How to handle multiple factions with one unit pool

Alright, before this turns into a 15 page flamewar deviating from the OP after the fifth post, allow me to explain my stance.

I don't really give a damn about multiple factions, will I be able to throw roks at my mate's planet? I will? Then focus on the explodeyness.

However, having exactly one faction will get boring after a while, if it's not handled correctly. This is known, at least the forums/boards where I frequent, as the "Dota vs LoL/HoN" argument, where Dota 2 has a single map where LoL and HoN have several, yet you only ever really see LoL or HoN players complaining about it, since the Dota 2 map is well designed and new heroes constantly flip the meta on its head-Timbersaw laughs at your puny attempts to juke him through the jungle, etc.
That being said, a single faction with a very large unit pool with many, many sidegrades would be perfectly fine, as it'd allow many different playstyles to emerge.

Another way to get around that would be to have every "faction" tied to a commander. Such as the Theta commander, it looks a bit like a rock, doesn't it? So why not give him some sidegraded units that are much tankier, but much slower than the default? And then the Progenitor looks a bit wiry, so go the opposite way and make him more focused around hit-and-run tactics*.
*Note: Please, please don't do this exact sidegrade, I have a Progenitor and I want to Ork it out with a giant blue wave

The final way that I see as a viable route would be to have an "army maker", similar to Airmech. For people who don't know, Airmech is a true action-RTS with one hero and then a 9 unit army that you pick from the general pool. What we could do here is take, say, the Peewee, and give him a big brother and a little brother, maybe called the Cudgel and Scalpel. The Cudgel would be the tankier-but-slower, while the Scalpel would the the faster-but-squishier. You could have any one of these three, depending on which fits your personal playstyle/the current metagame.

I'm curious as to why you thought this couldn't have gone in any of the Faction/race/whatever threads?

The problem is that if each commander has a subset of unique units you end up with the same problems(on possibly a smaller scale) as doing unique factions, hard to balance and you don't get any benefits of the system unless it's done right. Doing it via "stats-tweaking"(ala Age of Empires) is actually worse because you add in the issue of trying to remember exactly how each variation is different and how it interacts with other variations, which quickly turns into a mess.

Doing an Army builder system is more or less just plain bad, it can, in effect cause you to lose the game before it even starts purely based you end up being locked into your overall strategy and can't transition beyond your limited selection.

These have been gone over before, multiple times even in the existing Faction/race/whatever threads.

Mike

Because each thread just turned into a massive screaming match after a while.

At the moment, a massive unit pool would be the best course of action, unless Uber pulls the god tier balancing that IceFrog's been pretending to do for a while now. I was just trying to give alternatives in a relatively level-headed manner.

With the side effect of making yourself out to be pretentious with a massive ego.

Fact is that these ideas aren't new, they have been discussed plenty of times already, and while the discussions can get heated, to call them "shouting matches" and dismiss them based on that is pretty ignorant.

Mike

Honestly for simple unit designs, like TA had, balancing really isn't as big a deal as it is in something like Starcraft, or even worse, a Dota-style game. The reason those units/heroes take so much work to balance is that they have such a variety of uses and a maximalist approach to unit design. A lowly marine in Starcraft has to be balanced for early game, its ranged attack, attack/defense upgrades, stimpack upgrades, effectiveness while being healed, etc. On top of that, it needs to maintain its hard/soft counters, as well as its unit weaknesses. NOT an easy feat, even after a decade of balancing.

In TA, a tank is a tank. It moves, it shoots . . . that's about it. To balance it you can simply plug its unit values (armor, damage, turn rate, etc) in an equation and determine the correct cost, and you're pretty much done.

As for the concept of multiple factions, OrangeKnight summed it up pretty well. People keep debating the concept of a single faction (with regards to unit pool/unit modifiers), but it seems to me they're so stuck in the status-quo of RTS gaming, they can't imagine how a game without factions can be fun. TA might as well have been a single-faction game, and yet somehow people haven't gotten bored of it to this day. (And that's plain, vanilla TA even.) Zero-K is entirely single-faction, and that doesn't affect the variety of the game.

Meanwhile you go to a game like Starcraft 2, mirror matchups tend to be pretty darn boring. Zerg playstyle is essentially locked into one strategy (that the devs are even now trying to rectify). Strategy in that game is restricted to a select set of recipes that are the most effective. Would PA really be better off with something like that? I think not.

Well TA did have differences between the factions, but only in a few cases were these differences really noticeable.

Core units were generally tougher then Arm units, but considering the variables and scale, the difference was minor to the point that its hardly noticeable.

