What Planetary Scale Really Means

Could be a first with a game of this size

Haha I love your Zoolander reference there
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ffj8SHrbk0

But you are absolutely right that the size of the planets in the visual presentation was a bit small. But I've read several times that the planet size is adjustable, as long as your computer packs enough processing power.

And again, just to make it clear, I'm a bit concerned because I don't see an easy solution to having a full, supcom-style experience on the ground, and then have it possible for you to leave your fully established base behind, and go assault someone else's base.

SOME people like the ''turtle for an hour then fight" kind of games, but I would prefer that didn't happen, and it'd be nice to come up with some good solid suggestions to prevent this from happening.

Every tactic is a viable tactic, just because you don't prefer one playstyle doesn't mean you can take it away just like that. The question is not how do we prevent this, but how do we BALANCE this.

And on a sidenote, I've hated rush tactics which end the game in a couple of minutes in most RTS'. Turtling ensures huge epic battles, and that is what we want right? Otherwise play SC2 or any other fast paced RTS.

I think if the game design includes the assumption that you will probably forget about some part of your whole, system-spread force at some point, leaving yourself weak in that area, it'll be okay.

why shouldnt it work. You know that SupCom Map where they took Seraphim glaciers and instead of sea there would be empty space? This kind of is like 4 planets where you have to use transports and air for fighting. The only difference is in PA you have air on the planets and additionally transports for interplanetary movement

Thanks Mike. This should have been obvious to me from the video, but we have never had a game on this scale before.

This brings up mega questions such as, can I fire my peewee cannon back at the moon? and do I have to pay more energy per peewee fired? What about Nukes? How will this be designed (captured in game mechanics) to operate in such a way so that I can build and fire a missile without knowing it's destination before I build it but still get a game I have a deep underlying appreciation for my kinetic advantages? Maybe missiles/rockets will be exempt from major gravity well concerns? I don't want to have to consider destination before I build every rocket.

Pawz, I really don't think they're even listening to you.

Sure every type of strategy is valid, but it sounds like that's the opposite direction its heading if the only type of game permitted is that which you spend a long time teching up and establishing your well defended base before you even meet one another.

Simple concepts with a premise that you start on separate planets:

If transporting units from one planet to another is a difficult, expensive, or high tech action, then you will NOT encounter the enemy during the early phase of the game, when the light attack units and T1 raiders ought to be fighting one another. What good will they be if the enemy isn't even ON your planet?

If transporting units from one planet to another is an easy, tech 1 action, then you will likely be able to launch units up into space and land them again on your own planet, anywhere, bypassing any and all terrain obstacles not to mention land them in various spaces on the enemy planet bypassing HIS natural defensive terrain obstacles and even his perimeter perhaps. This makes every bit of the game having to do with terrain obstacles entirely obsolete.

So, which is it? How do you permit games where opponents meet in the early game where T1 units fight, and yet also retain the usefulness of natural terrain obstacles?

The only solution I can see is that opponents will start on the SAME planet, with the higher-tech option of launching off and claiming other ones.

One possible way: orbital units that explode incoming enemies.

(There are so many questions on the forum about how the game is going to play that is directly or indirectly based upon some logic or realism argument... when you debate on those terms the debates can be endless.)

My (new) instinct is that the most probable solution that PA is going to use is the one that maximizes fun, awesome, and explosions, not necessarily in that order ;D

Uberent has stated that Tech 1 units won't become obsolete when one reaches higher tech levels, so this means you will see Tech 1 units throughout the game.
Furthermore, they also said that the maps/planets are variable in size so you could have a really really big planet with several players starting on it.

But the devs are talking about massive battles between 10-40 players in systems containing anywhere from 1-10 planets and accompanying moons.
In that kind of situation, you are pretty much guaranteed that you will start on the same planet as at least 2-3 players.

I am sure that you COULD generate a map with 10 huge planets and play on it with a single opponent, but it would probably become a turtle fest...