Metal Planets - Should Metal Extractors Be Buildable Anywhere?

Not all procedures are random, but these ones are.

They aren´t right now, indeed. If you give them infinimetal then they´re about as imbalanced as it can get.


I do think that a geometrical distribution is better for metal planets, yes.

Right now they suffer from the same random resources as other planet types. Don't put words in my mouth and think you're being clever.

Having infinite resources also raises the skill ceiling since it will be more challenging to acquire and use them effectively. Metal planets are quite competitively oriented compared to other types.

Lol still using this point huh?

I believe as we have yet to be truly exposed to any of the unique abilities that the metal planet has to offer, it is to early to be deciding such a drastic thing as making all metal worlds money maps or not. For me money maps can be a fun mix up in play styles from time to time but I would not want it to be a set thing upon release. An option you could choose? Yes. Unless there are some serious changes in the game as a whole, a metal planet that acts as a deathstar and a money map sounds like it would be a little to overpowered!

I think the more game types we have the better. Sooo even though I'm not a huge fan of these polls as they really don't speak for the majority of people who play the game we should at least have a poll with the option to choose both or optional.

Or make it a mod. I cant wait to see and play all the crazy game modes people will make with pa. The possibilities are endless

It certainly does raise the skill ceiling - by seeing who can rush there the fastest. You are guaranteeing that all maps with a metal planet are played the same way - rush to orbital, try to get to the metal planet first. Anyone who does not do this will lose.

Your previous argument that a player can do more damage with less resources simply comes down to luck, since of course the player with more resources can do even more damage, easier. You can't rely on luck to balance disproportionate resources.

Instead of everyone having to actively avoid something broken when generating a map, it's far better to simply not break it in the first place.

If BMB can make a money map that is also a serious map, he just might win a medal.

Good luck with that.

yes to optional build mex everywhere
default off for ladder ...
yes to planetbuster weapons
default on for ladder (?) ...

It's NOT BROKEN just because YOU DONT LIKE IT. The same is true for any map where you start with sparse metal and another planet has a lot of metal. But it also doesn't mean the guy who gets to the metal first automatically wins. It simply does not follow that.

It's not the same thought, The Metal in these situations are finite, a pre-set amount set at specific locations on the planet. What you propose for Metal planets is similar in concept, but fundamentally different in a practical sense.

Imagine 2 planets, Planet A and Planet B. Planet B might have twice as much metal as Planet A but Planet A is half the size of Planet B.

While Planet B does still have an advantage, because Metal Placement is specific you can easily gauge how much of an advantage(hint, it's not as big as you'd expect) and balance accordingly.

Then you add in a Metal Planet, and suddenly regardless of it's size it's superior to BOTH Planets A and B(probably combined to boot) simply because you can build metal so densely that the metal planet has practically unlimited Metal production, and even a minute or two can have a huge effect on how far ahead a player can get.

In the end, we already had a taste of what happens when you allow Extractors anywhere from back during the Alpha, it wasn't fun and I don't want to see PA regress to that.

Mike

The only thing that is different is the magnitude. There is a hard limit on how much metal is useful too. Most regular planets exceed that right now, by a lot. If you fully control a planet, any size planet, then you have infinite resources. That is not currently "breaking" the game. It's not the most exciting gameplay but it isn't broken.

Unlike regular planets a metal planet would be perceived to be more important, and so prompt actual fighting over it.

Let's review the great gameplay "benefits" of having a tonne of metal in the center of Setons in Sup Com. This is close to equivalent of a metal planet that can have extractors built anywhere.

First off, all central players always go for the wreckage. Ever seen someone play competitive on Seton's and not go for it? Of course not. So it's we'll established that high metal concentrations elsewhere promote single-purpose openings. Only it's worse in PA, because it requires a fixed build order too in to get to an orbital launcher, and not just a single moving unit.

Secondly, wreckages do not function the same as income through extractors. They require large storage to take advantage of, and are one-time-use only. Furthermore, with Seton's, it occurred at the very start, when storage is a real limiting factor. So as bad as Seton's was with regards to boring gameplay and bonkers metal, it's far better than a massive concentration of actual resource spots, as in a fully metal planet.