Arm units were generally faster, but in the end, it was no game changer.

Specifically the main differences were cases when one faction had a unit that the other had no real equivalent.

Like the Core super heavy tank, or Arm spider tank, but overall like before, were more flavor then substance.

I like flavor, but not at the expense of the substance.

Leave things like multiple factions till after PA has been finished.

What this should tell you is there's nothing left of value to be had in the subject matter; and simply representing it in a different tone isn't going to rejuvenate the discussion. Don't be so cocky to think you are about to make new ground where people before you have retreaded many times over.

Bad idea. You should change each unit visibly (shape) somehow to relay the difference. I'm don't want to think "Hm, that's a red tanks. They are from red player. And red player is... Some-uber-offence-commander. OMFG!!! Where is my forces, he had attacked at my ACU while I was thinking!!!111oneone".

And yes, that was discussed before many times. Including the two threads currently active.

NukeSnipe, the thing about airmech is that the unit limitation exists because the game needs to be playable with a 360 controller. There can't be more than 8 units on the unit selection screen or it won't work. In a game like this an artificial limitation like that doesn't really make sense.

Personally I wouldn't mind AoE style factions. Has anyone discussed Empire Earth style custom factions?

:shock: :lol: Wow... that's a tad hypocritical.

I don't agree anyway. NukeSnipe doesn't seem pretentious or egotistical. You're not contributing anything by tossing character insults around. If you're tired of repeating yourself just don't say anything.

OP idea has been suggested, rebunked emphatically as a terrible idea. I suggest you don your flameproof underwear.

Also, I agree with OK, there's no reason for this to be in its own thread. CASE CLOSED.

Suggestions: Units be tweaked by...

...commander upgrades that affect the "theme" of his units (adding fire damage with a flaming commander, ect)

...having a special laboratory to produce units of certain types.

...having seperate factories for different unit types.

...just having all the units available with their counterparts at the same time.

All suggested. I think the laboratory or factory upgrade is a neat idea. Requires resource and land aquisition to produce a variety of units, giving it focus. Would also put useful strategy into successfully destroying a certain enemy factory that produced a certain unit theme to weaken them to attack easier.

I've been thinking this over.


The only reason why people are so adamant about factions is simple: identity. People don't want to be part of "the masses" (even though they are) and they want to be different.


I personally think the best approach is a "difference in aesthetics only". It shouldn't be too hard or time-intensive to take a base unit, and give it 3 different-but-similar models and put them in different quasi-factions.

It actually takes 2-3 times the work to make 3 as opposed to making 1 model. A lot of people like to think it's not that much work, but it really is, especially when you consider the style for each faction and making sure there isn't an visual overlap and that each faction's style is unique enough to ensure there isn't and confusion on the players part. A lot of people also wildly underestimate the how long art assets can take over all.

Mike

And it was already mentioned that it affects gameplay. If a player has to be able to identify a unit based on 3 unique design styles, it becomes much more challenging to play effectively. This is multiplied by the fact that PA will likely have a large unit pool, so if there are, say 130 units (which is about how many units TA originally had), then a player would have to be able to identify 390 units. The fact that one unit can have 3 different design styles actually makes this harder, as the unit design becomes inconsistent, requiring extra cognitive skills to identify.

I guarantee that more people will end up complaining about this artificial variety than enjoying it.

I like the idea of variety and customization, heck my first ever RTS was Earth 2150 (i know i reference it a lot) the game had uber-customization and instilled my love for customizeable units and armies. the successor game only added more customization. i was quite saddened when Uber said they would not be implementing a Research tech tree, as that tree often opens up those possibilities.

Uber may not want to design 390 units and learning the specifics of each can induce headaches, 390 units designs may not be necessary. Customization does not require that you have 390 different units. what you can do and Earth 2150 did is have basic Chassis which can be modified.

now certainly don't have to do it the way Earth 2150 did it, but i suggest some special structures or factory add ons that can do some changes to existing units, i mentioned in my latest post on the mine thread a structure that will allow your units to sustain more mine damage.certainly there will be some trade-offs so you don't jack of all trades everything, but you might be able to build a structure that can give your units better armor, an add on weapon, a shield, a cloak device, better propulsion (possibly differentiating Acceleration top speed, and maneuverability).

could even have a special structure that gives ships leggs or another improves the strength of their hull, an anti-missile defense, better long range cannons, give a certain ship the ability to rearm aircraft.

give the ability for aircraft to be modified to seaplanes, turn bombers into torpedo bombers, gunships that can drop sonar buoys. things like this the sidegrades that grant all the more options make a game all the better and especially neccesary when you don't have multiple factions.