Planetary Annihilation

On August 16 2012 09:16 FliedLice wrote:
Looks cool. Crazy-cool.

But 900k... Whew!

On August 16 2012 20:18 crappen wrote:


Is 900k much or little? Supreme commander was a 11.5 million dollar project (Chris Taylers word from a recent interview).

On August 17 2012 16:21 TaShadan wrote:
nice idea, hope it will be good. only downside is the comic graphic... why do modern rts games have comic grafics? Oo

On August 17 2012 16:21 TaShadan wrote:
nice idea, hope it will be good. only downside is the comic graphic... why do modern rts games have comic graphics? Oo

On August 17 2012 17:17 Ideas wrote:
I thought the art-style was one of the best parts of the trailer. I hope they keep it.

On August 23 2012 15:46 Thingdo wrote:
This game looks awesome. I really love the whole kickstarter model letting developers be creative without publishers breathing down their necks. I think there is really a lot of possibility for some awesome RTS games made this way.

On August 23 2012 16:53 Khalum wrote:


Your post made me realize that the next great RTS game is almost definately going to be a kickstarter/indie game.

On September 15 2012 06:27 nrage wrote:
Is this going to be free to play and has beta started yet?

On September 15 2012 06:40 Zilver wrote:


Not sure if troll, but the game is probably going to cost about 20 bucks and it's very early in development right now.

On September 15 2012 07:25 nrage wrote:


Troll? Free to play is the concept of the future. Smite costs money aswell to support and get guaranteed beta but will be free to play at release.

"It already looks very hard to move around and play the map on an accurate scope."

On May 18 2013 23:18 Godwrath wrote:
I would gladly play the alpha of this, but 90$ pre order to be able to do that is just not in my book. Anyways, i will following it closely since i love TA.

On May 18 2013 23:35 Madkipz wrote:


I don't think playing the alpha would be much of a draw anyhow. It's bound to be filled with bugs and little annoyances. Much better to come to a fresh and polished experience once it goes into live / beta. At least the money go directly to the project so that's always good. the 90 buck is most likely a gatekeeper to keep the people with access to it low. They already have a ton of people from the kickstarter who are bound to test the alpha.

On June 14 2013 22:49 MrTBSC wrote:
let me try to explain again...

the reason for the high pricing is to keep of trolls and crybabies away until release where the game will cost bout 40$ or less the game is just not ready to be presented to the masses ... and therefore alpha is price for very interested RTSfans who realy want o support the game ... i explained already that Uber doesn´t want to screw over the kickstartercommunity ...
this is a crowdfunded game afterall ...

if you don´t want to pay 90$ (which i aswell wouldn´t pay) for early alpha or 60$ for beta (which i paid for ...ahem)
... then just wait ...
it shouldn´t be much of a problem to wait until relaease, is it?

release will be bout december were the price for the game will be bout 40$ or less

On June 14 2013 23:31 MrTBSC wrote:
i like to throw a question in here

how much sense does it make to offer the massaudience an cheap early access when the developer already made a crowdfundingcampaign in which backers had to pay a lot more to get early into game...

On June 15 2013 01:50 floor exercise wrote:
So is it donations/funding or are you just buying product at exorbitant prices on KS? The whole concept is getting muddled now.

Selling your alpha for $90 is just stupid and bad business. Just because it's KS where it's actively encouraged that you make dumb tiers full of stuff doesn't make it any less so.

The thing is, if this was $30, or $25, they would have made tons of money on pre order while in alpha, because it's a highly anticipated RTS game. Whether you want to say it's because of the KS $90 tier or putting it on Steam at $90, this whole concept of $90 for alpha was poor judgement.

If I were them, or anyone who made this mistake, I would simply tell it to the KS backers like it is: selling it as an alpha at reduced price will be much better for the company's financial situation, and that they are sorry they ever made this price point and that it was the wrong decision. Afterall, theirs was supposedly a donation, they are fervent supporters, and they are fewer than steam customers.

Instead they decided to compound wrong decisions and now have everyone on the internet mad at them, except for the sycophantic bunch that threw money at them in the first place.

On June 15 2013 02:05 PassiveAce wrote:

They cant just totally piss off their most dedicated supporters like that, it would be a terrible decision imo. I agree that in hindsight the price is absolutely terrible for a wider market but it probably looked a lot more attractive when they were writing the pricing tiers while glancing at their current budget forever ago.
They have to sleep in the bed they made.

