Hello I would first like to state that I am new to the game (only had two games so far) as well to the forums (so, so many different topic) I have yet to fully explore the full potential of ether. However with the repetitive evolution of both I wont be able to truly explore ether for some time. That being said please note that anything noted below may not be completely accurate due to lack of knowledge (even though I would like to think I have done my homework). Ok to the issue, I have had great interest in this game for sometime. And one thing I'm hearing a lot is for feedback and ideas. And even with my lack of a complete comprehension of the entirety of the work done/in-progress/yet to be, I would like to put in my two cents as I feel that even in the case that it has already been thought of or would be something grasped by all, or also ignored can bring this game to greater heights and that is something I am sure we all want. SO LET ME BEGIN.... - I noticed while playing that a nuclear bomb doesn't really have the... satisfaction or effect I was expecting when I finally launched it. ^Is this a bug? still being worked on? overlooked? I am not entirely sure (still looking for that info in the forums) but I would like it to be examined and changed a little at least. -I noticed as well already in the forums talk about solar energy being a component in the game. and while I like the idea, I feel it could become a complicated issue, but perhaps maybe if it is limited to late game development option maybe for elite units and structures? ^just a thought. -EVERYTHING GROUND (or whatever) VS. AIR (also whatever) ^while it is always important to have those units that are special for anti air (or anti whatever) I hate the idea of units unable to do anything but die in the face of even a single bomber. -also while unlikely any chance of some kind of death star? ^maybe as some kind of game type, first one or team to complete one gets to watch as all other planets or space bases of any kind are destroyed... eh eh... -also I haven't quite looked to much into it but once space is reached don't yeah think the fog of war on planets would be or could be rendered useless by satellites? ^again thought haven't seen anything on this idea yet maybe I missed it. and wow I just realised just oh must I have typed. I have many more ideas and suggestions. but I will see oh people respond to what I have here before continuing. and I will probably have even more after some more games and reading of the forums. Please enjoy my two cents.
-Nukes don't have firing or "building missile" animations yet, they also don't do any damage. However, I think the klaxon sound they make as they launch the missile is freaking awesome if entirely illogical for a race of robots with silent communication. -T2 only Solar Power has been discussed as a possibility by the community, nothing yet from Uber though. -Most TA Fans expect all weapons to be able to fire at anything so long as it is in range. It is currently an issue because Tanks track their targets very fat, have very fast projectiles and their pitch limit isn't enough. -If you want to see a Death Star generate a Metal Planet in the plane editor. It doesn't do anything yet, but they're working on it. -Satellites will not remove Fog of War because it would be overpowered, and modern satellites are incapable of providing live footage of an entire planet with enough detail to make out enemy units, and it's very unlikely that satellites in the near future will be able to. Super-robot satellites? Maybe. Balance-wise entirely removing fog of war wouldn't play well, intel satellites will exist that may provide radar coverage or visual coverage in a small area.
Why have solar power if we already have power generation that requires no input? we have power plants that produce unlimited energy. anything less is a step in the wrong direction. I just don't understand why the robots in PA would use a lesser form of energy production (and have it harder to create than the obviously superior energy source) Why not? There are plenty of satellites used by current military that send back images in real time (time delayed images would be less useful for creating proper military strategies) PA is so far into the future, I'm sure technology has advanced far enough to allow satellites that relay visual data. Hopefully satellites take a decent amount of effort to launch into orbit, and have appropriate counter-measures to prevent them from being overpowered, but in my opinion, it's fairly useless if all they do is provide radar coverage. T2 radar already covers most planets very effectively, and are a lot harder for your opponent to find/destroy than I hope satellites will be.
