Planetary Annihilation: Total Annihilation IN SPACE

[Aklyon]

If anybody has good vid links that show off the game feel free to link them here, would be nice to get a good feel for it. I like RTS games, but starcraft has always felt waaay too fast-paced for me, and there's not really many other options.

At the end of the game, the stats reveal your average APM throughout the match. Mine is somewhere in the 5-7 range, if that tells you anything, and as a person who has been playing Total Annihilation (and spin offs) my whole life, I could probably beat 75% of the playerbase easily.

In Starcraft the average APM to be a decent player is well over 100.

I'd agree with Wingflier here. You don't need to go fast, but you need to go, and keep expanding as much as you can without melting your economy into a puddle of red deficit.

Is the commander building/assisting? He shouldn't be sitting around unless you're planning to evac him soon from your current planet. Same for fabricators, have them building more of everything or at least assisting factories. More radar. More metal extractor claims. More factories. Advanced factories. Defense towers. Artillery pieces. Umbrellas. Orbital launchers. Metal or Energy storage? Something.
Set factories to loop-build anything useful if they aren't needed for making a specific set of units or more fabricators/adv. fabricators. Send your loop-built forces out to scout, or to smash enemy metals and bases. It wouldn't be the most effective thing in the world probably, but if you wanted you could set a some factories to planetwide patrol via area command and have a more ore less random stream of units wander about (or in the case of air units, fly about).

This video is recent and seems to describe what I'm trying to mean fairly well.

[Wingflier]

The PA single player experience is, to me, just about as deep as the single player experience of Smite. That is to say that Smite was built from the ground up to be a multi-player game, the bots were added as an afterthought and Planetary Annihilation is absolutely no different. It is a single player game in the loosest sense possible, even the Galactic War campaign is just a series of single player skirmishes on randomly generated systems with limited technology. It would be no different, in my mind, than all the different modes in which AI can be used in Smite.

That isn't making excuses for the Uber development team though, if they promised it, it should have been available at release.

[KingIsaacLinksr]

The PA single player experience is, to me, just about as deep as the single player experience of Smite. That is to say that Smite was built from the ground up to be a multi-player game, the bots were added as an afterthought and Planetary Annihilation is absolutely no different. It is a single player game in the loosest sense possible, even the Galactic War campaign is just a series of single player skirmishes on randomly generated systems with limited technology. It would be no different, in my mind, than all the different modes in which AI can be used in Smite.

That isn't making excuses for the Uber development team though, if they promised it, it should have been available at release.

But what happens when the game's server goes away? This is never something I have to worry about with AI War but it would be a constant worry with a game like PA because AFAIK: their business model will have a limited time span. Maybe a couple of expansions are possible to keep development running but they have to generate money somehow, have they addressed this?

[Wingflier]

I'm hoping they'll start adding expansions. I've already thought of a few things they could add to the game right off the bat that would improve it dramatically (in my opinion):

1. Tier 3 - Ironically, in the original Total Annihilation, Tier 3 also came as a piece of expansion content, but was one of the most loved additions to the game by gamers and mod developers alike. I'm sure this will come along either way, the only question is whether it will be in free DLC or paid expansion form.

2. Different "races/factions" - New factions with entirely unique mechanics and units would fit very well into the game as expansion content. Right now there's just one faction and it does pretty well in most situations, but there's plenty of room for creativity if they want to go that route.

3. A more fleshed out and emergent "space battle" element. They could devote an entire expansion to this. Starships, battlecruisers, space fighters and bombers, orbital ion cannons, you name it bro.

4. More planet types/nebula options. This speaks for itself, but the possibilities are endless here.

Also there's some incentive for some cosmetic DLC with all the different commander skins they've already made. Unit skins, building skins, weapon/projectile skins, the sky is the limit.

[Misery]

If anybody has good vid links that show off the game feel free to link them here, would be nice to get a good feel for it. I like RTS games, but starcraft has always felt waaay too fast-paced for me, and there's not really many other options.

At the end of the game, the stats reveal your average APM throughout the match. Mine is somewhere in the 5-7 range, if that tells you anything, and as a person who has been playing Total Annihilation (and spin offs) my whole life, I could probably beat 75% of the playerbase easily.

In Starcraft the average APM to be a decent player is well over 100.

I always wonder just how Starcraft ends up even being a "strategy" game, provided it is at all.

Not to mention that I always wonder how many *actual* actions each given player is doing in a minute... since it often seems like when someone goes to give exactly one move order or something, they'll click the ground there not once, but 9999999999999999 times.  Same thing in the moba genre, though nobody seems to give a crap about the actual APM number there.


Anyway.

Sounds like this game still doesnt have anything resembling a full single-player mode, from what I"m seeing here?   All of that deep, procedural campaign stuff they'd rambled on about?   Which is pretty much the only reason I have a copy.  Ugh.   To be fair, yes, I probably shoulda just exercised more self control and not bought the damn thing, but.... yeah, like that's happening anytime soon.

[Aklyon]

Well, Galactic War does have proceduralness, but its mostly in the system map layout and what tech shows up where. Not particularly deep.

[madcow]

I tend to agree that starcraft is less a strategy game. It's more of a multitasking game. There's strategy at maybe the top end of it. But for all the rest of us, it's how well we can remember to check back and make units/etc while doing other things at the same time.  I think my all-time favorite RTS games were myth and the close combat series.

Starcraft campaign is nice, and I've played blizzard RTS games since the days of Warcraft (good ole' dial up), but the strategy part takes a back-seat to the multitasking & other aspects.

