Supcom 2!

[mfenn]

I have only briefly played TA. Haven't played SupCom (though it has been sitting on my desk for some time). Frankly, I don't understand what makes the resource flow model "strategic". It seems just like another form of micromanagement that has an optimal solution. You could easily make a deeper strategic game that used the orthodox pay-immediately scheme.

Two words: "loop build"

In SupCom2, if you run out of money while looping the build queue, it pauses your factory and doesn't unpause when you have the money.

(This is how it worked in the demo, hopefully they fixed it in the retail version.)

 

[Elixer]

Argh, they dumbed it down too much.
Guess the real name of this game is SupCon ... it was made with console in mind.
The pathfinding can really blow chunks at times, and I don't care about their little flow demo, if the units get stuck in wide open areas!

Oh well.

 

[ZzZGuy]

Seems all versions of Supreme Commander 2 use steam and it is not available on Impulse, such a shame like AvP 3.

With my policy of never paying full price for steam games I am waiting until it's ~$10.

 

[vshah]

Two words: "loop build"

In SupCom2, if you run out of money while looping the build queue, it pauses your factory and doesn't unpause when you have the money.

(This is how it worked in the demo, hopefully they fixed it in the retail version.)

works the same way in retail.

i feel what it comes down to is that land control / number of mexes under your control is much more important now than it was in SC/FA


i'm stuck on the "factions or family plan" mission. i just don't seem to get enough time to set up....going to try building PD right away this time.

 

[Dorkenstein]

Hmm, as I loved TA but didn't love the original SC, I think I'll pass on this until SC stands for Super Cheap.

 

[Pia]

Two words: "loop build"

In SupCom2, if you run out of money while looping the build queue, it pauses your factory and doesn't unpause when you have the money.

(This is how it worked in the demo, hopefully they fixed it in the retail version.)

This is a UI difference, not really a difference in the systems. As you say, they can "fix" it by adding an automatic unpause.

But the entire purpose of the pause/unpause business (in SupCom you occasionally pause then unpause manually, in SupCom2 you unpause manually but more often, right?) seems to be roundabout setting of project priority. Shouldn't the player rather be allowed to directly assign priorities to individual projects and/or entire categories of resource spending?

(Assuming it really wants to be as much "strategy game" as possible, and not merely exchange multitasking micro with less obvious balancing micro.)

 

[nemesismk2]

Just got emailed that Supreme Commander 2 is on it's way!

 

[vshah]

I played the UEF campaign last night on hard. Granted, the missions were pretty heavily scripted, but I still had to restart one mission a few times. Balance is very different than SC/FA. Point Defenses are actually useful now, or at least I had to resort to them to complete one mission.

 

[Acanthus]

After going 7-3 online yesterday i can say that i am very happy with this title.

The only thing that leaves me wanting is the map selection, we need a LOT more.

 

[mfenn]

This is a UI difference, not really a difference in the systems. As you say, they can "fix" it by adding an automatic unpause.

But the entire purpose of the pause/unpause business (in SupCom you occasionally pause then unpause manually, in SupCom2 you unpause manually but more often, right?) seems to be roundabout setting of project priority. Shouldn't the player rather be allowed to directly assign priorities to individual projects and/or entire categories of resource spending?

(Assuming it really wants to be as much "strategy game" as possible, and not merely exchange multitasking micro with less obvious balancing micro.)

You are correct. SupCom will never be a "grand strategy" game like Total War or GalCiv.

However, the critical difference between the SupCom1 and SupCom2 systems is the ability to pay over time. In SupCom1, I can start building my unit/building without having to pay the entire resource cost up front. This is not the case in SupCom2.

The SupCom1 system is more flexible. For example: Let's say that I'm battling my opponent over some mexes in the center of the map. In SupCom1, I could start my Monkeylord before I got control of all of the resources that I would need in order to finish it in a timely manner. This would allow me to capture the mexes and then rush-build my Monkeylord while my opponent was on the ropes. In SupCom2, I would have to capture the mexes and then save up the money for an experimental. This would take longer and potentially give my opponent time to regroup.

