Some thoughts I have on making the Orbital aspect of the game feel useful, but neither overpowered nor redundant: I would like to see the ability to build an upgradable Component-Based Space Station. By itself, the station does nothing, but could be upgraded with various components. For example, a player could build solar power arrays , allowing a new and unique way to gather power. These arrays could have a relatively low cost and produce only a small amount of power, but multiple solar arrays could be added to the station for additional cost. We could also allow for the placing of orbital defenses on these stations, and the upgrading of these stations to allow for additional modules. Early and/or cheap defenses would be short range and cheap. Additional types of upgrades or modules could include increasingly powerful (and expensive and time consuming) larger lasers and/or missile defenses. In theory, additional debatable modules can include items such as an Thrusters/Engines to allow for extremely slow Orbital Layer only movement, an Orbital Fighter Factory Module at great cost, an Orbital Satellite Factory, and potentially even an Orbital Nuke and Anti-Nuke Launcher (at great expense). This could also be a stepping stone for some sort of anti-asteroid defense. Why do I think this might be a fun system? First, it allows for a central point of operation in the orbital layer. Both a point for construction and destruction that a player can focus on. Second, it makes orbital economically useful (to some degree), by allowing players to build solar collector arrays outside of ground and air based attacks. Third, this system allows orbital to be neither too expense, nor too cheap. By having a relatively inexpensive base of operations with no initial functionality, but the ability to upgrade it, players can quickly enter the space race. Finally, this has the added benefit of not being redundant with the way ground and air are currently implemented. Please let me know if you think this would be a step in the right or wrong direction.
sadly I cannot help myself ..."the clawww" I like this idea. I know it's probably unrealistic to hope for it to come true but I like it.
I could see something like this happening eventually. (Maybe a mod, or during a beta update). I like that you kept it with how the current orbital mechanics work. Its more of an unit/structure idea instead of a change of the current game mechanics. Hopefully some of the developers will see the idea and implement it.
It would be wonderful if such a system would allow for credible invasions from orbital forces. Perhaps the ability to tow stations from orbit to orbit. It would really add a fascinating layer to interplanetary play. Imagine watching the skies light up with the chaos of battle between orbital defenses and the invading stations. The invading stations might blacken the sky with units launched built in orbital factories, or bombard the planet's surface with volley after volley of powerful orbit-to-ground. Threatened planets might build massive arrays of ground-to-orbit defense weapons, creating hardened, "bastion worlds." Such scenarios *seem* within the spirit (and possibly scope) of PA; if these ideas are not implemented not the game proper, we can only hope for a mod. In sum, I really hope orbital becomes a first class citizen, as OP seems to have suggested. Many seem to want orbital to be supportive of surface conflict, viewing it as "just more complexity" in the UI for a game about war on a world. IMO this really makes orbital and interplanetary "metagames," and I couldn't disagree more with this approach. What makes this game great is the potential to add new dimensions to an RTS.*** This isnt, and never should be about war *on* a planet; it's a game about war *across* planets. Not sure about upgrades, but perhaps you could just build orbital platforms and regular structures on said platforms. (*** based on my personal, and limited RTS experience, please suggest corrections if you find this inaccurate)
Why create all these new units when you will (hopefully) be able to do exactly the same thing with an asteroid? Since it has a buildable surface, you'll be able to treat it as a mobile upgradable space platform. No need to create a bunch of new units. Edit: To be clear, I like the idea in principle, I just think its redundant.
So, modular units for the orbital layer? To me it sounds like the sort of complexity which is 'too deep relative to the rest of the game'. Also adding things to an already existing unit would require a new UI. - That's just my model of neutrino talking but I agree here. Would there only be one point of operation? I don't see why players would put all their eggs in one basket and if they were forced to we'd probably get some boring binary success play in which you either successfully fend off an attack or lose your entire orbital presence. These features aren't unique to your system. The current system could have cheap orbital power plants which allow you to slowly build up capacity. The implementation would be different but the implementation is not the same as how it affects gameplay. This could differentiate orbital from the other layers but it would not necessarily do so. We might just end up with 'experimentals' which just take multiple player input steps to build.
