Uber, Please can we talk about the Energy System?

Hi Uber,

This isn't going to be a rant
I want to invite you guys to discuss the Energy System in Planetary Annihilation.

I know some of you may have seen my latest (and most thought out/least rambunctious) Poll on whether players would be interested in seeing greater diversity within the Energy System building roster.
That thread also attempts to envisage what this could look like numbers/mechanics wise. On the whole people are in favour (about 80%), and the thread has been constructive in discussing issues and potential solutions, if such a system were to be implemented in PA.

Having said this is not going to be a rant, I shall now do my best to convey my opinion in a clinical manner


We have one faction.
The ethos behind this was to be able to have a diverse roster which added character and created greater depth. Yet we have an Energy System that seems inspired by a multi-faction game - Supreme Commander. This model is clear right down to the fact that we can reclaim Trees not for Energy (as in TA), but for Metal (in SupCom we had Mass so this made sense).

So my question is:
Why is Uber choosing Supreme Commander's Energy System as its primary source of inspiration?
This is Planetary Annihilation - Total Annihilation's spiritual successor.
Total Annihilation's Energy System had a wider roster - would its system not be a more interesting jumping off point?

I recognise the game has to be fun, and not turn into an eco-simulation.
Yet Total Annihilation fulfilled this with an Energy System that had character and interacted with combat.

The system proposed in that Poll I linked attempts to work with current Energy numbers.
At a T1 level things are much the same. Low yield energy would remain easily obtainable.
It's when you want large quantities that things would start to heat up - we would need to fight over Geothermal Spots, space for volatile Nuclear Generators, or (ultimately) Gas Giant Energy as the ultimate risk-free energy source.

Following in Total Annihilation's footsteps would encourage a more combat-orientated energy system that rewarded raiding (Solar Plants bunkering), securing territory (Geothermal spots) and strategic decision making (should I really put those volatile Nuclear Reactors next to each other? ). All of this would work with combat, rather than (as some have said) taking our attention away from the fight.
That and opportunities for awesome robotic buildings and explosions, of course .

Models could be re-used. The current T1/T2 Energy Generators could be tweaked to be higher-yield volatile Nuclear Reactors while the other sources are gradually introduced.

Overall I'm confused as to why Uber are reluctant to follow Total Annihilation in this - it's not like it hasn't been done well before.
Do you feel that Total Annihilation's Energy System is not a part of its spirit?
Is it the extra work to code, balance and design?
Is it because of the unique challenges PA poses?
Do you guys not think it'd be fun?


That is all.
I hope I didn't come off too rude - I really enjoy PA, I just want to see it become a 'Next Generation RTS' whilst retaining the fun things from the past in the genre.

A fan,
eroticburrito.

P.S.: Sorry for being a pain in the *** again.

It is a round planet, it really does sound difficult to code. In TA, every tile was PAINTED with an EFFECT. Has metal, doesn't has metal. Has daylight, doesn't has daylight. Daylight didn't move. Has wind, doesn't has wind. I know I am gramatically trolling you. Still. Has tidal, doesn't has tidal lol. Has geothermal, doesn't has geothermal. You has any clue what I am saying?

If coded in PA, it isn't "a land area has this property" most the time. It is "can that land detect line of sight from the sun" or something. It gets really complicated. Then, it goes further to complicate gameplay. I could see the reasonable complaint as, this pushes game dev to 2015. Which isn't a problem for me. Except I could live with it being an optional gameplay thing added at a later date.

Absolutely - I has a general idea of what you are getting at. I understand if this is the case.

I'm also happy with waiting for future options or mods. This topic has been kicking about on the Forums for a while and wanted to invite Uber to lay it to rest. I'm trying to keep the tone polite I don't want the guys at Uber to feel like I'm having a go, though they probably will anyway as I'm being that guy.

Heh, I would love for Neutrino to post here saying exactly what I said, trust me. I think he is one of those devs that made the tile function stuff back in TA, so arguing TA with him is his expertise I am sure he would except devs always see everything but never always respond to every single little thing.

