Thoughts on bringing more Unit Flavour to PA

Maybe an upgrade system that is built into each factory so you have the basic T1 stuff and then you can upgrade that specific factory so it's tanks have emp shells and the spinners have the ability to bombard the ground with missiles within a certain range (this would have a cooldown(obviously))

You are very right that Knight is well-respected and people read what he has to say very closely. I also think your post was very well written. Your English keeps getting better!

I don't agree with the idea that PA is boring, but it is something I will think about.

Yeah I think you're pretty much right Knight, but I don't think increasing the single unit pool would make it interesting. I really believe that a single faction prevents this unit diversity and interaction.

As for progression I agree it doesn't feel that great right now. I don't know if "orbital" being a "third tier" really makes sense, at least in its current state. As unpopular as it is the three tech system is still my favorite approach to this so far, for both units and economy.

I definitely agree that the existing stuff is just amazingly boring. I've been thinking for some time about the fact that I dislike literally every single one of the units. Well, the commanders are ok. But I've realized eventually that this wasn't going to improve until the server gets released so modding can really get started. Unlike TA and SupCom, there is not one single unit that I think is just plain fun to play with. I haven't played PA in many weeks.

It seems inconsistent to me that a game based on some really over-the-top concepts like planet smashing on multiple orbiting battlefields would have such banal machines carrying it all out. It looks and feels wrong.

On the other hand, I'm not sure great unit design was ever something Uber was trying for - remember that big unit scale layout that they released shortly after the Kickstarter? Those placeholders are basically what we've got right now but now they're a little better looking.

Overall Uber have gradually had to become much more conservative in their design. Remember that 50+ page thread where neutrino asked for unit ideas? That was more than half a year ago and it doesn't seem that much ever came of it. Likewise quite a few of the other grander ambitions of PA have had to be shelved for (supposedly) post-release. I guess we'll see what happens after 1.0, but I think modding is realistically the only way forward now. For that reason I'm glad to see Uber polishing and fixing things so that we have a great platform to mod for. Without a good basic foundation, there's nothing to mod.

I just want to point out that they're going to be adding units later and are focusing on feature development for now.

Something to not neglect here is that if these units felt so good it's because at a given time only you had access to them. that's all races were for, splitting up the goods evenly and seeing how each player makes the best of what he's got.

This is true, hopefully all will come in time.
I...must...be...patient...but...want...all...now...argh!

I get what you are saying Knight. The game definitely needs more personality and more ways for a player to express his unique approach to the game. My goto example is Magic the Gathering. It is a card game with a simple premise. Get your opponent to 0 life before he gets you there. The beauty of Magic the Gathering is that players have many ways to approach that objective.

The following is an excerpt from this post https://forums.uberent.com/threads/pa-will-never-be-balanced.58794/page-5#post-916451.

The thread has a lot of good points. If you have not looked at it you probably should, if you are concerned about unit diversity.

"These different strategies are inherent to each color. Green is the big tank approach. Blue is about limiting the options of your opponent by stopping his plays. White is defensive and focuses on smaller units, and gradual expansion. Red is about just doing as much direct damage as possible. Black usually requires some sacrifice on the part of the player to get more power quickly. All five of the strategic approaches can be trumped by any of the other 4. It has no strict RPS mechanic.

To put the five colors of magic into PA terms.
At T1:
White = T1 units with cautious expansion
White is probably the most balanced approach. It has to incorporate defenses and expansion in a slow and steady growth.
Blue = Air harrass
Air is the weakest approach by far. with AA towers and AA ground units, combined with how fragile the aircraft are, blue cannot win.
Black = Really not present
Red = Artillery/turret creep
Currently Red is the most powerful at T1. It can seize control of large portions of map control and does not need to maintain a high economy to maintain it.
Green = All out ground assault
Green is almost as powerful as red but not quite. Green has a much larger appetite for economy and can be starved without too much creative thought.

At T1 nearly all of the strategies are viable for a win.

At T2:
White = Not an option
Blue = Air Attack
Blue can win at T2 but it is very expensive. And there is no victory for Blue if the enemy is off world.
Black = Not present
Red = Nukes, Satellite, Halleys, Artillery
All of the game enders are in Red at T2. The only counter at present is to get there first.
Green = T2 Ground assault
Green is the second most viable T2 approach. It even has some effectiveness if your opponent is off world via the use of teleporters. But we need to remember that teleporters cannot establish a presence without the support of interplanetary nukes or orbital fighter and anchor spam.

In an RTS some aspect of these 5 approaches to a game are traditionally encapsulated in the different races or factions. PA does not have different races that favor a certain players play style, and the unit variety does not provide equal support for all of the different play styles. We need all of the different approaches to the game to have equal viability. (This is what I mean when I say balance.) Only at that point will every player have the ability to win with their preferred play style."

On a final note, I feel that the T1 vs T2 economy issue has been mostly solved by the 64758-balance build. Once we get the personality and diversity into the game it will be pretty close to perfect. IMHO

Chess are actually pretty well designed in this regard (Through even this game has some problems in competitive scene).
Look at the Pawn: It's a unit with heavily limited movement pattern (only walks forward), attack pattern different from movement pattern (only attacks diagonally), charge ability (first step can be twice as long as following ones) and ability to transform into any other unit (when opposite edge of the board is reached). Imagine if Pawns were equal to the King in their behavior - that would be boring as hell.
Same goes for the Knight (chess piece) - without cunning movement pattern and ability to jump over other figures it would be bland and boring.
This is exactly what Knight (person) is talking about what PA is missing. Cleverly designed units that have their own feel and functional personalities. What if vehicle scout is camera artillery, bot scout can climb otherwise impassable terrain and air scout has reclaimer instead of gun? That would be a lot more interesting than three generic scouts. And this sort of thing should be present in many units thorough the game. Not all of them, of course, but many. Or at least some.

