Epic End Game Units

You quoted my post but failed to address the point - your argument was flawed for the reasons I pointed out and you were just stifling the discussion.

Neutrino used to be against AA flak as well, remember? Perhaps megabot/experimentals would also benefit the game and we could talk it out in this discussion forum.

Fair enough.

Even so. There's been many many different discussions on megabots in many different forms so far. Including a 36 page discussion on megabots in the backers forum.

They've been slowly shot down by both Uber and the community.

I both gave my personal stance on the matter as well as provided insight into what Uber and the community have come to the conclusion on so far.

It's a bit silly to try and argue against experimentals in a game which has the most epic experimental ever conceived as a core item in it's marketing campaign: the Halley engines that turn small planets into the biggest end-game unit in the entire RTS genre.

And nukes are an "epic end game unit". They fulfill the "experimental" role.

It's like you're standing in the elephant enclosure arguing that elephants aren't real. And we're all pointing wildly behind you at the giant elephant.

There is no question about experimentals in PA. It already has them. The question is whether or not we'd like more, and if so, what type.

You assume that people like all kind of strong "experimental" units evenly. Nukes and rocks are both long range stationary experimentals (planets are like a projectile you can shoot once). Some people want other type of experimentals too.

I think the assumption is that "experimental", "end game unit" and "giant stompy death laser shootey robot with 500,000 hit points that kills everything" are all different terms for the same thing.

I hate to see ideas shot down purely due to a bad use of labels and misconceptions.

I never did get why they were called experimentals. They seemed as complete as any other unit in the game, and there was little stopping you from making armies of them.

SupCom 2 at least differentiated them in one way, in that you could launch an incomplete experimental.

PA doesn't even need to have huge units as I'm sure, as with TA, that modders are going to swiftly flock to the idea and make their own arsenals of huge units fairly quickly.

By the same token, modding in huge units isn't going to be much of a possibility if they suffer from pathing or collision or animation problems that modders can't solve or avoid because they weren't tested earlier.

When you say 'experimental' what I hear is extremely expensive, and single point of failure. A thing that takes a really long time of not doing anything in order to build. And a thing that stands or falls all at once. Massive single units are binary by nature.

Units like Halleys obviously have to be expensive because they destroy entire planets upon which the rest of the game occurs. If they could be obtained quickly it would be a major problem. Certain types of assets have to be expensive to delay when they can be acquired- that doesn't make them "experimentals."

Also; Halleys are single-use, unlike the Krogoth, Monkeylord, or any other iconic mega-units.

The longer you get to use mega-units, the more chance they get to pay off their own cost. This is important, because it's the *primary way of determining if something is under/over/rightly-powered. If something can destroy more than its own cost then it is a good investment. If something cannot, it was a poor investment.


*exemption for killing Commanders. If you win, it was worth it.

why not give the experimental low health to the point that they are really expensive, specialized, die easily and are limited to having only 1 operational at a time but if protected are worth the amount of resources spent in there construction.

That's all good on paper, but it's really had to achieve in practice. Every T4/experimental/mega-unit I've seen in Sup1/FA and all their mods has fallen to either side of that perfect balanced point.

You have to also consider that a person will use a unit more efficiently than if it were left to its own devices (computers are dumb). That also needs to be factored into balance considerations. Then you have to consider the reverse case of the opposing player controlling/micromanaging units against said mega-unit.

Finally, PA is a game about massive scale duking it out. This game should be bigger than Ben Hur. Focusing in on one particular unit to make it operate efficiently isn't in the spirit of the game at all.

you mean like the hailey, orbital laser and advanced orbital radar?

Yes, exactly. That's why I say things like Halleys and nuke launchers fit the bill. They aren't called "experimental" but they are expensive, specialized, are a single point of failure and takes a really long time of not doing anything in order to build. They are the game's most expensive weapon systems. They are experimental in all but name.

As you say, some ideas simply can't be implemented as a cheap, mass-produced unit but are still useful as expensive things that are needed in the game to fulfill a particular role. Whether we call them "experimental" or not is entirely arbitrary.

I think some people get hung up on the nomenclature rather than simply thinking about the purpose of the unit and the balance of the game.

