Experience

Will there be any Experience Points for killing units or building structures which gets you faster tech or give you a command tree like in command and conquer ? It would make agressive early game much more interesting.

There will not be.

hopefully there will still be unit veterancy though? I like it when I can use a bunch of units defensively, build up their kill count, then use them offensively so they heal themselves a bit whilst being attacked.

Nope. Check the features and suggestions list.

Much of the common theory goes along the lines of reducing the complexity of individual units where possible while using the game to create complex interactions between groups of units and structures. That my theory on whats happening anyway.

I hope the game will show each units kill count though?

This is one thing Neutrino has been adamant on. There's every intention on logging piles of data in-game, and using it for balance information and such. Kill count will be one of them.

Though it need not necessarily be available for the user to see.

I'd like to see only the Commander get in-game, user viewable statistics such as kill count and structures completed, etc. The rest of your units have those statistics available for Data-Mining on Ubers "Server-Side", but are obscured Client Side.

Putting the "humanity" of counting heads or building units on the Commander alone re-enforces his uniqueness and connection to the player, IMO

---

As to the OPs question, yogurt312 and BulletMagnet have the right of it. There is no XP, no veterancy and no "bonus" for getting a lot of kills on one unit.

They are Robots already at the peak of their ability... they can't get better.
They're already the best.

i played world in conflict there you could buy air strikes or atom bombs or smth like that from kills that would be nice in pa when you just let an asteroid or smth crash into enemies planet

The large amount of logged info will make veterancy MODS easy.

But it will not be in the base game.

You can totaly buy all those things in PA... its just you need to use your metal instead of your kills.

Want air strikes, build bombers, want atomic strikes, build nukes, etc.

The Reality is that you won't be putting in that effort thought, PA is a game where you'll have Armies made up from Hundreds of units, your time is better put to use expanding your economy and unit production than it is hand picking the 5 units with veterancy out of 100 and putting them on the frontlines.

Mike

NO EXP means allways TURTLE IN FFA because the one who attacks dont get any advantage from so problem will be that all go on economy and noone will attack ...

Or they'll rush, and attack before you get economy.

Or they'll just Comet Rocket you.

Or they'll just chip away at you with artillery.

Or they'll attack someone else, capture their economy and flatten you with more resources.

And you know, since defense is easier than offense in general (unless the game system strongly discourages turtling), the units get benefits from turtling. Of course, player can make turtling futile but it does not change that turtling is easier than being offensive.

Turtling might be less easy in this game. You can't be sure what Unified Unit Orders and "painting" orders for Attacking, not to mention units intelligently targeting enemies to maximise efficiency, is going to do to the relative "ease" of attacking.

3D battlefields mean you've got 360 degrees to consider for defence now too... Most maps in SupCom and TA had corners to hide in. There are no corners on a Sphere.

Experience wasn't used in high level play of SupCom apart from Experimentals and Commanders anyway. Experimentals were only truly needed against a Multi-Shielded base... and shields aren't in the game. Commanders will have traits to make up for their lack of Veterancy.

I see no problems stripping out Experience entirely from the game at this point.

I agree with Mike, veterancy is useless while using hundreds of units, but the SubCom idear of having expirimentals build up veterancy was cool tho, they would become 30% stronger but needed careful playing, hit and run style to make them survive, repair and use again.
Now we still don't know if we get expirimental types of units, but i would love the same approach as in SubCom, for smaller units it's useless, there just trash to destroy ^^

... umm

Having them 30% stronger meant you could play MORE recklessly with them... Veterancy didn't encourage caution, it promoted micromanagement of a single unit or small group to gain an advantage.

This is WAR on a System-Wide Scale. You should NOT be micromanaging 4 Peewees to "rank them up".

He means you need to be careful with them while getting veterancy; which was true when your opponent knew you had a T4 and was competent enough to do something about it.

Once it had veterancy, then you could be a little reckless and get away with it.

But again I come back to... I'm fighting over 7 different planets at the SAME TIME. I should not be distracted by "levelling up" my units.

People who are trying to level up that tiny knot of units on 1 battlefield will lose the other 6.
Veterancy, in this instance promotes poor macro-management.

Macro-Management... in a game about Planets and Star Systems is probably going to be important. In fact it's likely to be so important that Veterancy of just a handful of units will NEVER make enough of a difference to be noteworthy. Hence its exclusion from the equation all together.