Several issues I have in regards to the latest stream

[strigvir]

Energy network display:
After seeing how much duct tapes are already there just to make it look nice, I understand why Perimeter made network mechanics in a particular way. In the current state the full network display is too bloaty, while the simple one is too nondescript and hurts the pleasure of watching the pattern of energy links.
I have a two-part solution to this problem:
1. Show only the main connection (the one which used to deliver energy) in a green color, while the secondary ones - in a blue colour and only when hovering over/selecting a structure. In detailed view show all connections, but the secondary ones in dim blue, which become normal blue upon hovering/selecting a structure.
2. Rework the way energy transfer works. Akin to Perimeter, Towers should have a connection range in which they deliver the energy instantly to all connected buildings without graphics, except for other Towers/Pylons/Microrifts. Since the Tower connection ranges are only relevant when plopping structures/moving units, only show them during those actions. Might as well fuse the current Collector mechanics with Towers, so they will expand the reach and then slowly gain more energy up to their connection range. I honestly don't see the point of the current collectors being a separate building, even though they have a similar territorial limit to Towers. Only take more space, without a way to terraform (so far) a territory, maybe. The collectors can be delegated to T2/T3 old energy generators with the cost being advanced resources.
Pylons have a double/triple connection range and energy delivery speed as Towers, but only connect to Towers, Pylons and Microrifts. They may or may not have different connection ranges for those and may be a T2 building.
Microrifts connect across the map, but only to other Microrifts, the energy still have to be delivered and dispersed through Pylons and Towers. Also require energy maintenance.

Since Towers deliver energy instantly, there is no reason to have separate energy packets for each weapon and instead the Tower itself will demand a fatter energy packet if connected buildings require it. Because the base rate of energy ticks and ammo values are known, this will allow to better calculate current and max energy consumption rate, which can even be shown when hovering over/selecting a Tower in the x (y) format.

2.5. Mobile buildings can only be charged while landed in the range of a tower. Something-something about energy packets requiring a stable delivery point, otherwise whole system goes haywire. This doesn't apply to HQ, because it's technically delivering energy packets to static points, even while moving. And honestly flying HQ should be legitimized, instead of being a dirty trick as seen in this video.

All of these changes will lead to more clear game and will look something like this: https://i.imgur.com/sK4yHS1.jpg


Warfare:
To be quite honest, the Sniper requiring Line of Sight is annoying. This forces putting a glorified support unit in the front lines, the space of which already cramped, and negates its massive range most of the times. Allowing it shoot through through terrain will make it less annoying to manage. Lore-wise it could be explained by it shooting some very small particle at relativistic speed straight at the core of bubbles/striders.
Might also be good to have a switchable overlay for all bubble pathes, so it would be easier to plan the defense against them beforehand.

I am note sure how control groups are working right now in CW4, but please make controlling them like most RTS in existence do: CTRL+number binds the current selection to this number, tapping that number afterwards will invoke said selection and double-tapping will invoke the selection and center on it. SHIFT+number will add said selection to the current one, which can again be reassigned as a new selection with CTRL+number. There are enough buttons on keyboard to have all commands without them overlapping or being context-based.

[knucracker]

Thanks for your feedback....
Just a couple of quick notes.
- Collectors/towers/reactors/panels.  It's all an area of active testing and development.  And I do plan to try out a return to the CW1/CW3 model to see how it fits.

- For sniper LOS, I have recently added a different visual range indicator.  But being able to shoot through terrain isn't totally off the table yet.

[The_Mell]

LoS and LoF - a hatelove.
On one hand it is annoying if you must have LoS, but on other hand it brings in a logic, little piece of difficulty.
CW3 simplified approach of height levels worked well for a 2d game and was a nice balance between annoyance&challenge, but at the moment my guts just say that in a 3d game LoF shouldn't go through terrain.

And if you would want/need the anti-glider-weapon to ignore LoS (because of balance for example), maybe a switch of snipers and rockets would be a solution.
Make AA like CW3 beams or even real AAA, thats means guns and little black puffs in the sky, while anti-glider-weapon would be something like nowadays Javelin antitank missile.

[Grabz]

2.5. Mobile buildings can only be charged while landed in the range of a tower. Something-something about energy packets requiring a stable delivery point, otherwise whole system goes haywire. This doesn't apply to HQ, because it's technically delivering energy packets to static points, even while moving. And honestly flying HQ should be legitimized, instead of being a dirty trick as seen in this video.

This is actually a long standing problem, in both CW3 and PF, and I agree. I would either not let things connect in flight, or allow units to hover. CW3 has this problem with moving the CN, as you showed a very appropriate example of, and PF has this issue with ships being able to connect to things when the core is not over land but the rest of the ship is, meaning that you can't park the ship anywhere in that area to connect to things, but you can if you wiggle the ship back and forth between two empty points so the ship stays hovering in that area.

