Give us Shields! Come on!

I tried SupComm and it was not a natural sequel in my opinion and I did not play it for long. I don't need SuppComm features and I don't want them. This game is TA++, not some SupComm:TA "Frankenstein". It really sounds like you want a SupComm sequel, whereas I want an updated version of TA which is what we are getting. I think you are looking in the wrong game/forum/game company. You should reread the kickstarter page to see what they actually proposed as opposed to what you think they did.

I will say it one more time: THIS is NOT SupComm and NEVER will be. Plus, this game isn't even completed yet.

Why did you completely ignore my (and other peoples') post(s)?

Just because you subscribe to a certain philosophy regarding on how to win the game does not mean everyone else has to, or is doing it wrong if he does not follow your way of thought.

As to commander cloaking I have no idea how you know its going to be included, the last thing I heard from the developers regarding cloaking was that they are unsure if they will include it. I did a quick scan on the forums but was only able to find user submitted posts regarding commander cloaking.

I feel that commander cloaking will only introduce binary gameplay.

1. You have harassed your enemy enough that you can win
2. You have not harrassed your enemy enough so you cant win

Where shields will leave the possibility of your commander being attacked open throughout the whole game, wich to me seems way more interesting.

No shields in PA kills 40% of strategy.
Not being able to use mountains kills 20% of strategy.

Care to explain where you got those numbers?

I think PA is quite strategic right now, but you sound all sciencesey and **** about this, so I like to know how you came to this conclusion.

It's not that I'm against shields or anything, but I want you to share with us, the magical formula which generated these outcomes.

The only thing I (and most other people on this forum) know about strategy is based on historical accounts of about 4000 years of warfare, which apparently weren't very strategic since they were all fought without energy shields of some kind.

Imagine if WWII were 40% more strategic due to shields and then another 20% more strategic if the allies would have been able to race their tanks straight across the alps from Italy to Germany.
THAT WOULD MEAN 60% MORE MAYHEM!!!

So once again, you really seem to know what you're talking about, plx teach us.

It's not a philosophy. If you don't attack, you can't win.

There's also a reason why the top players subscribe to this philosophy.

Because Uber said so in one of their livestreams. The 11 hour livestream from February 28th to be exact. Man sitting through that thing was long...

TA had cloaking commanders and no shields and it worked very well.

So what you're saying, "If I attack my opponent, I win. If I don't attack my opponent, I lose." That about sums up gameplay.

visual or radar? ... i am just not so keen on first especialy on multiple planets ... do we realy have to play hide and seek

I don't like the idea of being omnipresent either.

I honestly can't remember any details, if Uber gave any.

It's not much of hide and seek. Blow up a power field, your opponent's power is in the negative, and viola – there it is.

easy said ... try to blow up or invade a well defended powerplantmoon without resorting to smashing ...
early to early mid game might be not much a problem but lategame?

havent played much recently but did anyone try early as possible massaustreusdrops for invasions in a skirmishgame? last time i tried took me 40somehing minutes for mere 70 bots to get to a nonorbiting planet
it seemed to work better in GW at least

No I know that I have to attack in order to win, but I am in favor of either short attack periods or surgical strikes. With a cloak like Uber plans on adding to the game that way of gameplay is shut down completly. With shields I can still try to take out the commander without having to attack anything else - it will be harder, sure - but still possible!

I

in gw I did that. Managed to get fabbers on every other planet in 10/12 mins to preempt the turtleneck. Dropped a tele quick and then smashed all my units through and turtles up there. Smashed a 4 planet game in 19 mins with enemies on all the other planets

Depends on the tech. Advanced orbital tech, you build 5 SXX on your planet, sacrifice a few advanced radars or astraeus to get enemy commander location, then move between planets the SXX to directly over the enemy commander. Even if they are immediately shot upon entering orbit, they will also instantly shoot as well, and the commander will die.

Takes only 4 if you have orbital strengthening boost in GW. 25% more damage.

There are ways, I could imagine nearly impossible with no tech at all. But, even if you have shellers, you could camp a line and dig into enemy units and base. Or if you have flak, that helps keep bulk air down no matter how bulk.