For me, the thing that's been keeping PA interesting is the challenge of smoothly operating multiple planets at the same time. When you've got an interplanetary economy, you're handling a huge amount of resources and managing a large number of things happening at the same time. Effective planning and prioritization remains an ongoing challenge.

This ties in somewhat with your desire for more specialized units: when I'm managing multiple planets, I will prefer to take options that don't demand large amounts of my attention, since giving this attention to a single task means other important areas get ignored, and resources get wasted. Thus, any special unit features must be features that make the unit more interesting without demanding micromanagement - otherwise, an interplanetary player will simply ignore them in favor of units that can do their job without babysitting.

This still allows for a lot of variety: hovertanks, concussive blasts, long-range fabrication, air or ground weapon-jamming fields, and many others I haven't thought of yet. Hopefully we'll see things like that in the release version.

Unfinished game is too basic, news at 11.

Unit diversity is among the easiest things to increase. Why would we be going wide when we haven't yet to finish some of the basic game systems.

It's ok, there's a sequel.

I would say that even units that are supposed to be different are not.
I would go even further and say that all units have the same role. Not enough difference to make any unit more useful in a particular situation.

Mobile Artilleries in PA have 60% more range than tanks.
Mobile Artilleries in FA have 250% to 450% more range than tanks.

it means, in FA, that you can avoid arty shot more easily, but also hammering base defenses more easily.
They truly are siege weapons, while the tanks are there to protect them.

In PA, the arty unit is just another tank shooting slightly differently.
I can't place some behind a mountain to hammer safely a base. (not that there is any real mountain to begin with in PA :-/)

Same, bots in FA are light armored and very fast. Bot in PA are just a different skin for the tank.

HP, range, speed, all the units are the same. All is very close-ranged, and I feel it's really strange for a game based on big scale.
Actually, if the units were soldiers with big swords, it wouldn't behave that differently.

I think this is based on the perception that PA is 'nearly done' (in terms of release 1.0 at any rate). I know nothings been officially announced and you're philosophy is and always has been 'when it's done'- however I think with the 'release date' coming up on Amazon briefly along with the understanding that funds aren't infinite people are worried the release is just around the corner, ergo meaning the units we have are pretty much representative of the release roster.

I personally don't think it would be a disaster if that was the case- the game plays well and the character of PA lies in the diversity of different commanders coupled with the the fact we're playing in whole solar systems. In an ideal world a few more additional units wouldn't be a bad idea if you've got the funds and man power to do so.

Units withstanding, I think some of the new showcased features (Fire!) are going to help add allot of the depth people miss from some of the PA's predecessors.

Agreed. I also think this ties with Neutrino's comment above, in that increasing the unit roster is something that is fairly easily done once the game is complete. And since they aren't happy with the basic features yet, I think I can wait.
As long as the game plays competently for now, I can wait for increased unit diversity.

And the graphics are unbeatable.

So, Minecraft released in it's beta with like 3 blocks and no living character entities.

But you had what you needed for basic use.

Generally, if PA is supposed to be a platform, it doesn't matter if PA vanilla is good or bad or simple or complex.

I assume it will be well enough, most games we complain about are but we play them extensively anyway, yet it will still be modded and played modded even if the original game is perfectly awesome.

So, if it is good, it will still be modded. If it is bad, it will still be played unmodded.

I never agree with the "abandonment complex" people are looming over PA if the "game design and balance doesn't go the way they want", but I do support the modding.

At the way the development and balance is going, hopefully we do have basic units so the basic game is "introductory" yet balanced yet simple and macro. It really can't come up short if it is meant to be a platform, and it can't go in the wrong direction either. I am not saying we are obligated to "do it right" like it can be done wrong. I am saying we create a loaded situation where it can't be correct, where it is in actuality a different form of loaded where it can't possibly go wrong.

BTW, this is also the only good reason why release would be nice eventually. I agree it should take the full course and not rush it. I just think the next stage of the game doesn't start until it can be played on one system or can have total conversions or tweaks. Speaking of, when do we get a blacklist or whitelist of units to use in-game in the lobby game? I wouldn't mind playing games with t2 mexes and pgens and factories barred so it is just a t1 war. I am the kind of guy who likes t2 from Red Alert One where you can only produce infantry (there were apparently 10 technology tiers)

Very good points here. The scale of PA is honestly a bit confusing to me; sometimes I feel like units and especially structures are so big that all combat has to be close range combat out of necessity, and a lack of cliffs / wide terrain features certainly doesn't help that IMO.
It may not be top priority right now, but it's definitely something that needs work at some point.

Also this. Anybody can copy the unit files in-game and adjust to create new unit diversity. And if you did, you wouldn't be a master programmer, you would be adept at computer literacy and that is a swell trait itself but it applies to a large mass of people.

That being said, what doubt is there that Uber couldn't copy their own files to make a ton of different units. It also isn't the heaviest part of balance. Some units might be strong when introduced. The hardest part of balance is making a "build path" balanced, or the things competitive players rush to get to play to win. If t2 rush is OP it takes more tweaking, if simple expansion is OP it takes tweaking, if any one factory or unit is OP it takes tweaking, but if the factories are all viable on a basic design level then adding things are much simpler to balance, takes 1 or 2 tries at most at adjustment.

Indeed, first big game features, then smaller game features and finally small details