Thirdly, unless a player makes a monumental mistake, if one player takes the center of Setons, and the other player doesn't, that first player will win. A resource boost that early is an unsurmountable advantage. So it does follow that one player getting there first has more or less won, it's not just a case of us not liking it. Even if both players get to the planet at the same time, it doesn't change the fact that they got there using a boring opening build that they had no choice in doing.

Fourthly, there used to be even more mass in the center - namely, a monkeylord wreckage. What happened to it? They took it out in the expansion, because it was broken.

Does this apply to any other extremely dense resource deposit, even if it's not a metal world? Of course. But space between metal deposits is a big factor. Being able to build 100 metal extractors right next to each other changes things drastically compared to just a second planet with it's sparser layout. Furthermore, all future balance would get skewed as it would have to take into account massive resource incomes, making non-metal world play even more broken.

So with all these downsides, what are the upsides? Novelty/differentiation? The metal worlds are already planned be different by way of activated weapons. Because it looks metal it should act as metal? Well, it's impervious to everything except a planet smashing into it, I'd say that includes an extractor drill except for specific spots.

So what massive upside is there that outweighs all the problems it brings?

You still don't get that just because you personally don't like it, it isn't bad? Need I remind you that seton is one of the most played maps.

It is a natural variation on the base mechanics of TA.

It is the only reasonable purpose that a metal planet has in the gameplay, otherwise it is just a boring skin for regular planets.

My original supposition stands; if you don't like it, it doesn't matter. Without this feature metal planets are a waste and should be removed and the costs cut.

But what happens when that's fixed then? What happens when Extractors generate less Metal, or there are fewer metal spots on Planets, what happens when inter-planetary raiding is actually feasible, what happens when KEWs get refined and Asteroid Bases are functional?

You end up with a bunch of really fun and balanced planets, and then you have Metal planets that are still massively "over powered" because they have functionally infinite potential for income because you have NO means to regulate them.

So then, how does the potential for things like built-in Giant Lasers and Engines(among other potential surprises) NOT make it more than just a "boring skin for regular planets"?

Mike

What happens is that metal planets truly represent a different proposition in gameplay from regular planets. I don't care about the weapon as such, it's a gimmick. Regular planets can also destroy other planets with a weapon that you can build on them. It's not different.

I think metal planets would be as OP as the gas giants will be, so why not? Would have to be a starting planet or have a full system of them to make them work.

What's the differentiating factor? The reality is that both are gimmicks. But at least weapons offer some interesting gameplay compared to Infinite metal as explained by Raevn.

First off, not all planets can do that, or rather it requires a specific size(so far) and Dev comments have suggested that, at least in the foreseeable future, they don't want any size planet to be boosting around.

Secondly it is different, or at the very least has obvious potential to be. If the Weapons/Engines are already present and need activation, that provides different gameplay until the point of activation(for engines, weapons are still unique because thus far Weapons as described are limited to Metal Planets) and afterwards they function in a similar manner to the "regular" but might still have different qualities. For example Metal planets could have 8 pre-placed engines, and they are activated one at a time and there is no minimum to move the Metal Planet, instead the number of active Engines denotes it's Speed.

There are options available.

Mike

You literally explained the differentiating factor in your previous post, now you're just being obtuse.

If you don't like it that's fine, but it is not an invalid type of gameplay. Don't pretend it's somehow broken or imbalanced when it's not.

The past 5-10 pages has been nothing but overreacting to a specific type of gameplay that you, personally, you alone, do not like, and trying to deny the ability of the game to support that because you want yet another skin for your personal preference in gameplay.

Wow, Flame bait much? Why else would you only call me out, despite the numerous other people that took part in the conversation, not only SINCE you've joined it, but Before as well?

Mike

I just gave many examples of why it is bad; continuing to claim it's just our personal preference doesn't change that.

And it is played in exactly one way, every single time. Rush for the metal, or lose. That's what you are advocating for PA.

And a broken one, for the reasons I've explained (not just because I don't like it). The only equivalent to TA would be a system entirely made of metal planets, so there's no rushing involved. A system with metal planets that you don't start on is not at all the same.

Just because you say it is broken does not make it so, it's not imbalanced, it does not compromise any other mechanics, it only changes how resources are distributed.

That paragraph is addressed to whom it may concern.