If you think people are mad now you have no idea how pissed people would be when they realized they were essentially scammed out of 50 bucks.

On June 15 2013 03:45 LaNague wrote:
its a big deal because they are basically selling their kickstarter funding on the steam main page, im just as annoyed by valve as i am by the game publisher.


And rightfully, a lot of people got annoyed as well.

On June 15 2013 05:10 Conti wrote:

Aaand why is that bad, exactly? Is that supposed to be unfair for the kickstarter backers or something?

On June 15 2013 06:35 LaNague wrote:




no, its bad because steam is being used as a crowdfunding platform when most people use it as a store that is selling working products.
As i said, id like to see it seperated from the main steam store page if valve really must insist on competing with kickstarter like this.

this kickstarter and early access business is prone to abuse and not always working out, sometimes the devs dont even mean to pull a scam but are just not skilled enough to deliver, i really hate to see it on a platform that i previously could trust to not scam me.




kickstarter backers know that they arent making a business decision, but are donating for a game to be made, btw.

So is it donations/funding or are you just buying product at exorbitant prices on KS? The whole concept is getting muddled now.

no, its bad because steam is being used as a crowdfunding platform when most people use it as a store that is selling working products.
As i said, id like to see it seperated from the main steam store page if valve really must insist on competing with kickstarter like this.

On June 15 2013 20:05 zbedlam wrote:
Anyone that has played this and FA forever that can tell me if/why it is better?

On June 15 2013 23:56 MrTBSC wrote:
minimaps as far as i heard won´t be a thing...
though you will be able to put up multiple widows for multiple viewpoints...mutimonitors will also be possible
and here is quite a big intresting feature ... ChonoCam ...this allows you to rewind the game like a replay while playing beeing able to see what happened on a specific time on a viewpoint you choose and then go back to actual match as it continues..

On June 29 2013 08:23 ChristianS wrote:
I'm really interested to see if the Starcraft community takes to this game. I've watched a couple of their live streams of gameplay and it looks really fun, and really different from traditional RTS games in a lot of ways. Blizzard hasn't really had much competition in the RTS field for a long time (LoL and DotA aren't RTS games).

Actually, they were saying they're planning on trying out minimaps in some of the upcoming builds of the game, although it's not exactly a priority so it will probably be a while before we see it. But Mavor was saying, at least theoretically, that he'd like to do some kind of minimap. Although I can't imagine how that will work with multiple spherical planets being represented on a 2D map. Maybe it will be some kind of thing where it shows one planet at a time, and you can choose which type of map projection you want to use.

On June 15 2013 03:45 LaNague wrote:
its a big deal because they are basically selling their kickstarter funding on the steam main page, im just as annoyed by valve as i am by the game publisher.


And rightfully, a lot of people got annoyed as well.

On July 06 2013 14:34 rezoacken wrote:


Imo, they should just have offered 3 offers on steam, with pre-order at 40$ being the first presented on the store. Then in it, show other options at 60 and 80 for pre-order + beta or pre-order + beta + alpha. In the end it's the same but it would have probably helped the massive hate/wtf that were the forums when this game was offered on steam.

Or maybe just skip the alpha offer at 80$ on steam, or reduce it and offer other stuff for KS backers at this price point.
Or steam should make a separate crowdfunding section.

Looks like a very bad first time experience to potential buyers to me.

Hope they are better developers than marketers

... don't allow for micro very much

"A needs to do something similar to make late game units more important than throw aways."

Micro loses importance late game because it is too hard to do everything at once, not because it doesn't matter

