Company of Heroes or Supreme Commander???

[ZzZGuy]

Originally posted by: BlueAcolyte
Multiplayer is MUCH better than the campaigns and AI in SupCom... But if you play multiplayer you need the expansion pack because no one really plays w/ the original anymore.

The expansion is stand alone, so you can just buy that.

 

[Kromis]

See-oh-fucking-ech

Sup Com sucks. Units are so generic all around aside from the experimental units but that's it.

 

[TidusZ]

Originally posted by: Dorkenstein
Hmm. First, the "vibe" I got off the game was boring, but that's just me. It doesn't take me long to decide whether or not I like a game. The scale of Total Annihilation was there, but the units felt too similar to each other and I just didn't find myself catching on to any particular units as my favorite. There were some things I was also doing incorrectly when playing skirmishes, and again, that's my fault. I am actually going to re-download it from Direct2Drive and give it another look.

You may wanna look into supcom again, the units are definitely not too similar to one another. The game plays out like a chess match and the more competitive you become and the better opponents you play against the more meticulous you have to be with your macro and micro, countering the others strategy, memorizing and using each maps fauna and mass deposits, and using the right units.

I was a huge TA fan and I feel that Supcom carried on the greatness, unlike most of gpg's other games. I would recommend not bothering with skirmishes at all. There are so many little details to the units I find, such as cybran's t1 ground aa being better than uef/aeon, the different explosion aoe's and dmgs of t1 arty. Being able to micro mantis' around uef and even aeon t1 and not having them hit you much. Using line formation with aurora and outranging most t1 units, or massacring t1 pd doing this and firing all at once. These are all t1 strats, not to even mention air or t2/t3/experimental. There is so much to master in supcom that like TA, the top tier of skill is pretty near limitless.

glhf

 

[WT]

I just installed the SupCom demo last week and played it a lot over the course of this week. I wanted to take a break from CoHF and had read so many good things (to an extent) about it, so what I found was that the interface was just terribly clunky and difficult compared to the simplicity of the COH interface. I am STILL lacking in how the interaction between units works on SupCom. A lot of that has to do with my extensive knowledge of WWII and tactics, so it was clear to me how to hold onto a command point or counter enemy tactics, whereas in SupCom it is based on future weapons at some point with the tech3 upgrades.

 

[Dorkenstein]

I have to admit though, COH is a VERY stressful game online. I had to stop for a long while. Just hearing the loud gunshot of a sniper made my heart rate spike.

 

[CrackRabbit]

CoH all the way. The units had some sort of personality to them (I love the Sherman ) while SupCom was very sterile and generic. I just couldn't get into it as well as I could CoH

 

[MikeyLSU]

no poll = fail

CoH

 

[blckgrffn]

CoH

The last mission (or two?) suck though, IMHO.

One of the few games I really loved and never finished.

Nat

 

[themisfit610]

SupCom was amazingly cool. Single player was blah, but multiplayer was epic. It's probably one of the most difficult games I've ever played, in the sense that people online were _FAST_. I won only a handfull of games. Immensely challenging.

~MiSfit

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

They're pretty different - CoH is more about tactics and micromanagement, while Supcom is general strategy. I prefer CoH though - I like to have just a few units that need to be coordinated effectively.

Edit: When I did play Supcom though, I just found that it lacked any soul - it doesn't have the "crap, we're in a war" feel that CoH has.

 

[OCGuy]

Love them both. CoH in DX10 with everything on High looks amazing as well.

 

[Pelu]

I never manage to get into CoH that much... each time i try the same things that push me away, do it again... like the MG camping... and in CoH the one wining gets more benefits and the one loosing gets more screw... if u get to the middle of the map and lose the first fight... the enemy will get more territory,, more resources,, more stuff and then win.. is like ... HIT FIRST because the one that hit first, hit twice... and thats it... If u lose the first hits hit menu then quit... you going to lose...

 

[evident]

neither, war3 is better than both

 

[Pelu]

Originally posted by: evident
neither, war3 is better than both

omg.. you should stop taking a drag so often...

 

[PieIsAwesome]

CoH. Supreme Spam bores me to tears.

 

[Maximilian]

I just fired up CoH there and trashed some newbs on the schdelt... amazing stuff, GERMAN STEEEEL!!

 

[Dorkenstein]

That must feel nice. Normally I get steamrolled against humans but I still enjoy the game a lot.

 

[Pelu]

hm,,, sounds like coh is better all around, the game population online speaks for it... around 4000 in CoH and 500 in SupCom...... too bad the nat error screw me up in CoH....

 

[datalink7]

CoH is perhaps my favorite multiplayer game of all time. Certainly up there.

SupCom isn't a bad game... but I don't feel a draw to play it anymore.

 

[BlueAcolyte]

Originally posted by: WT
I just installed the SupCom demo last week and played it a lot over the course of this week. I wanted to take a break from CoHF and had read so many good things (to an extent) about it, so what I found was that the interface was just terribly clunky and difficult compared to the simplicity of the COH interface. I am STILL lacking in how the interaction between units works on SupCom. A lot of that has to do with my extensive knowledge of WWII and tactics, so it was clear to me how to hold onto a command point or counter enemy tactics, whereas in SupCom it is based on future weapons at some point with the tech3 upgrades.

The demo is way out of date and the interface is terrible...

The full game has a more minimalistic UI option (press ALT+up arrow) and a very good customizable UI mod (Saya's UI) while the expansion is pretty good by default and has AZUI as a mod.

Oh, the demo's balance is all out of whack too. The favorite tactic back in those days was to turtle for a bit and assist a factory to t3 so you could get siege bots.

 

[EvilComputer92]

I've never played COH but I will say that Supreme Commander sucks. After playing Total Annihilation for almost 10 years I still cannot manage to get into Supcom. The graphics look rather dated overall even when it was released. Almost everything has been sacrificed to increase the zoom scale of the game and it shows. Individual units are unimaginative and the polish is clearly lacking from TA.

 

[tvdang7]

COH def. supreme was not bad but too advanced for me and took way too much time/ planning to play. COH was easy to learn and very fun right off the bat.

 

[Sureshot324]

COH by far. I'll admit that I've only played the first few levels of SupCom, but I was not impressed at all. There are a ton of units but they mostly seem the same in terms of how you use them. The more or less all just shoot at the enemy and that's it.

In COH there are just so many more factors that effect your tactics, like cover, infintry getting supress/pinned, different armor types of vehicles, units can go into buildings, and it goes on. Plus since you get resources from controlling territory, you need to fight for the whole map, not just your base.

 

[vshah]

supcom is way deeper and more complex than people give it credit for. the units are VERY widely varied in terms of abilities and usefulness. those who think otherwise will get massacred the instant they play online. i still play forged alliance all the time. no two games are the same.

 

[TidusZ]

Since the thread got resurrected I might as well just sum up what I said earlier. Sup Com > all current rts.