Personally I feel like the hate against sphereical planets is weird
One of the BEST RTS's ever made IMO was Populus: The Beginning, and its the only RTS other than PA that I know of that has spherical planets.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MHErNkaKwY[/media]
Of course, they aren't randomly generated planets so that might be why people rag on PA's planets. If its possible for PA planets to have a good design/flow to them, then I'm all for spheres.
[editline]28th December 2014[/editline]
(seriously though why hasn't anyone done anything with the populus RTS? its such a unique take on RTS that is super balanced and fun)
I like the spherical stuff. But I kind of wish there was more variety to the environments of the planet. I bigger mountains and more forests n shit.
Just tried out PA for the first time yesterday. Ran impressively smoothly, even well into a 5-person free for all on 5 planets. I thought the one-unit set worked surprisingly well, although I do sorely miss SC1's faction diversity, and would love to see it return.
I feel like if anything is seriously missing, it's stealth or radar jamming. The feeling of making a moonbase is so satisfying, but being able to hide it from the obligatory one radar unit everyone sends to every planet would really round it out.
Is there any list of planned future update features/expansions anywhere? Game screams possibility, would love to see it keep going.
[QUOTE=Canesfan;46811215]Just tried out PA for the first time yesterday. Ran impressively smoothly, even well into a 5-person free for all on 5 planets. I thought the one-unit set worked surprisingly well, although I do sorely miss SC1's faction diversity, and would love to see it return.
I feel like if anything is seriously missing, it's stealth or radar jamming. The feeling of making a moonbase is so satisfying, but being able to hide it from the obligatory one radar unit everyone sends to every planet would really round it out.
Is there any list of planned future update features/expansions anywhere? Game screams possibility, would love to see it keep going.[/QUOTE]
Not official list, but overall we can expect balance, fixes, new units, better system editor, more tutorial, better galaxy war and moreeee. For now probably next big thing is asteroid belts, but nobody knows for sure how that will work.
As far as I know they plan to update this game for as long as they can, kind of like TF2 (but instead of hats, we have custom commanders).
[editline]28th December 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=GHOST!!!!;46809918]:|[/QUOTE]
I aim high with my next rig, going to collect money and buy beast pc around time they will release 1151 intel slot (or whatever it is called, forgot the word), so middle of 2015.
[QUOTE=Canesfan;46811215]Just tried out PA for the first time yesterday. Ran impressively smoothly, even well into a 5-person free for all on 5 planets. I thought the one-unit set worked surprisingly well, although I do sorely miss SC1's faction diversity, and would love to see it return.
I feel like if anything is seriously missing, it's stealth or radar jamming. The feeling of making a moonbase is so satisfying, but being able to hide it from the obligatory one radar unit everyone sends to every planet would really round it out. [/QUOTE]
Stealth and radar jamming would be awesome. I never used it in SC because I wasn't good enough to play against anyone except AI, but now that I've played like 130 hours of PA and most of it against others online I actually realize how incredibly useful it would be to have that.
I really don't miss factions though. I like how every player starts with the exact same technology and it's all about skill instead of knowing the ins and outs of each faction.
[QUOTE=Robber;46811862]Stealth and radar jamming would be awesome. I never used it in SC because I wasn't good enough to play against anyone except AI, but now that I've played like 130 hours of PA and most of it against others online I actually realize how incredibly useful it would be to have that.
I really don't miss factions though. I like how every player starts with the exact same technology and it's all about skill instead of knowing the ins and outs of each faction.[/QUOTE]
Well, when I want factions I guess I mean I want more unit variety. I loved playing Cybran because of their stealth/cloaking technology and their cool experimentals. A game like PA seems tailor-made for big experimental units, so hopefully that's something they expand upon in the future.
I feel like they are purposefully avoiding stuff like experimental units because TA never had stuff like that and they seem more interested to be faithful to TA
Shame because IMO SupCom's take as being a spiritual successor to to TA is much more interesting than what TA did because of stuff like experimental units and better faction variety. And it should be, being that the game came out almost 10 years later.
Have Uber commented on experimentals in the recent past?
It would be so awesome to have huge experimentals crashing down from orbit and wreaking havoc in the enemy base.
[QUOTE=Robber;46812500]Have Uber commented on experimentals in the recent past?
It would be so awesome to have huge experimentals crashing down from orbit and wreaking havoc in the enemy base.[/QUOTE]
I think I heard somebody said they scrapped them although I do remember a render of a large mech that looked similar to one of the commanders.
