Experimentals What WOuld You want to see!!!

I've been thinking of some kind of invasion unit you have to build in orbit. Once completed you launch it at an enemy planet/moon/asteroid. Upon arrival it could be blasted and destroyed by anti space (?) defence, nukes and all that, like the asteroids. However, when this unit lands on the surface it can not leave the planet/moon/asteroid again.

This unit could be one of many:

• Heavily fortified ground unit factory and transport (immobile after landing) capable of storing a large amount of units.

• Similar to the above, but picture instead a Atlantis type submersible aircraft carrier/air unit factory for invading water planets.

• Heavy and slow moving offence unit (traditional experimental unit).

• Unattached engine for changing incoming asteroid trajections.

• Fake mini asteroids for soaking up planetary defence rockets to allow the real deal to land/crash. These would be brittle so if one actually crashes, the impact is minimal

Mirror the Krogoth, and let that be it. Keep as true to original TA+CC as possible, in my humble opinion.

experimental warp gates, one is constructed on the best developed colony weather an asteroid or a planet. after construction of this mega project it would allow fast and seamless travel between systems and is best suited for galaxy war

U got my blessing!!!

As far as they do not replace basic units because of certain weaknesses/unique abilities I absolutely like the idea of heaving some special heavy units (no matter whether you call them experimentals). They should be very expensive like in supcom 1 and be built like structures and not in factories, which is necessary for experimental structures anyway. (not those factory made mini-experimentals of supcom 2 that are hardly stronger than 10 tanks) But units should not gain veterancy. That was one aspect that made experimentals inadequately strong against large numbers of low units.

(By the way high energy upkeep actually only adds the mass of the power plants to the costs.)

I like the idea. But I'd have two land experimentals, both with high costs, upkeep, low speed, no aa:
1: very extreme hp, high direct fire rate, normal damage, low range (good against tanks and bases, bad against the experimental 2 and air)
2: normal hp, very low direct fire rate, very high damage, range about 3km in supcom scale (good against the experimental 1 and bases, bad against tanks and air)
tanks would still be important, as they can not be as easily destroyed as exp 1 with exp 2 or air, and can easily destroy exp 2.

Bomber like the Ahwassa or at least heavy strategic bombers

Air transporter

Battleships like the Tempest could be nice, but are not necessary to me.

Unit canon (we saw an interplanetary one in the video)

Orbital spaceships

No experimental ressource generator! After having built up highly, further significant improvement of economy should require expanding territorially.

Experimental arty/missile: I like tactical missiles and artillery with medium range, but weapons with a range to shoot across the whole planet should be very expensive or should not exist.


Furthermore I had the idea of fusion of 2 experimentals to a new one that has the charachteristics of both, but I'm not sure about that. Somehow it would be cool..

For an experimental, I would like there to be a capture able gantry on metal worlds that produces a type of death robot, but unlike almost all experimintals in TA, SupCom, FA and SupCom2 this death bot will only have 1 type of weapon thus showing a definite weakness.

The gantry and death bot type can vary from metal world to metal world.

These gantry's would come equipped with a super advanced transport rocket allowing you to fire your new death bot at nearby planets for quick delivery.

For the sake of discussion what about experimental buildings? Would it be more feasible to have unique experimental buildings instead of units balance wise?

I'm all for the next stage of bertha cannons honestly. I don't know about you guys but a cannon so powerful that if not anchored on planets will make those little asteroids twirl or jerk off course. Might need thrusters just to counter react its recoil .

I know uber wants to kinda steer away from them but its still fun to discuss. It can be anything from a defensive, resource or offensive building type. Costs a lot to build and operate but packs a nice punch but nothing really over the top just awesome.

Wouldn't the next stage of the Bertha cannon be the rapid fire version?

Give me my Krogoth and I'll be a happy camper

Make it relatively hard to build as it was in TA without being quite so invincible.

no no that's the Vulcan....ahh the Vulcan I still have fond memories of you and still make new ones to this day.

Rapid fire is cool and awesome to be sure..way awesome. There is just this special feeling when a cannon fires and it takes its time to reload no hurry, just sits there all badass BOOM! reloads with a cocky attitude. Like "meh if you didn't die that shot you have indeed shat your pants and are scurrying about which you wont be doing much longer."

I might be biased though I'm a horrible Nuke/Heavy slow artillery kinda person(...sorta turtle type) I only need one shot and if I miss well its fun to miss really, the first shot you didn't see coming, this next one though you know is coming and well I feed of that fear... :twisted:

Ha, I am more of a fan of destroying the enemy from within, by sneaking engineers into their base and turning it against them.

Hell have no fury like a devious engineer.

I would like to see experimentals, do not know at this point what kind but ..

Something I do not like to see is that it would be more efficient to build experimentals than it would be to build normal units.

In FA for instance it is usually faster/more efficient to build a GC or a ML instead of a swarm of T3 bots. This results in T3 bots not being used that much, which is a pity.

Simply not true. A GC cost as much as 26 Harbingers but had less than the HP of 17, and less than the DPS of 7. A Monkeylord cost as much as 33 Loyalists, but had less than the HP of 15, and the DPS of 23. Experimentals were considerably less efficient than T3 bots. You traded mass efficiency for build power and force concentration.

Please also factor in the buildtime, and it is easier to micro.

No, because that would require you to be making a different point to the one you were making. You said that they were more efficient, which isn't true, it's just that their inefficiency doesn't actually matter if they're used correctly.

They had less HP, yes. But contrary to building single T3 bots, the DPS of an experimental did not lower until the unit was fully destroyed. That means that (assuming that enemy bots get destroyed at a constant speed), the experimental with the same total health and total DPS would have dealt twice the damage over it's lifetime.

Even that would make many experimentals close to on par with their equivalent in T3 units, but then experimentals are also much more versatile, having longer range, death explosion and (don't underestimate that) "immunity" to AoE effects (they can soak up the full shell, but still only receive the damage once. The same shell could have hit 3-4 T3 units and have dealt the damage to ALL of them, meaning dealing 3-4x the base damage).

Except no experimental had the same health/dps ratio of another unit like you speak of. Also, multiple units have the advantage of fore not being focused. It's possible(probable) that most of the units wont actually die until near the end of the battle.

Also factor in that a swarm of T3's is a heck of a lot more manoeuvrable and good at fleeting damage than a single big target.

Yes, assuming that you micro and that you don't play against an AI which actually takes down enemy units one after another. (Or standing up against an experimental which also deals focused damage.)

Experimentals are just a lot easier to play if you are not so much into micromanaging multiple fleets of bots.

If you were into ultimate micro managing you could simply play with T2 mobile artillery only, assuming that you always calculate the correct lead angle by hand and enforce ground attack, you get by far the highest bang for bucks. (Not serious about this, just want to say that the benefits of micromanaging should not be taken as given.)

The god holy death star! :twisted:

Don't call them experimentals. That was a stupid name for them in SupCom, as there was nothing experimental about them, they were simply powerful single units. Call them experimentals in PA and you invite legal troubles. Maybe call them Uber Bots instead.