The Halley isn't a combat unit. Neither is the nuke launcher. A giant robot with a ridiculous amount of HP and a ton of high-damage guns strapped to it is a fat combat unit, and an experimental. Still, this is semantics about what we call an experimental and not a substantive discussion.

A Halley isn't an experimental because it isn't a combat unit. And is also isn't an experimental because it isn't massively bloated as a unit in its role. For gameplay reasons, we must make the Halley expensive in order for it to work at all.

An experimental is a giant unit that could easily be implemented as a really large number of smaller units instead. Instead of strapping fifty guns to the thing, it would be much more interesting to have fifty units each with one such weapon and with much less HP.

In much the same fashion, instead of designing an "experimental" unit cannon that is this massive, expensive, bloated unit that fires a huge number of units quickly, the unit cannon should be minimalistic. It fires one pod/unit at a time, at a moderate rate. If you want MOAR LAUNCHER then just build more of them so you will have more capability that the unit provides. A single unit which, by itself, confers an enormous amount of capability is usually unnecessary, but sometimes certain capabilities are so strong that they require a high price tag.

Everything should be as cheap as possible, but not cheaper.

I do hope that uber does descide to add them though, I unlike a few people absolutely loved the massive units that came with both supreme commander games, its actually one of things out of the series that stands it out from all the other RTS games out there still even today. Perhaps limiting to just having 1 instead of infiniate or an ability in the game setup menu to limit the number of end game units, or infinate number of end game units or just plain right out disable it. Those options would take care of pretty much everyone who likes or doesn't like the idea of big game units, its like a final goal to reach on the tech tree, I liked that idea instead of having millions of low tech units running around all the time just adds something a little extra to an already great game. Even though I thought having so nothing but experimentals in supcom did ruin it as every single game always ended the same at the end with mass spams of experimentals, but I do think they deserve to still be in PA in some form or another, just not spamable, bit like commanders, you get one and thats all you get, or can only build one at a time.... adds an escort type of gameplay at that point as well, because you'll need to protect them

I don't like the SupComFA mega units as they can easily just replace armys.

However the SupCom2 mega units were great support (Mostly) but couldn't fight a war unless massed rather exclusively.

it's a t3 unit by Neutrino's standards.
technically it's as good or better than any other combat unit as it can wipe out an entire planet of them. sounds pretty "game ender unit" to me.

Still think having x amount of huge units, where you can choose one would be epic and add a lot of depth. They wont end the game, but they will give the enemy something to focus on killing instead of whatever else they were previously.

There must be an absolute prohibition on any kind of pointless, arbitrary rule like "you are only allowed to have 1 of this unit at a time." It is even ridiculous in a small-scale game like Starcraft 2. And it is utterly contrary to the basic principle that all the rules always apply to all the units, physics, and so on. No damage types, no arbitrary quantity limits, no silly rules.

Not that my opinion should carry a lot of weight, as I have no intention of playing this game 'competitively', but I'm disappointed that the variety of units will be limited to 1 tank, plus one upgraded tank, 1 bot, plus one upgraded bot, and anti-air versions of tank/bot. One of the great things about TA and Supcom was the variety of units and their usefulness for specific applications. Having one tank be a straight upgrade for another means I've no need of the smaller tank ever again.

As for the large 'experimental' units, frankly those were some of the best things about SupCom. If your economy could support it, sure, you could have similar or even more powerful forces by building more units, but having those experimentals both gave a centerpiece you could count on your opponent to focus on and a general feel of power. Watching my Monkeylord stealth the rest of my assault army right up to my opponent's base through his radar was one of the greatest feelings.

So now I'll keep my T1 factories around for anti-air vehicles/bots, and use T2 for my main assault units, and most of my strategy is just to mass these units as fast as possible and throw them at the enemy? This is strategy? There are no stealth units? There are no glass cannons? It's just smash the same units against each other on both sides to measure who's economy is better?

Guess I'll be playing a lot of skimishes then. I'm not as disappointed as the ripped-off feeling I had buying SupCom2, but I'm feeling pretty let down, and I can't really recommend other people buy this game so they can smash a moon into a planet when they likely will never get there because they'll stop playing when they see how limited the unit selection is and understand that it's all about who can produce the best economy the fastest. Big units let me focus my attention on something more than just mass production.

yes brian your opinion not what youthink you should be say

I'm loving this more and more people speaking the truth. The plain and simply truth.