[QUOTE=Canesfan;46811215]I feel like if anything is seriously missing, it's stealth or radar jamming. The feeling of making a moonbase is so satisfying, but being able to hide it from the obligatory one radar unit everyone sends to every planet would really round it out.[/QUOTE]
Cant you just put up some quick orbital defense to kill the radar units they send to spy on your moonbase.
[QUOTE=alexojm;46812732]Cant you just put up some quick orbital defense to kill the radar units they send to spy on your moonbase.[/QUOTE]
sure, but they can still have a vague idea of where your base is for nuking or a strike
[QUOTE=paindoc;46812748]sure, but they can still have a vague idea of where your base is for nuking or a strike[/QUOTE]
And don't forget SXX. If the enemy radar survives for even a second he can just send a bunch of SXX and snipe your commander if you don't move him immediately.
Have they said anything about tier 3 or at least adding more tech tiers
a while back they said they wouldn't
ideally they want a horizontal tier system, where t2 wasn't just a straight upgrade from t1 but rather would have some sort of consequences associated with them
Theres alot of confusion here. Sooo, no experimentals (99% sure), no t3, no shields, no factions, no space combat (for now). Dunno about stealth, but I already can be hidden for a long time, if enemy is occupied with something :P
As far as I know, PA is mostly about big armies. T2 is not straight up better, but more specialized.
We will probably get more units, subs, also more cool mechanics like Unit Cannon that add up to the gameplay.
Also, they plan to add different nuke types. That also can be fun.
Edit. Many people confuse PA gameplay with SupCom, it is symilar, but its much more symilar to the TA. Two tech levels, second more specialized, its more viable to build more factories than assist one, no unit levels for kills, no perks for adding storage next to mex or energy or factory, etc. Its more like they took what was good in SupCom UI and big scale, than pure gameplay.
[QUOTE=Xanoxis;46814017]its more viable to build more factories than assist one[/QUOTE]
wait really? fuck
[QUOTE=Furnost;46814157]wait really? fuck[/QUOTE]
Later on you CAN assist one factory if you really need something fast, but when you start game, its better to build more factories than assist one. Pure eco reasons, nothing more. Also, remember rule, that one small PGen (energy) is giving enough energy for one factory working. So, try not to have more factories than pgens. Also there is mass, but you know, that obvious.
That's a bummer to hear for me. I loved SC1's gameplay, including all the intricate stuff like bonuses for linking factories, etc. I understand the desire to keep it simple and be about big armies, but making a game deep doesn't necessarily mean making a game complicated.
[QUOTE=Canesfan;46814314]That's a bummer to hear for me. I loved SC1's gameplay, including all the intricate stuff like bonuses for linking factories, etc. I understand the desire to keep it simple and be about big armies, but making a game deep doesn't necessarily mean making a game complicated.[/QUOTE]
Uber wanted to make it cleaner. If you dont see it clearly that unit have any bonuses, you cant put it into game. Also Uber was really against synergy bonuses, because they wanted to have free design of bases. You can build them however you like.
Uber wants to add depth into gameplay by clever balance of units, more units, more mechanics. Game is already deep. Unit Cannon, Halleys, Metal Planets, unit ballance, T2 units, Arty, Tactical Rockets, Atomic Rockets, Orbital layer, Gas giants... We gonna have more of that stuff.
There was ALOT of discussion about SupCom mechanics on pre-alpha, alpha stage of development. You're more than year late :P
[QUOTE=Canesfan;46814314]That's a bummer to hear for me. I loved SC1's gameplay, including all the intricate stuff like bonuses for linking factories, etc. I understand the desire to keep it simple and be about big armies, but making a game deep doesn't necessarily mean making a game complicated.[/QUOTE]
IMO that was the worst part of SupCom by a mile
It sounds nice in theory and made for pretty bases, which I'm all for. But games were decided entirely by who could micromanage their economy building placement the fastest and most efficient rather than strategy. The economy in SupCom was exponential and if you didn't capitalize on exponential economic expansion as quick as that allows then you just lost to the guy that could. That and T3 bombers invalidating any strategy you might want to establish on games that could last more than an average length of time. Two reasons (among several others) I find SupCom2 a better balanced game overall (shame everything else about it though).
