cheaper orbital : good or bad???

Sorry I just can't agree with a cheaper fastest way to encourage turtles and make thirty minute games turn into two hour games. I like orbital and its fun but unless a major change is brought to defensive towers, decreasing orbital cost seems to only crap on the fun level of the game to me. There's already enough orbital turtles as is now......I know people like Mike are going to come in and say its to expensive, its t3 blah blah blah. I simply don't see it as so. Nothing at the orbital level currently ends the game immediately, and anything over 4ffa becomes a three hour chase across a system. Lowering the cost is only going to encourage a three hour game at the 1v1 level IMO. Speaking personally when I play 1v1 its because I want a quick nice game that truly test a person's small army and unit prowess, I'd rather not chase them for hours as orbital is now a readily available cheap gimmick for them.......

Anyone else??? Thoughts opposing or otherwise????

Static artillery could do with being less overpowering, and defensive towers could do with costing energy to fire (Planned, but when?).

Then you can turtle, but it is also easier to siege from the ground or sea.

yes if towers are less menacing it maybe fine, but everything I've seen about towers is that they need to be super scary.ATM they are.... too much so imo. I'm more a fan of huge unit battles than nukes and smashing planets.I like to see superior tactical skill represented via small squad tactics. Nukes and such = cheese .... part of the game nevertheless, and I do use them on occasion but nothing like plowing through your opponent with bots and tanks

Cheaper orbital just seems like a lot more chicken action going down. Like oh no here he comes, no worry I've got a handful of mex and a handful of power I'll just throw up totally undeserved orbital and flee .....

There are many opinions on what to do with orbital. I am undecided.

I am however of the persuasion that static defences need to be strong as they are with a proper power economy in order to allow players to actually build bases and fortresses.

Otherwise mobile war fair is the only game to play, and that would make me highly sad as both a turtle and a siege commander.

We've already been over this man. A lower Barrier to entry for orbital gives more strategic depth and bringing down the overall power level actually makes room for MORE Depth and Variety in units, not less.

Mike

yes more time involved in smaller games....... as much as I love pa I some times only want a good thirty minute game. I could see it adding more depth but only if off planet is placed into a separate orbital tier. I know some things will have to be built by orbital fab as stated. But if off planet is so easily attainable what do you think everyones first strategy will be???? Run to nearest asteroid ASAP no bueno, boring long drawn out repetitive gameplay, not more strategy and depth just who can escape eco up and fling rocks. I know I must wait and see where they take it but as it it stands currently I don't see it being nice just a slingshot fest= turtles dream......

If it's going to add more depth I would appreciate some examples on your speculation of how a cheaper escape route will add more depth?? If you would be so kind.......I have given cases of how it poops on gameplay....

How do you know that all your assumptions will be true after they've reworked everything?

It's not like the guys at Uber will ONLY change the cost of the launcher and leave everything else as is.

Mike

Beer, like knight says you appear to be basing your entire argument on how the game plays currently. we'll already be getting multi planet spawns regardless. i think it makes sense to have the orb launcher as a basic unit. all the other unit arcs start at basic ie kbot = vehicle = air = naval =/= orbital.

If you want to play quick games you'll no doubt have the option of hosting a match and playing on one planet. I really dont understand what you are complaining about.

I understand that and stated that...... just curious as to others speculation on how it will improve things??? Yours would be great since I see you as the biggest supporter of cheaper orbital.....

And everyone starting on their own planet individually is a turtle fest anyways so why would the current cost be a hindrance anyways??? As you have a whole planet to expand on with no opposition????

The issue is really only static artillery, and even then it's because static artillery can't be counter batteried by moving artillery.

We are dealing with game mechanics that haven't been done before.

Its more then likely we won't get them right on the first try.

True, but having defences being as strong, or possibly even stronger but with a major reliance on your economy would be a sweet spot for creating defensive gameplay that is more in depth then building more turrets and walls.

and how in increases strategy, you are making multiworld interaction accessible earlier in the game. therefore broadening options.
you equate expanding to another planet with running away. this is one (bad) strategy of early orbital.
some strategies which all have positives and negatives (all based on current game play which is very unfinished in this arena)
- focus on solar arrays as a means to protect energy supply from nukes/ ground forces, downside extreme up front cost. (theres nothing saying that just because the launcher can be built at an earlier stage that the units it purchases change in cost.)
- fabbers to asteroids earlier to start fortifying KEWs downside, forcing attention split, potentially losing momentum on home planet.
-orbital radar rush - again nothing saying it will be cheaper so do you sacrifice earlier build to try to get big radar up?
-planet migration (probably deprecated once have planet spawn choice) do this for maybe more metal accessibility/ poor spawn on home planet. again forfeiting build time/giving others a head start.
shall i go on?

planet selection is not equal to everyone spawns on a planet solo.
Imagine a game where one planet has 300 metal, another has 120and the last has 80. where do you choose to spawn? given its a 6 player game. id say around 2/3 will choose the 300. (blind guess). potentially noone will choose the 80. (i would for this very reason).
its also not a turtlefest as until you thouroughly scout the whole planet you dont know if you are alone on it or not!
as an aside if it were 1 person per planet im pretty sure you might want an orb launcher sooner rather than later right you know to get over to their planet and attack them? and thus having it be a basic unit would actually work against the long build up time?

Beer 4blood, I'm not sure why you made the title so biased towards the idea of lowering orbital is bad. Id prefer if you changed it to "lower orbital:good or bad?"We don't know the con's and the ones you mentioned can't be proven

You are basing your current orbital knowledge with the fact that orbital units take forever to move to planet to planet? Its not going to stay the same. How do I know that? Well, through reasonable discussion and not one sided discussion we can work out compromises. And give uber good ideas on what would make orbital fun for everyone. (And critisims).

No one likes change, but let's not get set in our ways so that good ideas get glossed over by an automatic "this is bad".

Personally, I feel like orbital is underplayed and not a first world citizen just quite yet. Not as bad as naval but still, its sort of like luxury items once you are on top in the game. It would be nice if it was supplemental and started galactic conquest to aid you land battle like in the kick starter. Most times you own the whole planet and then start sending waves of orbital fighters to an escapee commander and pummel him.

I think as long as the ability to move a commander to another planet isn't made any cheaper or quicker to attain the turtle problem you're worried about wouldn't be an issue. Maybe restrict commander interplanetary travel to the teleporter gates or something. Actually, that would solve the invincible commander exploit too.

Or if the ability to hunt down a commander who already has moved to another planet is made easier.

Where is that option hidden?

Title change for you sir yes there is much to improve on the orbital level. I just don't care for its mechanics now and making it more accessible just seems wrong to me......

@Stormie firstly the unit cannon isn't going to launch units across an entire system. Only between orbiting bodies second please show me where it's confirmed that you get to choice of start planet??? My understanding as it currently stands is that the game creator will make starting planet decisions for everyone. Idk this may change as everything in the game is subjective at the moment, but my thoughts are on what we currently have. Hopefully the changes they have in mind will make it work..... until then I'm staying on the side of it makes more turtles, until someone provides a decent counter argument or uber unleashes their plan and it is awesome ( which everything to this point has been aside from God like artillery and turrets)

The high cost heavily favours weird turtle play and makes orbital pretty weird and useless in 1v1.

I believe it should be useless and out of the question in 1v1 I don't want to chase some one for an hour that would die right now at the thirty minute mark. Orbital being reached in such a small game should be the result of an extremely good match with both players pummeling each other but unable to make good ground. Not just a cheap gimme obtained with a handful of resources.