On July 16 2013 16:16 TheLunatic wrote:
I'm in the alpha, it's an amazing game. I'm a five time masters, first two hots w toss last three wol terran. I love starcraft but it's going to fall to the waste side. This game is too epic. My highest sc2 match was 8 base vs 8 base at masters level and it doesn't even hold a candle to this planetary annihilation game and galactic play isn't even in alpha yet. If cheese annoys you switch, because in this game it's harder to cheese than to hold the cheese. I'm living every second of planetary annihilation. I hope blizzard takes some notes from these guys, because till I can have a 200000 main army, harrassing armies in the hundreds all at different spots, launching reinforcements from the moon, I'm not comming back to sc2 seriously. It seems pathetic and childish in comparison, and I loved sc2. Never in a million years did I think another rts would top it, but this has. I can't wait for galactic warfare and planetary destruction mu ha ha ha picked out the perfect screen name for this game to, that is gaurnteed to be mine since I'm in the alpha.........judicatorofgenocide mu ha ha ha plus having the masters sc2 background makes it so ready to out micro and macro your opponents lol, no one has figured out concaves are good yet its so funny, as of right now the quickest I've taken over a WHOLE PLANET is 26 minutes.....that's epic so the game length doesn't have to be outrageously long, I'm think in when in is put in I'll be able to destroy whole planets in 40 minutes to an hour.......I've had 40 plus minute games in sc2 where I never got over 130 units and I sure as hell didn't destroy a planet.......blizz is gonna have to step up there game if they want me buying lov or

On July 16 2013 17:36 Enema wrote:

I am not sure if you are trying to brag about your skills in a game which is in Alpha State or if you are trying to trashtalk Starcraft. Either way I don't like your post at all.

On July 17 2013 02:36 ChristianS wrote:
Hahaha oh, calm down guys. There were gonna be a few SC players that really liked the heavy macro emphasis of PA, this one guy happens to like the scale of it a lot more than that of SC2. SC is still going to be the top RTS. This isn't the first time it's had competition (although it is the first time in a little while, at least)

On July 17 2013 07:26 MrEnzyme wrote:
I have high hopes for this game, but its worrying to see that the control scheme is only for individual units like every other rts. If their plan is to have games spanning multiple planets/asteroids, it seems totally unfeasible to have the players still building and controlling individual units at that scale; ideally there would be some way to help automate production so you aren't forced to manually build every single unit. Hopefully they see the need for something like that, but at this stage it looks like they haven't even considered it (possibly just because it's only being tested with one planet at the moment). It still looks awesome, but I hope it isnt horribly cumbersome to control bases across multiple planets, or that might kill this for me.

On July 17 2013 05:53 ninazerg wrote:
I'm going to cast PA games when it comes out. I'll have to lift off my commander to obs, though. WAIT IS THAT POSSIBLE?

On July 24 2013 21:11 FFW_Rude wrote:
Is this game any good ? I'm always seeing it on steam but it costs a shitload of money. It's almost a month of food for me (not that i don't have money but i don't want to put 90€ in a game that i won't like).

I own all of the Total Annihilation (dat music) and was really a fan of it. I read a lot of it but i still don't understand how the game work. Is there single player for now ? Will there be a campain ?

On July 24 2013 23:18 FFW_Rude wrote:


Yes sure no problem, because i know you get alpha,beta and the actual collector edition game. But i was wondering if the game was good or not. I can't figure that out

On September 17 2013 00:08 MrTBSC wrote:
nothing much happening here ... well ...

so just a quick announcement for those intrested (as always) ...
betaphase will start on thursday september 26
by that time interplanetary warfare should be implemented

a couple early orbital units were available on a older build already
as shown in this video by zaphodx
video also shows metal- and lavaplanets generated
in the planet editor

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDyIfZzbwpA

Since there were people who backed the betaversion on the kickstarter
the current possible PA player population of 8028 + additional alphapreorders from the inhouse uberstore and steam will rise by at least 11925 + betapreorderers from the uberstore
making the populaltion consist of 19953 players + preorderers
so there is a good ammount of players for betatesting

On September 28 2013 03:31 TigerKarl wrote:
I bought this game today. I hope so much that this game is going to be a big hit, because SC2 has stopped being a relevant RTS game some time ago and it's more than questionable if Legacy of the Void can revive this genre.
I've loved playing the original Total Annihilation, let's make a dream come true and give Blizzard the competitor they Need to produce good games themselves.

On October 29 2013 20:29 Grumbels wrote:
The game is projected to come out in December the 13th

On November 17 2013 10:19 ChristianS wrote:
What do you mean by no depth? It's got plenty of interesting game mechanics that will take a fair amount of figuring out. If you don't like the graphics that much, that's your business, I suppose. Personally I was enjoying Destiny's stream quite a bit

On November 26 2013 15:00 ChristianS wrote:
After playing it briefly, some features I'd like to see included are:
-Elliptical orbits for celestial bodies
-Interplanetary weaponry based on absolute distance between objects
      *obvious applications:
      1) Place two planets in synchronized orbits, one circular in orbit and the other elliptical, so they can't collide, but shift either orbit slightly and both bodies are on a death clock.
      2) Place two planets in synchronized orbit where they will pass close to each other once every so often. Prepare large invasion forces for each launch window.
      3) Place a moon in high orbit around a planet. Build lots of interplanetary defenses, and then lower its orbit once your guns are big enough.

