Discussion in 'Backers Lounge (Read-only)' started by garat, March 14, 2013.
I'd be fine with a check box for on/off on a Megabot. This way, everyone's happy.
I agree with this.
I dont know why people are so against the idea of options, because the last time I suggestion an option to enable/disable experimentals or a Megabot-type-unit, every was adamantly against having an option for it.
(Even in SupCom/SupCom2, experimentals weren't really all that powerful. Even the Noah Cannon wasn't that great.)
Well, that's kind of like saying "why not add a 1 metal cost unit that instantly wins the player the game, and is buildable by the commander? We'll just add an option to turn it off."
Megabots (in the definition most people think about) aren't necessary. They are either overpowered, or pointless, and all too often take up unit roles that other units already have, thus rendering those units useless. What I'd like to see is a uni that needs to be big to fill it's role. It should be a normal unit in all other respects, it just needs to be big to do it's thing. The leviathan is a good example of this. It doesn't replace other units, for the most part, but is still really big, which is cool. If you want to add a megabot do it that way, not in a way that invalidates other units.
Are you so petty that you really want to go there?
I am not sure I want to take you seriously on your counter-points if that is the kind of logic you want to exercise, sarcastic or not.
I am not comparing megabots to that, don't worry. I'm saying that the "just turn it off if you don't want it" argument is a bit silly.
It is not a silly argument though. Being okay with an option that changes the dynamic of a match on the scale that a Megabot should is not a novel concept.
Turning off specific weapons (usually super weapons) is not a new concept to RTS games, which is why a suggestion for an option on a Megabot would not be outlandish. For example, C&C Tiberian Sun had an option to turn off Hunter-Seeker Drones. It was not the first time a feature like that was done, and it certainly was not the last.
For Planetary Annihilation, an option for no Megabots would really be no different than playing on a map that does not allow you to use moons. Nukes have a hard counter, so no need for an option there. If you cannot be arsed to build an anti-nuke, that is not my problem.
The Megabot could simply be something people either want on/off because it should be a game changer. We know what games are like without them, and some people like that. Others like myself, want to see a Megabot because it is more reminiscent of TA and SupCom game play.
Yes, but you can use the same argument to argue for silly units like I mentioned before. It is not an argument that is worth anything. If you want a megabot, convince people that it won't render any other units useless, and you might get some support. Otherwise a majority of the people on the forum will be against the suggestion.
Another example is Empire Earth. You could build Wonders which would start a timer, and when that timer ran out, whoever had the wonder would win. The wonders also had special abilities, like revealing the map. Oh, and they had a disable option for it in the lobby settings.
(Hunter-seeker drones were such bullshit, by the way.)
First off all, your argument about the 1 metal cost unit that wins, is completely irrelevant and doesn't really support your argument.
No, Megabots aren't necessary. But if you think about it, a lot of the dev team has worked on SupCom, and SupCom2, which both had "megabots" and other "experimentals." In those games, they never take up another unit's roles. They were never pointless or all-that overpowered. If Megabots were to be added, I have no doubt that the team would be able to find a good spot for them.
I will agree with you though, that it should be big to fulfill its role. The bigger it is, I think the cooler it is.
No, you misunderstand me. I am saying that the "just turn it off if you don't like it" argument is silly, because it can be used for anything, even the most silly unit (such as the one metal unit that instantly wins you the game), and therefore is irrelevant. It should not be used as a primary argument for adding something that doesn't really have a place as is currently defined. Also, supcom experimentals often completely invalidated other unit's roles.
I understand where you're comming from but I'm not talking about any other units, building or anything of the sort, its "just" for the megabots/experimental unit, nothing more, nothing less, its hardly silly to suggest such a thing when this has always been in the supcom games right from the very begining! yes this isn't supcom but the foundations of that game can easily be found in PA and that many of the devs working on this did actually work on the supcom series as well, so its not "out of the realm of impossibility" to ask such a thing. So people who think their too over powered/don't like them, just simply don't have to play with them, plain and simple. Not talking about taking out every single little thing that makes the game it is today, geez heh, talk about taking my entire idea completely out of context lol...
