On the topic of scale...

I posted about this in the megabot reveal thread, but it almost instantly got buried by all the hate comments and argument. I think it is important enough to have a thread of its own.

I've noticed in the whitebox renders that the bots and tanks are very similar in size, despite the fact that the factories are not only very different in size, but much, much bigger than the bots themselves. The difference between the T1 and T2 bot is the presence of big armor plates, they don't have much difference in size. The T2 factories are 1.66x bigger than the T1 factories, so shouldn't the bots inherit that difference?

I understand it's whitebox, but the difference between T1 and T2 should be identifiable at a glance. Look at the difference between T1 and T2 tanks in TA. One is relatively normal sized, the other is ENORMOUS.

What do you guys think? Unit scales look iffy to me.

Size = Power in the mind of most gamers. As T2 units are not more powerful, but rather more specialised you can't use size as an identifier. It's too engrained in our minds that bigger guns, hit harder.

What it *looks* like they're doing is, T2 units are very slightly larger... but *look* far more complicated...

"Busy" is the artistic term I believe.

There will also be a large variance in the T2 designs to better suit each T2 unit's "Specilization"

Mike

Pretty much how I would handle it.

It's also possible none of the bots shown are T2, although the assumption for a couple of them is that they are.

Nah, we have confirmation. In the livestream a few weeks ago Mavor said that the community had guessed pretty much everything in the whitebox correctly as what it was.

Which is GOOD. The art design informs mechanical function.
I don't need to be told what unit does what... I can see it plain as day.

I highly respect the artists at Uber.

Okay then, size should still mean something. It'd be stupid to just leave size alone entirely, as it's a good identifier that should be used.

So wait, explain to me why T2 Factories are more expensive, larger, and more complex if they produce units of the "Exact same effectiveness, with more specialization"? Also explain to me why T2 Units look more heavily armored, and generally more heavily weaponized than T1?

But anyways, if all units are effectively "the same" with different specializations, that would be rather boring. It's like you guys are voting for a game that already has low diversity (only one faction) to have even less diversity by purposefully standardizing the units. I mean seriously, you go to your factory, and you open up the buy screen.
-KBot 1: Has 1 damage, has 1 health, has 1 resource cost
-KBot 2: Has 2 damage, has 2 health, has 2 resource cost
-KBot 3: Has 3 damage, has 1 health, has 2 resource cost
-KBot 4: Has 1 damage, has 6 health, has 3 resource cost
-Repeat ad infinitum for tanks, aerospace and boats

Just no. SupCom already has low unit diversity and almost no asymmetry despite the fact that it has 5 BLOODY FACTIONS, we don't need ANOTHER TA-styled game with absolutely no diversity.

You aren't arguing with anything other than someone's opinion.

We haven't revealed all of the T2 units. The T2 factory is bigger for a reason.

That is CRIMINALLY oversimplifying everything, If Kbot3 is arttillery based it'll play, and look, very differently compared to units.

Heck, even changing how the weapon functions is enough to create diversity, look at AA as a Prime example with Flak and Direct Fire.

There are a LOT of different variables to take into consideration.

Mike

You're right, I am criminally oversimplifying things, but remember that everything has to have a simple base.

And also, what exactly do you mean by the whole specialized but equal argument? If you mean equal in terms of resource efficiency in relation to other aspects, yes I can understand that. But please elaborate before we continue to dissect.

Edit: @Neutrino, I'm just stating my opinion on these things, and I am meeting opposition. I understand that and am grateful for it.

T1 tanks aren't amphibious. T1 bots don't have jumpjets. T1 bombers don't have radar jamming. Think of any other abilities you could add (and in other games have been added) to a basic combat unit to allow it to have a role that would specialise it, making it less useful in certain situations, and more useful in others

Also, placeholder art. The units you see there aren't even finalised in design, so they have been made to specifically scan as different to allow the devs to see which is which while testing the engine. I would be surprised if the beta unit palette looked anything like that, except in very general terms

Low unit diversity? For SupCom / FA take T1, T2 and T3 into account and there's what, 15+ land units? Plus a similar amount of marine units, and again for aircraft. For each faction.