[Hearteater]

Not to mention that I always wonder how many *actual* actions each given player is doing in a minute... since it often seems like when someone goes to give exactly one move order or something, they'll click the ground there not once, but 9999999999999999 times.  Same thing in the moba genre, though nobody seems to give a crap about the actual APM number there.

So from checking in to APM on SC in the past, I've come to the following conclusion: A lot of those APM are totally wasted on giving duplicate orders. A ton of them. However, they keep their APM high to establish the physical response rate in the game. If they try and play to only issues orders at need, as soon as then need to issue a quick group of orders they have trouble going from "0 to 60". It also affects their mental state as they play. When you are constantly issuing commands you can mentally slot each new command you need to issue in very easily. So the constant physical activity keeps them in the mental space to issue fast orders as well as keeps their hands in a state to respond instantly to give those orders.

[keith.lamothe]

Yea, starcraft is more like a time-management game.  Specifically, managing your time as a player.

Very interesting stuff, but it's strange to apply the same word "strategy" (or even "RTS") to both Starcraft and, say, AIW.

[Misery]

Not to mention that I always wonder how many *actual* actions each given player is doing in a minute... since it often seems like when someone goes to give exactly one move order or something, they'll click the ground there not once, but 9999999999999999 times.  Same thing in the moba genre, though nobody seems to give a crap about the actual APM number there.

So from checking in to APM on SC in the past, I've come to the following conclusion: A lot of those APM are totally wasted on giving duplicate orders. A ton of them. However, they keep their APM high to establish the physical response rate in the game. If they try and play to only issues orders at need, as soon as then need to issue a quick group of orders they have trouble going from "0 to 60". It also affects their mental state as they play. When you are constantly issuing commands you can mentally slot each new command you need to issue in very easily. So the constant physical activity keeps them in the mental space to issue fast orders as well as keeps their hands in a state to respond instantly to give those orders.

Geh, this one always goes over my head.

I see this in fighting games as well. Other player tends to get overly excited easily... or at least that's what it always looks like to me.... and their character will start jittering back and forth, possibly with some random flailing added.  Happens in pretty much any fighter, is most obvious in the Smash series.

Wheras I will then just stand there and wait for them to do something if they're twitching that much.  Typically, they're easier to put a stop to in this state, I've found, which is why the whole behavior confuses me...


Feh, I just dont get it.  Always feel like with games like SC they should call it something other than that, since the "strategy" aspect is VERY different from what could ACTUALLY be called "strategy" games.

Wheras something like AI War or Supreme Commander back in the day makes alot more sense to me.  Ahhh, I wonder whatever happened to SupCom?  That coulda gone on as a full series. 

[WingedKagouti]

Ahhh, I wonder whatever happened to SupCom?  That coulda gone on as a full series.

SupCom2 happened.

[KingIsaacLinksr]

Ahhh, I wonder whatever happened to SupCom?  That coulda gone on as a full series.

SupCom2 happened.

Yup and that killed the series. SupCom 1 with the expansion and the most recent up-to-date balance mods is an incredibly impressive game but I doubt it'll ever continue.

[keith.lamothe]

In many ways PA is the continuation of supreme commander.  The closest we're likely to see to it, anyway.

[eRe4s3r]

In many ways PA is the continuation of supreme commander.  The closest we're likely to see to it, anyway.

Sup com had more than 1 race though... in fact it had.. 3 and they were pretty diverse So it's more like a "casual" version of sup com. But then I look at maps that are spherical and it's too hardcore even for me... I never thought I said this, but I can't handle spherical battlemaps :/

Also I have other issues with the game (Namely the abysmal GUI).... there are TONS of UI issues) ... don't make me list them ;P I think with mods it can be a decent game. But 1 race and no experimentals is very boring imo. Also I just can't get over the fact that I can't upgrade my commander. I loved that in SC1

(Disclaimer: I backed this game, so I have a right to be miffed ;p) I backed it expecting the continuation of sup com. But maybe that was illusionary considering how much money SC1 cost to make.

From my Kickstarter projects so far, 1 is ok with a but (D:OS), 1 is meh until mods (PA), and 1 is still not out (PoE) not a good run. But D:OS at least made me happy. PA doesn't for some reason.

[Wingflier]

Ahhh, I wonder whatever happened to SupCom?  That coulda gone on as a full series.

SupCom2 happened.

As far as I know, Supcom 2 trumped the original in sales by a large margin. It also received very positive reviews in general, including being labeled the co-op game of the year by several notable gaming sites.

It seems like there's this cult fanbase that pretends Supcom 1 was some successful or revolutionary title for the genre, and I hate to break it to those people but it wasn't. It really didn't do much, 20 years later, that Total Annihilation hadn't already accomplished. The resource requirements were absolutely insane, so that 75% of the potential playerbase couldn't even use it, and the game itself was kind of an unorganized mess, the story was lackluster, the multiplayer was buggy and laggy. It just wasn't a great game, even with the standalone FA expansion. It didn't tread anywhere new or do anything particularly well.

Supcom 2 wasn't all that revolutionary either, but 5 years later it had graphics which trumped the original and were about 75% less resource intensive. The "research tree" was also a nice touch and had never been attempted in the ground-based RTS genre, at least as a resource in a fast-paced setting (4Xes are completely different). It's true, the game left a lot to be desired, and deviated further from the original TA even more than the first game did, but I overall I thought it was pretty solid.

In other words, don't blame SupCom 2 for the failure of the series, if the first game was any good they wouldn't have even needed a sequel. The first game was a disaster, much more so than the second.