There's nothing poor about building a platform entirely from scratch. Asteroids are the poor man's space ship.
I really don't think that having a modular unit really adds that much complexity from the player perspective. For example, we could simply click on the unit and a popup could appear with a list of 5 or 6 possible upgrades. I don't think this would be too much for a player to handle. It isn't that you would be required to only build one, but having the defenses already installed would make it easier and cheaper to expand one or a few starbases rather than build a large number. Consider: If you need more energy, would you rather spend X amount of metal on a power array for an existing station, or alternatively spend Z metal on a new base, AND Y metal on each supporting defense, AND an additional X metal on a power array. Again, the idea is to focus the Orbital layer a bit more, but not totally restrict it.
The point isn't that it adds too much complexity. The issue is that it adds something that is completely unrepresented in the rest of the game. There are no 'upgrade systems' in Planetary Annihilation. It's a design decision to keep a cohesive focus to the game. Orbital units are no exception.
I am not sure that just because something isn't already in the game we should simply discard an idea. That being said, if the argument is that it is too difficult or complex to implement at this point, then that may be a valid point. I can't really speak to that as I am not developing the game.
Again, nothing to do with development problems. Neutrino just doesn't want upgrades in his game. Fair play to the man. It's his vision. Let's just wait and see if it works. If it doesn't, the community will 'fix' it and you'll probably have half-a-dozen Orbital Mods that add in space stations and upgrades.
Is it too complex, not really. But then its imo more of a question of focus. Should one spend time micromanaging and customising individual units or should the focus be on large scale unit movement and orders? In that light I don't see fiddling with upgrades to be time I want to spend in a game like this while I have to focus on so much else. Remember, PA is just as much an APM focused game as Starcraft at the moment. The only difference it is we spend that APM on a nearly exponential economy instead of unit abilities.
Well Nanolathe, as I recall, he said that about units, not structures. But if Neutrino said that intending structures as well, I can't really argue with him, I agree its his vision. However, @smallcpu, how would having lots of units scattered over the orbital layer be easier to manage than a central focus point? I guess I see it differently. But that is from my own experience in that managing one or a few centralized things (even with upgrades) is more manageable for me personally than dozens of individual units and buildings. I'll certainly allow that others may have different feelings on this.
You're totally free to argue with Neutrino and his plans for the game if you want to. I've done so during Alpha, and plan to do so frequently throughout Beta. Just because he's a Dev, doesn't mean he is above scrutiny. Orbital is in such a state of infancy that I imagine there are a lot of aspects that will be fairly mutable during the early days of Beta. As of now, we have very few concrete facts that govern PA's development. If you can present a case strong enough and well thought out enough then the Devs will take notice. Can't say they'll agree with you, but they will notice it.
Upgrades are for RPGs. There is nothing an upgrade can do that can't be similarly done with new units, more units, or supporting units. You want a gun upgrade? Build more tanks. You want an eco upgrade? Build more gens. You want a terrain upgrade? Grab more asteroids. You want to spam the hell out of that d-gun? Get more gens and storage. It's pretty straight forward.
Again, just to be clear, I am not advocating for upgrading units, nor am I advocating for a total restructuring of the game. I am just suggesting an alternative method for the implementation of Orbital that I feel might be doable and enjoyable. Feel free to suggest your own system if you disagree!
I don't see this idea so much as an upgrade system, it's more like sending a fabrication/construction bot into orbit that builds upon itself. It's UI would be no different than how current units build things. You would decide what you wanted next, and you would 'build' it onto your pre-existing orbital unit. Nor would this have to be the central viewpoint of the orbital layer. You could have many of these units in orbit, but in order to make them more advanced you would invest more into a particular unit. It'd be a building/unit hybrid.