The requirement of having two empty spots on two sides of an inaccessible area, only so you can give an order to move so that you can hover over an area, has always felt extremely arbitrary to me. I feel like it's only not a big problem because I don't have to do it very often, as it only really comes up in context of speedrunning. I don't know if speedrunners like the way it works or not, and I don't want to take a layer of strategy they are used to away from them, but I strongly believe that it increases the barrier to entry to speedrunning the games quite a bit, because it's a very unintuitive mechanic. You'd expect you could just make your unit hover, if it can do that many things in the safety of being airborne :)

To be quite honest, the Sniper requiring Line of Sight is annoying. This forces putting a glorified support unit in the front lines, the space of which already cramped, and negates its massive range most of the times. Allowing it shoot through through terrain will make it less annoying to manage. Lore-wise it could be explained by it shooting some very small particle at relativistic speed straight at the core of bubbles/striders.

If the unit has to be part of the frontlines, to me it's just a part of strategy. I think that's actually very healthy for the game. A row of Blasters followed by a row of Mortars can usually hold practically anything in CW3. If anything, the game needs for you to have more variety of frontline units, support or not, to dilute the amount of creeper firepower and make it so you have to pick your frontlines more carefully, where space actually allows, while having each individual unit still deal a satisfying amount of damage :)

In CW3, Beams and Snipers fulfill this exact role, but you generally never need that many Beams or Snipers in maps, because they have to throw a lot of Spores/Runners at you for that to be a necessity. I'm personally excited for the possibility of needing to strategize my frontlines between a variety of different offensive units.

Snipers behind frontlines can also target things dropping from the air, such as Spores or the Air Sac.

Lastly, it just doesn't really sit well with me if a Sniper could hit things through terrain. The game is 3D now and it should be using that to its full extent. In the much earlier versions of the game Mortars could hit through terrain and people didn't really like it. I know that Snipers are a much different thing and could likely be way more acceptable, but in my mind it would still feel quite unnatural for them to be able to do so.

Might also be good to have a switchable overlay for all bubble pathes, so it would be easier to plan the defense against them beforehand.

+1, it's something I would like to see as well :)

Though at the very least, I would love to see blobs leave a trail, so you can tell their paths while paused. But, since they aren't random once they pick a path, a visual of where they are moving would be welcome!

[strigvir]

LoS and LoF - a hatelove.
On one hand it is annoying if you must have LoS, but on other hand it brings in a logic, little piece of difficulty.
CW3 simplified approach of height levels worked well for a 2d game and was a nice balance between annoyance&challenge, but at the moment my guts just say that in a 3d game LoF shouldn't go through terrain.

I am not sure LoS management in 3D environment is the kind of difficulty the series should drift to. It was mildly annoying in CW3 when trying to overtake a hill covered with runners on digitalis, but was otherwise a simple mechanics and could be overcome with terraforming. In CW4 it seems you can't place a sniper in a relevant location and cover at least a 3rd of total LoS, and that's just some pre-alpha map.

If the unit has to be part of the frontlines, to me it's just a part of strategy. I think that's actually very healthy for the game. A row of Blasters followed by a row of Mortars can usually hold practically anything in CW3. If anything, the game needs for you to have more variety of frontline units, support or not, to dilute the amount of creeper firepower and make it so you have to pick your frontlines more carefully, where space actually allows, while having each individual unit still deal a satisfying amount of damage :)

Sniper can't kill creeper, therefore it's not a frontline unit. Also it having to shoot bubbles, sac bombs and gliders gives a lot of priority problems which can't be fixed by a checkbox.

[Grabz]

Sniper can't kill creeper, therefore it's not a frontline unit.

Why? Blobs/Striders/Air Sacs are as much a frontline threat as Creeper is.

Personally, I don't see too much of a point in adding more units to the game if they can easily be killed by units sitting in the back, not diluting frontline's firepower. At that point it becomes just a routine, similar to how using Beams in CW3 works - if there's some spores on the map, you just have to place a few Beams behind your frontline to be perfectly safe. If it's just a few spores (i.e. the map is not practically centered around them), the only real gameplay shift here is whether you remember to place them or not - other than that, it changes up nothing.

Now, if you have to put these non-Creeper damaging units in the frontline instead, that means the special units are actually putting a dent in your vs.Creeper firepower (which should be their secondary intention, aside than just trying to damage you).

Also it having to shoot bubbles, sac bombs and gliders gives a lot of priority problems which can't be fixed by a checkbox.

I'm not sure how that's a response to me, as nothing I'm proposing emphasizes this problem. However, it doesn't have to be checkboxes - it could always be a list of targets, ordered top to bottom, where you can drag them to determine priority order.