#What are the factions' identities?

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

jagged elbow
#

Basic questions:

Why does this game have 2 (+1 soon) factions?

What is the 'vision' for those factions' identities going into the future?

Why should players want to play one faction over another faction?

How should the factions' identities tend to manifest in game mechanics?

What activities/playstyles should be encouraged by one faction that aren't as encouraged in another faction?

What activities should be encouraged by all factions as a 'common thread' of the game?

To what extent may factions have 'special' units that break with the identity of the faction?

What aspects/relations of the identities of the factions might clash with 'fun' or 'interactability' (thus desiring negative-feedback effects)?

What aspects/relations of the identities of the factions might jive well with 'fun' or 'interactability' (thus desiring positive-feedback effects)?

How should the identities of the factions manifest in their units?

Arguably there's a deeper question here about what the identity of the game is. Discussion around that, I imagine, would be less tangible.

I had my own answers for these questions (heck, those answers are consistent extensions of the 'shallow' descriptions found here: https://www.beyondallreason.info/faq/what-are-the-main-differences-between-armada-and-cortex).
Unfortunately, the upcoming balance changes (which I've played: #1326243940730667160 message) and the nebulous status of Legion made me realize that my answers for these questions are almost certainly not the answers the dev team (or even apparently the majority of the playerbase) would come up with. I would rather not be surprised if the game suddenly becomes unfun for me when it exits alpha, so I'd like to have a better understanding of where it's going.

ebon cliff
#

Its pretty simple

There is Arm, and then there is cortex which is 20% worse than Arm in everything

boreal ferry
#

the faction description is lying, armada is brute force with brain dead units like jaguar marauder and thor, while cortex requires outsmarting the opponent cause youre slower and your projectiles hit with a delay vs armada instant damage

#

AA? Dont worry with armada irs free, while cortex gets the banisher wich cant even hit t1 bombers

torpid spade
#

I like how the first two answers are memes and also 100% serious and truthful answers

#

Anyway, one (also kinda meme) answer that I've seen on reddit once is that Armada is the optimistic faction and cortext the pessimistic one.

#

Armada has recluses to make plays from cliffs and also webbers because in their optimism they think they're gonna reclaim the top of the cliffs too
Cortex is already disgruntled at the idea that the enemy will be on top of cliffs, so they have the thermite who's only function is to counter recluses and a vanguard if very lucky.

Armada has banshees, because of course we're gonna get com snipes, yay!
Cortex has shuriken, because of course we're gonna have leaks, grumble grumble.

Armada has gremlins, because, like, what's the chance the enemy has intrusion, and what's the chance anyone will be looking as we accidentally bump into some windmills, bad things don't happen (except to the other team) don't you know?
Cortex has the commando, which can survive it's transport dying, because of course the enemy has aa, you ever saw an enemy without aa?

The titan doesn't even have emp immunity, because, come on, we're gonna emp them first, arent we?
The juggernaut dies in a nuclear explosion, because of course we're gonna get dgunned, let's at least do some damage to the commander dgunning us.

jagged elbow
#

#1353364944350871632 message (just putting this here for recordkeeping purposes, since dev comments seem to be hard to come by) Quote, "Arm isn’t the emp faction" ~@wind otter

fringe bison
#

I think that faction's identities are more-less well established.

Armada generally have a slightly cheaper tech-tree with more dependency on energy over metal. It relies more on speed, raiding, hit-and-run, utility, and highly specialized units, which sacrifice much to do well what they're intended for, hence the preponderance of glass-cannons and speed-over-sturdiness options. Cheaper building and units allow Arma to step up the tech level faster and gain tangible advantage at the given phase of the game.

Cortex relies more heavily on metal income. Most Cortex units have more armor, more rounded and more reliable. Cortex work from the defense and attrition, all of the main-line units are better, but also more expensive, making it more important to rely on repairing over restoring. Because of that, Cortex gradually gain advantage over the given tech phase, and T2/T3 units on every plane of combat has more expensive selection.

In abstract, two Arma players fighting looks more like two cats trying to outmaneuver each-other and hit where it hurts, while two Cortex players look like two rams pushing against one another, working to stabilize their assets and break through the weaknesses of the enemy through out-enduring them.

The problem with the faction isn't as much as their identities being convoluted or mismatched, but moreso in that some of the outliers from both factions that are under-balanced doesn't allow for the tactical flexibility, meaning that the matchup becomes straightforward and predictable.

#

Won't comment on Legion faction, because I don't have enough experience with it to cast valuable judgement. The designer behind the faction is better suited to what the faction's identity is, other than being a mish-mash of ideas unexplored by the two core factions.

#

In terms of balance between the 2-3 factions, my best pick would be Dawn of War 3, though the game has been long canceled and cannot be reliably explored.

The Space Marine faction were akin to Cortex, with more expensive, more durable, slower units with reliance on positional warfare and attrition, but awkward to react to emergencies;
The Eldari were similar to Arma with focus on mobility, harassment and precise attacks at key points, but brittle and hard to hold a prolonged direct assault.
The Orks were designed around sheer numbers and explosive offensive power, but poorly adapted and timing-reliant on defending anything they manage to take over. I guess you can bring Legion closer to that model, unless the reliance on higher unit number somehow breaks the meta principles of the game, such as kill/death count influencing OS scaling etc.

I'd say that it was very entertaining to embody the nature of these factions in my strategy and unit choices, but it might not be as applicable to BAR, which works in its much broader scale.

void charm
#

Cortex units are just ridiculous. No one in their right mind would invent the Catapult. And that's why we love them.

fringe bison
#

I guess you never encountered a zealously defensive player, who start spamming shields like there's no tomorrow. Vanguards can do nothing about it, but Catapults flatten it all the same.

void charm
#

if you get to the point where the guy has a ton of shields, you haven't probed him enough while he was building them. It takes ages to build shields, they're insanely expensive

fringe bison
void charm
#

it's cheaper than pulsar but build time is higher 😦

fringe bison
#

3k BP difference is nothing at that point

#

it doesn't make shields "insanely expensive"

boreal ferry
#

They use a lot of long range rapid fire rocket batteries that are notoriously inacurate

void charm
#

Yeah the Stalin's organs

turbid aspen
#

They then transition in the later game into being about very high tech and expensive units

void charm
#

Legion just feels like the crazy aliens