PTE Build 76412-pte now live (updated with new build 12/16/14)

Wait the stuff disabled in the code right now is not perfectly finished?
HOW DARE YOU!

Just played a quick team match with another ai vs 2 other ai. Unfortunately one of them got stuck even in the new build (Build 76079-pte). The ai had a really bad starting point between a bunch of rocks (not big enough for a factory), just build 2 mex and then was not able to do anything else.

Edit (more info): As it was a local match, I can't provide you with a lobby-id but I will continue my ai testing on online servers in the future matches. Also I think it was more of a really poor starting place which should not be available for spawning: Like there were two metal spots totally surrounded by rocks (desert planet) and the next free place to build larger stuff was quite a bit away behind all those rock elements. Still it would be great if the ai is able to handle even that complicated conditions, too.

I'm loving all the balance tests! Keep em coming!

zykey is streaming now with tvinita watching and yaegz maybe joing, or streaming himself: http://www.twitch.tv/zykey_

Had you fixed this earlier, a lot of TeamComBuilder would work with the AI using it (The AI refused to start vehicle or naval first, just bot or air, not to mention structure-only commanders refused as well). Meh, better late than never, still want to do some work making individual AI for individual commander factions.

If you played on the Uber servers, do you have a lobby id? Those are helpful, since Uber can see directly what's going on then.

I don't agree with these ideas to insert starcraft similar micro to PA. Honestly i think starcraft micro is a bit retarded, how fast can you click a button should not define who wins in a STRATEGY game, unit composition and deployment should. You wanna test your reflex time go play a FPS, this idea that e-sports introduced in micro is stupid.

Starcraft and MOBAs are much more akin to the old tactical games then to to RTSs. They should not be an example of how to do a RTS cause they in my my opinion are Real Time Tactical games.

Don't get me wrong i do want more micro inside the game but the good micro not button mashing brainless one. I discussed some ideas of to do it here:

https://forums.uberent.com/threads/discussion-on-how-to-make-pa-more-tactical.65672/#post-1028504

How well you click should, yes, but that's hard to do, me thinks. I'd love for micro like that, not the APM micro SC uses.

Do you really think that this is how PA should be played?


criz.

this makes me consider actually buying hots just to play a little sc2 again. ... okay I don't even have enough time for PA currently :/
Anyway yeah PA should not be like that.

Can we please get a fix for the ATI high brightness, that's not a mod.

Very good point, the game still looks quite bad on AMD cards contrast-wise.

I haven't the faintest clue what I actually watched. I understood the numbers but... wat. I don't know enough about engagements to even give an opinion if that's really how PA should be played, though I'm thinking that it wouldn't be all wonderful to implement that.

Edit: It occurs to me that I didn't properly read your message when I decided to reply, but I'll leave my reply as is in case someone didn't fully understand it.

Noooo we do not want PA to play like that, it's micro intensive, and you could argue that even starcraft shouldn't play like that. Because it's strange to think that anyone who can see something clearly enough to shoot at a target, can't figure out whether or not it is a target.

I don't know the specifics of why it works this way, or why it was made in the first place, but from the effects of it I can give an explanation.

If I put it in overly simple terms the "scan range" is the individual unit's range that it will confirm the existene of
the target and confirm that it's an enemy, and then fire

If i have a stalker/dox selected, and i right click on an enemy unit, that stalker/dox will receive a command to attack that enemy unit and then carry it out as 'quickly' as possible. An attack move is to move to a "location" and also to attack any enemy units that come into the scan range.

Why it's weird, is (In sc2's specific situation) the scan range is globally a single number, and the individual range of some units is more.
So attack moving stalkers/dox results in them getting up close to within the scan range (say 10 metres) of the enemy before they open fire, even when their maximum shooting range is 20 metres or more.

By extension, this also demonstrates there are units that have a scan range higher than their literal attack range, for example melee.

Ideally we wouldn't use scan range to limit effectiveness at all, in both PA and Starcraft. I don't really understand why it exists, and I think it's silly to have something only use it's maximum range when you specifically tell it to, and in no other situation. Especially when the maximum range keeps it safer out of harms way.

So the solution then, is to have a scan range removed, or have it 1-4 points higher than respective attack range of each individual unit.

Just played a game with 2 other humans vs 4 total AI, 3 humans v 3 AI v 1 AI. everyone should have been set to separate armies, but somehow one of the AI players on the team of 3 had its colors changed to that of one of its teammates and the pair were able to act as a shared army. The primary color was supposed to be green, but changed to orange, if that matters.

Not sure how to look up a Lobby ID post game, else I'd post the replay.

On a similar note, is there any way in-game to have AI share armies besides in GWar? It was a good challenge, if unintentional.

Unit cannon has proven to be fun as all get out, it really changed the way I attack into fortified positions.

I noticed the health bars on my damaged naval units was not being displayed if I zoomed out a bit, while at the same time other health bars like on enemy structures was still displayed.
Also it was really hard to find my commander when he was under water, if you zoom in close enough no icon is displayed as with all units, but a unit that is deep under water is practially invisible without an icon.
I think a submerged (friendly or owned) unit should get an icon so I can still find em regardless of whether I'm zoomed in or out
like submarines...

Surrender button still displays after I lost the game.

Um er, I hate to state the obvious...
Actually it's the point of this post, and I'm well aware of the disclaimer posted on every wall, door, nook, cranny,
chair, and forehead but....

With the unit cannon, I don't actually see what I'm getting, in fact that it has storage didn't occur to me till I started building stuff, though that was more my own negligence at (not) looking closely.

But looking closely and watching construction doesn't give me any indication on construction/storage limit.
and I'm still thinking I prefer a more streamlined packing+launching process, rather than construction.

But for the sake of being able to use it on water, I guess it needs to be a factory.. and I'm fresh out of ideas.

<random dream>
A smaller UC on t1 that is a factory, land only, small capacity, expensive to build larger armies with etc.
A big endgame UC on t2 that launches stuff build from other factories.
</random dream>

You can set the icons on units to display at all levels of zoom in the settings

Detail: Just looking at ships' movement... It seems they completely stop moving when turning.

I can appreciate that maybe they don't/can't corner at 200 km/h in water, but I'd have thought it makes more sense to let them turn while moving, or turn while accelerating; rather than decelerate completely-turn-accelerate.

Minor detail:
I can also appreciate the cost inefficiency to give fully realistic water effects/waves etc- but maybe some particle water effects on ship movement to give some likeness of going through water, instead of maybe ice skating on high friction ice?

Edit:
Another minor detail: if the ships are going to fire as fast as they are on the current PTE build, could we make it so that they fire one gun at a time per set of 2-3 , rather than all 2-3 guns per turret? I think it'd be aesthetically more pleasing, and more happy. But it's only a minor detail.