Having said that, they are not drastically different across factions, no. Because players would moan like hell about "X faction is imba" or "nerf unit Y I can't maek defens ". I seem to recall that happening anyway for SupCom, there was a lot of hate for the Cybran T2 point defense because it was a laser, not projectile like most of the other point defense units. Still not sure what got up people's butts so much about that one, but hey.

The fact that T1 is effectively superceded by T2, and again for T3, does mean that there's only a few of all the available types in play at any time, but I don't think I'd call a game with what, over 200 different unit and building designs "low unit diversity". Even at T3, I'd still be building the T2 torpedo bomber for wet maps, and the T2 transport, because those units did not have a T3 upgrade.

Unless by "low unit diversity" you meant "people only build 2 different units out of the 40 available" in which case I'd agree with you up to a point. Players with little imagination do indeed pick one or 2 units they like and just build those en masse, in the hopes that numbers will triumph. That doesn't stop anyone from using them strategically, it just means a lot of people don't.

Is that a failing of the game design, or of the player?

I firmly believe that it is a failing of the players as well that the game is so symmetric and flat. I'm just hoping that Uber ignores uneducated players whining about it, and makes an awesome game with cool quirks and tactics. Which is sorta my point of posting this, as diverse units kinda links in with this.

Though that really isn't the heart of this thread. My OP was about the bots and tanks being hard to tell apart from one another because of their size, which I was hoping Uber would entertain my opinion about.

I'm confused... what exactly are you upset about?

Neutrino has told you that the size of the factories is not "just for show".

Half of the units are whitebox anyway,and I am pretty sure it would be easy for Uber to change such a minor 'issue' of size with some units.

I'm not particularly upset about anything now, Neutrino has dropped a hint that unit scales will change. As of the moment it seems the discussion has shifted to unit diversity.

Just because I'm griping about something, don't assume I am upset about it. If all the tanks were relativistically the exact same size, I wouldn't much care, so long as a player could differentiate between them at a distance.

Fair enough, hopefully the livestream on Friday will shed some light on the situation.

That may not be necessarily true. If the ability fits like a glove, then it should be used. Staying effective is just as important as being simple.

Honestly, T2 shouldn't be much bigger than T1... I was playing Total Annihilation: Twilight the other day... T1 is freaking worthless as soon as you get ONE popup cannon. The splash damage can literally kill 50 peewees in one hit...

What fun is that? Your opponent getting T2 stuff shouldn't stop you from getting T1 stuff. That turns the game into a pointless tech race.

T2 should either be more powerful or have added abilities compared to T1, be more expensive, and take more time to build. T1 should be massable and should still be a big part of your forces LATE game. Think zerglings in starcraft. They're always useful at any point during the game. I realize starcraft is totally different, but the idea of each unit having its place is important.

I agree with the above post. I just played TA today (for my first time :3) and I noticed that massed Peewees can kill T2 units pretty easily assuming there isn't that much splash damage being flung around. I'm kinda disappointed with Supreme Commander now because of how much more efficient T2 and T3 units are than T1. I mean seriously! LABs are best stompy robots, and they get almost no place in-game.

Literally? You sure about that? If you're referring to the Toaster, it will get overrun by a nominal amount of peewees VERY quickly. Plus they're a lot cheaper/quicker to build, so relying on a toaster is hardly a good idea. (And if you're talking about the Ambusher, Peewees move too fast for it to hit.)

In fact, while the static defenses are all quite powerful, they are all outclassed by the more mobile units. And in my Twilight experience, the T1 units are rarely useless, both against static and against mobile opponents. In fact, they're usually the meat of the army, with T2 units added in for survivability and special function.