It isn't taking a picture that's the issue, it's the resolution of the picture that is the issue. A large tank is about... 10m long. Numbers pulled out of my *** mind you, I think modern tanks are a bit smaller. The Earth is a relatively small planet, and has a diameter of 6,731,000 meters. Including the curvature of the Earth (which reduces the amount of data per pixel on the image), imagine trying to spot a 10mx6m camouflaged box on a 6,731,000m wide circle. Now we want a robot to do it, which means that the image would have to have enough data per pixel for the robot to identify the shape of a vehicle, assuming it would remove line of sight. That means the robot satellite has to have a camera capable of capturing an image that is several quadrillion quadrillion quadrillion pixels in length and width, and those are the dimensions; the actual image size would be the dimensions SQUARED, assuming a square picture. Then the robot has to load this massive image into its buffer (which realistically would be several thousand, maybe even several million terrabytes of data loaded onto the Robot's equivalent of RAM), and then it has to process it through a detection algorithm. This would take thousands of years to do if every single computer on Earth was working in harmony, without any lag time at all. Sorry, sciencerant, muh logic. As for T2 solar, the reason is to add diverse gameplay. Fusion, fission and dark matter reactors are very expensive and require a large initial investment (which is pretty much your generator with little to no input), and you need to get there first.
Actually we really do have the technology to view things in sufficient resolution for a great amount of detail already, and also have the processing power to use it. http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1469 ... 20000-feet The US already has "a 1.8-gigapixel video surveillance platform that can resolve details as small as six inches from an altitude of 20,000 feet (6km)... Two ARGUS-equipped drones, and the US could keep an eye on the entirety of Manhattan, 24/7..." And, how much detail do you really need to see large structures or bots the size of a house? Now, should you see the whole world clearly from the launch of one satellite? Probably not. But if you have a dozen satellites surrounding earth you can get images as clearly as Google Earth, and that seems to me to be more than good enough to see a whole army coming. I don't see why we can't have satellites illuminate the world, the OP is right that this is exactly the reason we have them now. Sure, balance is always an issue, but as he said, we can simply make them expensive and require large build times and/or have large energy upkeep. Also, yes, this should not be a poll...
I think the OP was implying that a single satellite would be able to entirely remove the Fog of War from a planet. I can understand of a handful of satellites would be able to do this, but not one. I may be mistaken, it was a bit vague and that's the way I interpreted it at first.
well I like that the satellite idea has taken off so well (didn't think it would get so technical seeing as though this in a futuristic game with ROBOTS so I believe in these cases we can have just about anything we want), and what I had in mind was multiple satellites to reveal the entire planet cause you know field of vision. but another thought I had was that if the entire planet being revealed always so long as the satellites are up or for only a period of time and in a certain area in which case you would only need one. Or maybe a hybrid combination of the two in some way. and while on the topic of satellites I would also like to see satellite weapons, ORBITAL BOMBARDMENT HORAH! and note while I realise that these thing may be overpowered on a single planet but keep in mind that multiple planets having an entire planet revealed might not compare when 3 other planets circle it and then asteroids and who knows what else it may not matter much.
They aren't satellites, they are drones. Satellites orbit much, much higher. The international space station is at 400km, which is 1.3 million feet. GPS satellites are at 20,000 km (65 million feet). Edit: If you want geostationary/geosynchronous orbits, you have to go to 36,000 km (118 million feet)
Quite right, these are drones. But the point is that if we have that level of detail in modern day, I can't possibly imagine that "well into the future" these "advanced robots" won't be able to adapt such ancient technology to satellites. And I don't think we need to detect armies that are only 6 inches in height anyway. Last time I checked, these robots are freakin' huge!
Please don't try to use future predictions of our own technology to justify overpowered, unfun and unfair gameplay mechanics.
A satellite in geosynch orbit with that level of detail would show a 900 meter long object as barely 1 pixel. You would need a camera nearly 6000 times as powerful before it became the slightest bit useful. This may actually be impossible, regardless of any technology - I know there are theoretical limits to what you can do with photography.
You cant say that solar energy is inferior. Solar panels could be cheaper to build and they could produce significantly more energy than regular generators. Again, we are talking about gameplay and balance, not about real technologies.