I wonder if Notch or Jeb were ever asked way too much to ask every single detail question for their game ever, or if they actually did answer every little question addressing them ever?

It sounds valid enough to me!
Every single little thing. Heh.

Have you ever been to a press conference? Someone can ask a question 5 times, they can answser 4 other people's questions. You can feel you asked yours more, so you start asking louder. You can't feel entirely ignored. It just isn't an addressable question.

I accept that if that's the case.
In which case it'd be awesome if somebody from Uber popped in and simply replied "No." to the Thread name.
I'd have a good chuckle and go and do something more productive... like put the kettle on!

Trust me, getting actual answers from Uber, rather than plications, is like pulling teeth.

As far as I can remember, when posed the question about differentiated energy types the answer was "Mods". I'm going to take a wild guess as say that, due to their marketing direction that seems to prioritising accessibility to reach the broadest possible audience, Energy Diversification would be considered too hard for the average player.

I guess this energy system is just low priority stuff if it is planned at all. First get the main game good, then add tiny extra's

I don't think people realise what they're asking tbh. They just go "hey more shiny units! must be good right?".

What would be the point of multiple energy systems? You'd only be making maps even more of a nightmare to balance. Either something is worth the metal to build or it is not.

This was also a problem in TA where wind was almost always redundant because the planet had no wind or not enough. You didn't even have ANY feedback about whether a planet could support wind or not. All you ever really did was build solar and spam out geothermals.

PA's energy system is good because it simplifies this mess, as it does alot of the other unit variety mess in TA. It takes away a false choice, one that was never actually meaningful, and increases player accessibility. "Oh you had to defend your geothermal", well guess what, you have to defend your pgens and mex too.

I just want better power gen models then the vague power generator thing we have now.

No balance changes attached.

I'd be fine with that, it would be a little nice to have geothermal maybe, as it's basically the same idea as a metal spot only for energy. (It could give more, though of less abundance and something players could fight over for expansion, economy.)

Basically what the gas giant will be in terms of game play, only on a smaller scale.

Is diversity of energy structures terribly important? ...not really. Even in TA the variety of energy boiled down to a very simple rule set- build the best quality one you can.

The actual important part of energy is making sure it works well as a resource. In TA this was pretty true. Energy was a solid resource that was easy to understand but not quite valuable as a target. In PA there were a multitude of issues and glitches that made energy more difficult to manage without adding much depth. In PA... well. The team picked a direction (under some really weird assumptions) and they got what they got.

Solar power that depends on a day/night cycle will mean one player almost always has the advantage in the first few minutes. Instead, why not have solar wind collectors that decrease in effectiveness as the planet's distance from the sun increases. You can still get cycles with elliptical orbits but it will be on a per-planet basis. You will add strategic value to controlling planets closer to the sun, too.

I miss volatile energy.

Total Annihilation also had pre-built maps.

PA has randomized maps. We already have issues with spawn equality due to metal spots, and now you want to introduce further spawn in-equality through energy?

Just because something worked in TA doesn't mean it will work in PA.

I've read through that thread a lot. While a lot of people want a more diverse energy system, I didn't see one suggestion that implemented it well.

Also, the poll isn't completely accurate as people who voted yes could simply have wanted another power plant, and not wanted the complicated energy system based on terrain.

I reccomend you have a read of that thread I linked to in my OP
I agree with you on the shortcomings of TA's system.
However I still (to this day) find it more fun and interactive to play with than SupCom's. No offence intended, Uber - both systems work well, it's just I felt TA's was more fun than SupComs.

I am not suggesting that Uber replicate the flaws of TA's system in PA - most of these diverse energy sources would be more clearly distinguished and fit niche roles.
For example, Solar Energy would suit somebody looking for daylight booms to tank their Economy. That means mass-assisting and teching up to a more constant, high-yield power source (Nuclear). Or they might choose to push out an army quickly to try and secure a Geothermal Spot. As it is tied to daylight, spamming only Solar Energy would be a bad idea - so you have lower-yield Wind and Tidal on backup to keep things ticking over.
Can you see how this diversification leads to these new strategies and tactics, and suits PA?