I get the complaint about units not looking very unique, but I think that's mostly just because they have to be small since army sizes are so big. Unfortunate, but probably unavoidable

On December 03 2013 23:26 KeksX wrote:
Just FYI, Planetary Annihilation is 33% off on Steam right now.

On December 03 2013 23:44 Farad wrote:


But is it worth it? Reading that it could use another year in development isn't very reassuring.

On December 03 2013 23:44 Farad wrote:


But is it worth it? Reading that it could use another year in development isn't very reassuring.

"Actually if you go to the Planetary Annihilation forums there's a big thread filled with community members who are asking the team to delay the release, because they also feel that the game needs much more time and polish, so I think Grumbels is right. Also I agree with him that the units do appear generic; I mean it isn't even as good as Total Annihilation was more than a decade ago...I would rather play TA again than this. Particularly the expansions."

"It does show promise, but controlling your force over a very small planet feels kind of silly and more chaotic than tactical (total annihilation for example had canyons, forests, water barriers, cliffs, etc. to block and control battlefield motion. Here there is practically nothing except a big open planet or a big open planet with water."

"I can't see them finishing their biggest feature (crashing moons into other planets) either."

"A good reminder not to buy into the hype no matter what the project is"

On March 06 2014 16:09 Sermokala wrote:
the game isn't done yet so any recomendation has to be predicated with "its really a crapshoot at this point blow money on it if you remember what rise of nations was and think sub com fa was way better then any other macro rts ever.

But I got it and I enjoy it for what it is. looking forward to things changing but I'm uncomfortable with the balance between ai control of my units and being able to control things on more then one planet.

- All non-combat structures health increased by 3x.
- General combat balance pass over ALL combat units and structures.
- T1 AA Bot: Removed.
- New T2 Tactical Missile Bot added.
- T2 Sniper Bots: Can now shoot down tactical missiles.
- T1 Assault Bots: Turned into light raiders. Fast, cheap, weak.
- T2 Assault Bot:s Can now go under water, added torpedo.
- T1 Bomb Bots: speed greatly increased.
- T2 Tank: Has a very slow turret turn rate but improved overall.
- T1 Fighter: Improved.
- T2 Fighter: Removed.
- T1 Bomber: Drops 5 bombs in carpet bomb style.
- T2 Bomber: Fires from outside of range of AA towers and fires a tactical missile.
- T1 Frigate: Torpedo removed.
- T1 Destroyer: Torpedo added.
- Pass on Artillery structures and their firing arcs.
- Tactical Missile Launcher Structure: Energy removed, range reduced, made into much more of a base defense.
- Bases defenses improved overall.
- Ion Cannon: (Umbrella): Energy usage removed, range and damage increased.

On October 04 2014 19:43 iHirO wrote:
Uber's next game is starting to look interesting. It's a shame that Planetary Annihilation is so buggy on release, they'll have a harder time getting Kickstarter backing.

https://d2pq0u4uni88oo.cloudfront.net/projects/1062187/video-447849-h264_high.mp4

On October 04 2014 19:49 Grumbels wrote:

I didn't understand that at all, Planetary Annihilation still isn't "done".

On December 03 2014 03:00 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
Just bought this game for 5 euro in the sale... still feel robbed lol. What a horrible excuse for a single player campaign. A map to fly around on and start missions which are just skirmishes. Laziest thing I've ever seen. How on earth is this game in release state... Also the pathfinding :X

On September 29 2015 07:57 LaNague wrote:
its just a poor excuse to get full price for the old game again, notice how it isnt even a steam DLC for the game, its a completely seperate game to start with full price again and to get more postive reviews since almost noone that gave the base game, which is still 80% of the content of the new entry, a negative review willl buy the new one just to review it and most fans will buy it and review positively.


Its just shitty practice and i am surprised steam allows this review dodging.