple list of rock paper scissors counters.

For example, in ta a common tactic is to rush flash tanks early- now that often results in battles with similar groups of tanks however there are lots of Other counters- first option is mines- its easy enough to predict where the flashes will go as they are short range melee units in effect... Place the odd mine next to you metal extractors and boom, tight blob of flashes is gone. In similar fashion self dettonating a structure in their path can be perfect but requires precise timing. Spring ads other counters like the riot tank which breaks up blobs of units thanks to its impulse damage and t1 air emp drones which punish players who neglect to send air defence units in with the attack...

Where pa is concerned the unit roster is very basic at the moment so I'd expect things to improve a lot. If you haven't played it before I'd recommend trying out spring as that would give you a better idea of what to expect with more units available in pa.

Rob

What you're asking for isn't modernising, you're asking for a different game than the one PA is going to be.

I think it's because uber said the game is "Spiritual successor of TA" most of the basic game mechanics are from TA. I would personally wish the game mechanics were more newer and fresh. There could be more interesting ways to create new units than just changing health/speed/damage/accuracy/etc. Armor types could create interesting interactions that aren't possible without armor. There could be other things too, but if you try to be original and creative you will get exactly what Quitch just said.

Are you sure it's "the general outlook"?

I disagree. TA's unit mechanics feel far more fresh even now to me than PA does at the moment, but that's because PA is in development and yet to see any real polish on the units. The total unit count isn't anywhere near finished yet, and I can only imagine getting even more units post release.

As for the general outlook on armour systems, this thread is about as general as it gets: https://forums.uberent.com/threads/armor-systems.44744/ Feel free to judge the general outlook from there.

It would be very cool to have some kind of unit building in, a bit like Warzone 2100 maybe. Wont happen though.
Maybe another game/mod picks that idea up, PA will have a static unitset -hopefully much bigger than current- that can be expanded by mods.

Maybe armortypes will be modded in, but the stock game wont ever have them.

TA had one major armor type. Air units took roughly 2.5x more damage from all anti air weapons. But for the most part, physics IS the armor system. Fast things can evade the fire from slower things.

Given the threads we've had on this topic on the thread that's been linked to already shows that it is in general terms.

Mike

But we have a like fast bot that use close range... he name is Dox.

Hi,

What I mean by "modernise", is making use of ideas, concepts and things that have been used in other, newer RTS games.

(this example talks about shields which I think have been discounted but I'm just using it for illustrative purposes).

So a example of this might be:
- Unit X has shields that regenerate over time and absorb damage
- Enemy unit Y has a slow AOE attack that stuns units with shields, or a weapon that does extra damage to shields (like lasers).
- Enemy unit Z has a high rate of fire attack that is deflected by shields but very effective against units once their shield dropped.


So in the example above it would be an effective strat to mix Unit Y an Z to beat X.


As it is right now I basically just build the units with the most HP for cost and try to get the longest range stuff that I can. Also spam air because its the only thing that can cover space and hit strategic objects quickly.

Dont get me wrong I only want whats best for PA. Thats why I said I dont want this to become SC2. I am not trying to make PA another type of RTS... I just want something a little more interesting than what we have currently.

Good day!

Love it, Love it and Love it, I really hope they implement it.

This is the best post I have read on how to make the battles much more interesting without ruining the game, need mayor change or turn it into something else. Cheers!

Well as i and others said unit balance has yet to be done
The unitrooster is missing units so its clearly not done as well
All things of patience
Currently the biggest nut to crack is orbital as that needs to synergise
With surfacebattles mid to lategame

My question is what battle ever in history, didn't rely on numbers and range of fire?????

Fixed*

Thank you for illustrating my point beautifully.

The battle of Agincourt relied on superior morale and muddy terrain. The French outnumbered the English in both numbers and power (the French had heavy calvary!) But we're demoralized and fleed the battle after getting stuck in tthe mud as they tried to swarm the English king. Total War RTS uses this morale/flee mechanic to model human behaviour.

EDIT: I forgot to add. Company of heroes 2 has snow and ice mechanic based on weather where water freezes to become ice and snow impedes movement and leaves tracks.

The battle of D Day relied on surgical parachute strikes behind enemy lines to cut off supply before a beach invasion. The allies relied on superior scouting and surprise to offset he nazis greater ranged naval batteries nd mgs etc.

You see my point hopefully. More options equals more fun, not less.

And bows. Lots of bows.

Wow this is crazy.
Normally when someone argues with realism, it goes like "realism means nothing for the game".

And then, I dont know how, realism seems to be of utmost importance sometimes.

Ill never get it.