[QUOTE=KorJax;46816365]IMO that was the worst part of SupCom by a mile
It sounds nice in theory and made for pretty bases, which I'm all for. But games were decided entirely by who could micromanage their economy building placement the fastest and most efficient rather than strategy. The economy in SupCom was exponential and if you didn't capitalize on exponential economic expansion as quick as that allows then you just lost to the guy that could. That and T3 bombers invalidating any strategy you might want to establish on games that could last more than an average length of time. Two reasons (among several others) I find SupCom2 a better balanced game overall (shame everything else about it though).[/QUOTE]
That's true. I guess I don't miss the base connecting stuff, being able to build freely is nice. And I definitely do not miss T3 bombers.
I've started a Galactic War campaign; it's tough early on on the multiple planet maps when you don't have ANY orbital tech at all other than transports. If you take too long to get to the planet, any transports get swarmed immediately and you have no options for invasion beyond mass a ton of transports and hope you can get a teleporter up on time.
[QUOTE=Xanoxis;46814271]Later on you CAN assist one factory if you really need something fast, but when you start game, its better to build more factories than assist one. Pure eco reasons, nothing more. Also, remember rule, that one small PGen (energy) is giving enough energy for one factory working. So, try not to have more factories than pgens. Also there is mass, but you know, that obvious.[/QUOTE]
You just revolutionized everything about how I play this game.
Is there any tutorial never really played RTS games so was taking it slowly and the AI just keeps sending in a fuckton of units and destroying everything instantly.
[QUOTE=Lexinator;46837996]Is there any tutorial never really played RTS games so was taking it slowly and the AI just keeps sending in a fuckton of units and destroying everything instantly.[/QUOTE]
Not really, I think there are a bunch of getting started videos hidden in some menu.
Some tips though:
If you're completely new you can set the efficiency of the AI much lower than 1.0 and it won't be a threat and you can experiment with the economy, units, tech levels and various other gameplay mechanics without pressure.
The other really important thing is, if you want to play against better AI or even humans there are three rules: Never stop expanding, never stop scouting, never stop attacking.
If you stop expanding and your enemy doesn't they'll quickly have a much larger army than you do.
If you stop scouting and your enemy doesn't they'll always have the answer to your strategies while you will be surprised by attacks you didn't expect.
If you stop attacking while your enemy doesn't, they can expand as much as they want without any problems while you will have to spend considerable amounts of resources to defend your MEX (mass extractors), fabricators, base and commander. Resources your enemy will put in his army instead.
I can't overstate how effective it is to raid early with a just a few bots (or tanks) and destroy a few MEX and maybe even the fabricators building them.
[editline]2nd January 2015[/editline]
[url]http://forums.pamatches.com/t/quick-tips-for-improving-gameplay-efficiency-and-combat-effectiveness/124[/url]
[QUOTE=Robber;46838074]Not really, I think there are a bunch of getting started videos hidden in some menu.
Some tips though:
If you're completely new you can set the efficiency of the AI much lower than 1.0 and it won't be a threat and you can experiment with the economy, units, tech levels and various other gameplay mechanics without pressure.
The other really important thing is, if you want to play against better AI or even humans there are three rules: Never stop expanding, never stop scouting, never stop attacking.
If you stop expanding and your enemy doesn't they'll quickly have a much larger army than you do.
If you stop scouting and your enemy doesn't they'll always have the answer to your strategies while you will be surprised by attacks you didn't expect.
If you stop attacking while your enemy doesn't, they can expand as much as they want without any problems while you will have to spend considerable amounts of resources to defend your MEX (mass extractors), fabricators, base and commander. Resources your enemy will put in his army instead.
I can't overstate how effective it is to raid early with a just a few bots (or tanks) and destroy a few MEX and maybe even the fabricators building them.
[editline]2nd January 2015[/editline]
[url]http://forums.pamatches.com/t/quick-tips-for-improving-gameplay-efficiency-and-combat-effectiveness/124[/url][/QUOTE]
Put the AIs energy/resource thing or whatever it's called to 0 as well, and it will just sit still for an eternity, while you can learn what each thing does.
The Unit cannon is so much fun to use.
[QUOTE=Xieneus;46842557]The Unit cannon is so much fun to use.[/QUOTE]
I'm always sad when the enemies die before we get to unit cannon their home planet.
I played a ranked match and got amazingly beaten.
The other guy had a insane good economy and was using area attack commands to keep me busy me here and there, he stayed away from micro totally focusing on economy.
I tried to play a match with an AI and it didn't do anything until I was literally shooting its two mass extractors, Why?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