That's generally not true, in original SupCom, as well as many other RTS games, turtling is pretty viable. In fact, it depends solely on balance - there are even RTS where turtling is the most common strategy, and rapid advancement is very situational as it is countered easily. However, certain small but very active group, bent on promoting aggressive gameplay in RTS, succeeded in spreading viewpoint on turtling as "bad practice" in many communities, including PA's. As PA developers take that opinion for common, or even themselves belong to mentioned group, it's not looks like anything but rushing/expanding will be ever viable in PA. There's still some hope on mods, but I'm currently not aware of any modders who have plans to bring back together shields, experimentals, stationery resource generation, exponential economy and other components of turtling-friendly gameplay. Anyway, it will become clear in forthcoming weeks, and to me it's a factor determining whether PA deserves any further attention or not.

I'm working on an "experimental" mod, super units, but not necessarily as OP as they were... Hopefully it'll turn out niche enough to not be broken.

https://forums.uberent.com/threads/wip-megabot-ideas-and-progress-thread.59374/

Turtling is a early game strat.

NOT a late game strat.

You make an excellent point here. C&C Generals in particular was very turtle friendly and had several factions dedicated to surviving long enough to superweapon your enemy out of the game. It was a fun game and I was very active in the mod community. It was one of my favorites, but it was also very different from TA, SC, and PA.

I enjoyed shields in SupCom, but I also enjoy not having them in PA. It changed the game to have them, but it certainly didn't ruin the game to have them, and it certainly didn't ruin it to take them away. Supreme Commander's T3 heavy artillery vastly out ranged the Holkins we have today. The Holkins would almost have to have interplanetary range to match the range on SupCom's T3 artillery, and if it did I would start missing the shields then... but even more so I would think it would mean we should focus on effective defenses against ultra-long range artillery. But, it's a problem we don't have right now, so it doesn't need a solution right now.


The primary advocacies of the shield are

• Defense against artillery.
• Give more time to react when your attention is split between multiple planets.
• Improved Commander survivability.
• Shields look cool when they are under attack.

Defense against artillery. This can be provided by a dedicated point defense structure and doesn't necessitate a shield... also, PA artillery is very short range compared to the T3 and Experimental artillery in SC. We don't need a dedicated defense against it right now.

Give more time to react when your attention is split between multiple planets. This can also be achieved with improved radar coverage and roving patrols on planets. Even when playing on a single jumbo sized planet I keep a patrol of aircraft and tanks roving around outside all edges of my base so that they can intercept enemy units before they come in range of my base. This buys me time to rally up the other patrols and converge on the enemy.

Improved Commander survivability. This can be supported several ways. Commander cloaking/radar stealth is an option we can look forward to. I would like to see a "Command Bunker" structure added where the commander can move inside to get an insane health buff at the cost of not being able to shoot back while inside. This would shelter him from artillery and "cheap" snipe attacks without providing any balance upsets to other units. It's true the commander is vulnerable in PA right now, but keep in mind your opponent's commander is as vulnerable as yours. It's not unbalanced at all, but it is exploitable at times and that works both ways.

Shields look cool when they are under attack. This is undeniable, but I also think it's cool watching a base crumble and burn when I attack it. But even more important aesthetics can be enjoyable but they cannot replace gameplay.

It's completely unfair to suggest that any RTS NEEDS shields to have 40% more strategy (lolz). There are roles a shields can fill, but shields are not the only things that can fill these roles, and some of these roles don't even need filling. There's nothing wrong using a shield, but don't pretend they have no drawbacks and keep in mind there are other ways to keep the game flowing.

The biggest flaw of the CNC games is that you don't start with artillery.

So turtling became the norm until you could tech up.

There was plenty of rushing in the community I played with. 1 humvee and 5 rocket troopers was enough to break many early game bases if you got to their first dozers and supply pad.

Much of the early game turtle advantages were specifically included to prevent that kind of bum-rush playing. With all of the mods involved it became a VERY different game. For example... http://www.moddb.com/mods/remix-escalation

Exactly, the trio of turtling/rushing/booming.

But the lack of early artillery made turtling completely infuriating to tackle, and by the late game, you had enough powerful artillery that you couldn't be stopped.

wow that so biased

you forgot to append "...in PA with the current balance."

that is not necessarily the way we want it to be.

what if we want early phase to be raid.

then afterwards turtle?