How does one spam Geothermals? They are tied to map control.
I do not believe a diverse energy system is a mess, or necessarily more difficult to learn if it keeps a WYSIWYG mentality so that what's going on in-game is immediately clear.

Thank you for reading Brian

First off, if we want completely balanced maps then there will be mirrored hemispheres.

Second, in that thread it was suggested that each spawn have one Geothermal spot (with more placed around the planet). This would give everybody an equal boost early game.

"Something something something dark side."
I agree. TA and PA are different games. But I could equally say:
'Just because something worked in SupCom doesn't mean it will work in PA.'
Obviously it would make less sense because PA isn't a spiritual successor to SupCom
Why would this in particular not work in PA?

If you follow me down the rabbit-poll then you'll see the various stages of this discussion.
It began back with the Environmental Effects poll (1, 2), then I asked the community a more direct question on whether they would like to see a more Diverse Energy System.
Then I made a proposition on what such a system could look like, and asked whether people liked the sound of that proposition. They did.
It's on the back of the thread in my OP that I'm opening this thread.

Lastly, while this system may be more complicated, it would not be difficult to understand.
Nuclear explodes, fast clouds means more wind, moons pull the tides, solar needs sunlight. This is only very loosely tied to the Terrain (save Geothermal, but my first two points deal with that).

Just because it's easy to understand, doesn't mean it's not complicated in implementation.

A huge meta game will spring up revolving entirely around energy. And I don't like that. The game should revolve around combat. Economy needs to take a back seat.

First off, Nuclear Power Plants are actually extremely stable. It doesn't make sense for them to explode.

Moons pulling the tides is not WYSIWYG. The power plants will generate different amounts of energy. We need consistent amounts of energy from buildings. Same goes for wind generators. We're also running into the issue of clouds blocking vision.

Buildings need to produce the same amount of power always. If buildings produce different amounts of power, it no longer follows the WYSIWYG principle.

And before you say it, looking at clouds moving and looking at how many moons there are doesn't mean it's suddenly WYSIWYG. Just because I see moons, doesn't mean I know how much power they produce.

Also, mechanics like this force us to use symmetrical planets. That's bad. I support the implementation of symmetrical planets, but we also need to have the option of fully random planets.

If solar needs sunlight, they'll never be used. Power plants aren't worth the investment if they only work 50% of the time. There's also the balance problem of one player spawning on the sun side and one player spawning on the dark side. Spawning on the sunny side would be the equivalent of having a bunch more metal spots when compared to spawns on the dark side.

Geothermal is the only power plant I can support. It could actually be a nice way to improve the boring *** start of the game and early energy issues. It'd give everyone a nice boost of energy at the start of the match and help speed up the opening build.

Even then, I'd rather just have the Commander produce enough economy to power a factory and its lathe. But both (factory first and geothermal) wouldn't be bad either.

This. I still don't agree with mr. burrito when it comes to how solar would work, if it didn't work at night (or didn't produce at full efficiency) then it can't be balanced in a game like this. It just can't.

This would be a solution.

Also stop complaining about clouds people, if clouds were in the game they would be there to look pretty and not block your vision on purpose. And turn them off if you really hate them.

Now looking at how fast clouds move is really not a solution for knowing windspeed. Just have it display at all times in the top right. Yes, there where that little bar is that shows icons of the planets in the system and the name of the planet you're viewing. Along with windspeed, atmosphere thickness, dist. from the sun, geo spots and metal spots, tidal power,... all that info should be displayed right there.

Stuff like that isn't WYSIWYG.

We don't have different unit ranges based on planet size because of WYSIWYG.

Having different amounts of energy based on distance to the sun, number of moons, speed of clouds, etc is exactly the same as having different amount of ranges based on planet size. It simply isn't WYSIWYG.