1 Megabot per planet would easily work as well.... There are quite a few idea's that would make this work without it changing the game what so ever, to be completely ignored is a silly idea to be honest, more silly then what I've proposed from the very beginning of alpha actualy.
i say it again even if for fungames there shouldn´t be any reason why one HAS TO disable a specific unit
even if only the minority of players plays ladder you don´t disable units in that otherwise you are not playing the game how it is supposed to be ... ladder means make use of EVERYTHING available in the unitpool! ...
and while personaly i´m not a ladder play i (and others) want every unit to have it´s place and not become redundant in any way...
the only way in that case people would be happy is if it is a mod ... have fun with mods all you want ... in that case the difference is IT IS NOT imba/broken vanila content but possible imba/broken mod content ... imba/broken vanila content will damage overall vanila gameplay ... which definitively will make competitive players unhappy and either ask for rebalance/remove of content or leave the ladder behind ...
first let the game be made how it´s supposed to be played ... and then add your funmodifications ... or those that truely add to vanila to eventualy find their way into it ...
1 megabot per planet is a very arbitrary limitation. Why should we make a unit that must be limited for the game to be fun? Don't make a megabot that needs to be limited to be fair. Make a large unit that has it's own role in the game, like the thor from SC2. It's big, it's cool, and it's got lots of guns, but it fills it's own role, and doesn't superimpose itself over other units.
I will say this again.
Don't make a megabot. Make a unit that has fills a role currently unfilled, that by definition must be a large unit.
Megabots are awesome, that's a fact.
Megabots have been implemented rather poorly in games in the past, that's true too.
There will always be people who hate megabots for being megabots (racism?).
The turn on/off thing was a counterargument proposed because of the hate against megabots.
Megabots does not mean other units will become invalid, it will add 1 extra unit to the rather poor roster atm.
This thread was made to help conceptualise megabots, straight up breaking apart ideas is useless. Take a bad idea change it and respond how that could actually work.
For example my concept of a megabot:
not cost effective in the way that it will lose to pretty much any army with a similar metal cost, it's a megabot, but not a superweapon that often results in insta win
There is no hate here, only people who are giving reasons as to why the inclusion of a megabot is pointless.
theory and actual propper implementation in relation with other units are 2 different things
i don´t think people dislike megabots per se
what they and i dislike is when a unit doesn´t realy add something unique to it
best example halley ... no unit/structure is like it ... there is nothing else that does what the halley does ... which is moving planets ... and THAT is a good thing ...
Not so much pointless as much as that it doesn't actually "improve" the game per say. It's like SupCom:FA, when you Break it down, the Best Tier in terms of unit roles/mechanics is actually T1, T2 and T3 often miss out on some key roles and this wouldn't really be a problem except that because T1 is completely outclassed bt T2, and T2 outclassed by T3 you're forced to use what units you have because the units from previous tiers are useless once you've moved up the Tier Tree.
That's why I've been saying for awhile we need to stop asking for SuperMegaExperimentals, it's a super arbitrary term that doesn't have a proper meaning and start focusing our thoughts towards roles where size is a built in factor and not something tacked on at the end for "presentation"
Yeah, they were really hard to counter, even with Firestorm.
Like a bot?
Bots are outclassed by vehicles, and there is nothing that really counters vehicles well other than more vehicles, if at all, rendering bots useless. There is a role needed right there.
We have planet smashing, yet a Megabot is out of place in terms of scale?
Endgame is stale, and nukes and planet smashing is wholly anti-climatic with huge armies swirling around. Commanders are paper thin, and once you get to endgame there aren't huge battles, but spam fests to stop the Halleys or Nuke fests.
Maybe at a "pro" level, or where everyone plays the same Meta build where every single game is build x of this, then x of that, then spam this, then spam that if they spam x do not see the point. Those matches all seem to end the same way. The most enjoyable matches I've had in SupCom were actual fights at the end (with an occasional nuke), with a few Experimentals to crack the heavy defenses.
Even TA had a point at endgame where T1 was eclipsed by lower tech because at the level economy you should have by then, why are you still using them when a T2 was better?
PA is quickly becoming turtle turtle turtle. Turtle until you have Halleys, turtle until you have nukes, turtle around your anti-nuke, and.... wait. If people are so worried about spamming Megabots, then make a build limit, and make it worthwhile. There was a time in SupCom where if you saw an experimental going up, you either pushed right then and there, or you found every free engineer to finish yours first.
The end game is stale because there isn't much variety in what you can do, to that end SuperMegaExperimentals aren't really any different than Nucks or Smashing.
i think this will change with asteroids not always being entirely cataclismic ...
the other solution is as many times mentioned before ( but difficult to implement) multiunitransports and orbital carriers that (hopefully) add more flexibility to transporting armies around and the ferrysystem aswell ... functions and options like these add more to macroing your armies and are imo almost mandatory ... unitpathfinding with teleporters would also help a lot ...
Oh definitely, and I would love to see such units. One of my favorite features of SupCom was ferrying a large invasion force. It was especially useful on water maps.
Separate names with a comma.