@tat, the issue I have with your argument is that Ashes isn't a spiritual successor to TA or Supreme Commander.
Anyone hoping Ashes to be "TA for the modern age" is likely to be disappointed. Heck, we don't even have robots (in the sense of having things walking around or even tanks driving on the ground).
What we're looking to do is make our game our way and get feedback from the players on ways we can make it as fun as possible. We're not looking to make a Starcraft/TA/SupCom game for the latest gen. It's it's own thing with our own ideas based on decades of experience in developing and playing these games.
And by that I am referring to the original post:
So far what people want that i have read are the following
-Long range artilery
-Naval units / Large oceans
-Ability to zoom out with icons on main screen like in supreme commander FA
-Possibility of having some sort of Commander type unit
Of which, Ashes will have none of the things listed above. That game was already made quite well: Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance. I like that game. It's just not this game.
I will wait to play the game but pretty much have 0 hope and can see this being another failure even with new engine purely because of the attitude of making a game "to not be supreme commander" like your too proud to say hey we took stuff from supreme commander why because its great and its what our players wanted the people paying for your game are the ones asking for stuff similar to supreme commander and you seem to say like we don't care what happens with the game i mean the people asking for this stuff are founders we are directly funding and paying you to make a game we want
When people saw the previews of this game they didn't say wow this game looks great i might get it they said "wow this game looks like supreme commander maybe it will be the same or very similar that would be amazing been waiting for a game like that for so long now" whether you accept that or not i don't care that's what people thought that's why most came here and also most funded your game and became founders i didn't become a founder to support a game who refuses to take any input if it relates to supreme commander and to sit back and be told yeah were making sure our games not like supreme commander cause were too proud to be labeled SC FA successor
Your not listening to that at all your saying hey our games how we want to make it not how you guys would like it and we will do everything to ensure its nothing like the game you all want to play and that was so successful
So how can anyone have any hope in this game at all after comments like "Of which ashes will have none of the things listed above" you already just closed any option of changing things depending on the feedback you get from players after they play the game
My question to you is what are you gonna do if people play this game and say hey frog it needs shields it needs artillery we really need a zoom out option are you gonna sit their and say hey well sorry im too stubborn to implement those things because i don't want my game to be anything like supreme commander ? because if that's your approach you will fail exactly like multiple other games have including PA , Sup com 2 they all failed because they refused to listen to what people really wanted and stuck with its my game and ill develop it how i want
It's a sad day for SC fans it really is
I watched the latest video you uploaded to the vault and i don't really know what to say your taking some ideas from ta/sup com e.g metals / power / engineers / t1-3 even the ui is similar and i know you said it will change and even in the video you have a zoom out option already and i find the reasoning you gave in the video quite poor are you building a game for people who have never played an rts or for people who have played rts before ?
Your example you gave was the terrain heights and differences and if units were at bottom of a cliff and you zoomed out on the map you wouldn't understand why they can't attack and why your units are getting destroyed ? is that even a serious question
If your playing the game zoomed out or not your expect to learn and understand how the game plays and how to be effective the only thing your doing by limiting zoom so people can see the different heights in terrain is catering for fools nothing more
Heres how it would play out if i was a total noob - I send units in their at bottom of cliff im zoomed out and my units are getting demolished i have no idea why obviously i zoom in to see why i see there's units at top shooting down and my units trying to fire but can't shoot up the cliff oh ok he has a height advantage ill have to factor that in when i pick my battles next time problem solved lesson learned
If i was familiar with rts ok i wonder if this game has real physics and strategy like they claimed sends units to bottom off cliff units can't shoot up the cliff and the guys at the top are raining down hell on my units and getting completely annihilated ok yep their is real physics ill use that to my advantage when defending etc
TL:DR Zooming has 0 effect on the work you have put into terrain detail and physics of units
TA/SC had the following and so does your game
Tiers 1 - 3
The engineers even build the same as TA / SC with different particle effects
You can assign more than 1 engineer to speed up building process another feature of TA/SC
Whether you agree or not so far the game is built like TA/SC and is playing similar including in the video showing the zoom feature already working i really hope you can stop focusing on making a game thats won't be called a TA/SC clone or worrying that people will claim it to be a successor and focus on the good work your doing by taking proven ideas from other games and building on them and adding to them instead of making the drastic mistake other devs have done and trying to focus on being different from other games
Also you mention when people get a hold of the alpha your worried about people saying its not like SC or they give feedback basically wanting a clone of SC if your playerbase gives you feedback for example saying we want shields what logical reason can you possibly have to not add them in if people want them implemented apart from saying SC had them and its not a SC clone ?
The #1 issue developers have is they never really listen to players they like to think they do they even might believe they do but they never really really pay attention to what were saying that's exactly why PA failed and other games similar , look at starcraft for example they had a proven good game starcraft 1 and then they built on into starcraft 2 with added features and improvments
Now i know AOTS is not SC however nobody has really made a game that improved on SC you have a chance to make your own game AOTS with better features and taking great ideas from a game most devs failed to clone or attempt to remake correctly
Hopefully a bit of this sinks in or makes you at least consider / think of a different approach i don't want you to feel as if were demanding this or that or that we dont appreciate your ideas etc i think its in yours and your player bases best interest to not hesistate on any good ideas simply because they are used in another game or ur too focused on making your game different so its not labeled the SC successor infact if it was labeled that you should feel honored that you have managed to claim the throne from SC:FA and doing so by building a game most players have craved for a long long time