I feel that this flexibility allows the game to more closely represent the real economic considerations of starting expensive projects (which may never come to fruition). You can utilize deficit spending in order to gain a temporary advantage over your opponent, at the risk of completely stalling your economy.

My 2c

 

[Mennovh]

Shame the game seems really dumbed down. I have only played the demo and the game just doesnt seem as in depth as it was. I am still debating buying the game as i love MP rts games. I will probably never play the single player campaign. Is this game worth it for the Mp aspects? I loved SC1 when i played it, but didnt like how games could take hours if you didnt win it in the first 20 min or so. I keep reading lots of negative things, but most negative feedback grows on people. Whats the Mp like? Is it any fun?

 

[vshah]

i played a few rounds of mp yesterday and had a blast. if you think the "dumbing down" made it easier, it didn't. it is just as involving and surprising as before. and the new maps are great.

 

[KaOTiK]

Still pissed off about the experimentals, they are a joke overall in their "epicness", super quick to build and go down pretty damn quick. Though the giant gun that shoots tanks and other land units makes me laugh every time.

One of my biggest complaints though is the size of the maps, they are pathetically small. There is only 1 8 player map and it sucks balls.

 

[vshah]

Still pissed off about the experimentals, they are a joke overall in their "epicness", super quick to build and go down pretty damn quick. Though the giant gun that shoots tanks and other land units makes me laugh every time.

One of my biggest complaints though is the size of the maps, they are pathetically small. There is only 1 8 player map and it sucks balls.

i love the unit cannon, its pretty awesome. launch units in a square around the enemy's commander or experimental..kaboom!

the map size is pretty much my only complaint. i hope they release a map editor the community comes up with one.

 

[nemesismk2]

Seems all versions of Supreme Commander 2 use steam and it is not available on Impulse, such a shame like AvP 3.

With my policy of never paying full price for steam games I am waiting until it's ~$10.

Just tried to play Supreme Commander 2 but can't because Steam keeps having network errors. If I had known that SC2 used Steam I would NOT of even purchased it.

 

[Ancalagon44]

I'm still debating whether to buy this.

I liked the demo, mostly, I'm just not very happy that it seems to have been rushed. Like, its short on multiplayer maps, there was a huge day 0 patch (so even if you buy the disc, its like a 5 hour download from steam), there are already bugs and balance issues. And some things like the fact you cant build something if you dont have the resources up front just dont make any sense.

So, I want to buy it, I'm just a little reluctant to reward GPG for rushing this one out the door. It needed another 2 months of polish I think.

 

[nyker96]

can't say I like supcom type of rts. I wonder if II is better. My complaint with original is that you end up producing a bunch of units that looks so similar, I honest don't know what the hell was that block of blue soldiers. every unit all look very similar esp mixed up in a large number looking from a distant vantage point.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Graphics are disappointing. Art is in line with what I'd expect 10 years ago only with higher resolution and 8x AA. I only played some of the tutorial, but the commander looks so clunky if I remember right Supcom1 looked better. Can't really comment on gameplay yet.

 

[vshah]

Graphics are disappointing. Art is in line with what I'd expect 10 years ago only with higher resolution and 8x AA. I only played some of the tutorial, but the commander looks so clunky if I remember right Supcom1 looked better. Can't really comment on gameplay yet.

i think in general, the textures have taken a step back, but the effects look much better than supcom.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

i think in general, the textures have taken a step back, but the effects look much better than supcom.

Ugh, I hate people trying to make effects replace art : (

 

[frozentundra123456]

I dunno how to beat the second campaign in the demo. Chick says to upgrade my aircraft or something but I forgot (or just don't know) how. Meanwhile fatboys keep coming at me and the enemy makes infinite+1 gunships.

Also gotta love the cheesy dialogue

"I eat punks like you for breakfast"

"That explains the foot in your mouth"

HARHARHAR

I just kept building fighters and gunships and finally attacked the base to the right of the base that you can see. After taking out most of that base, the commander himself attacked my base. I blew him up and won the mission that way. Granted, the mission just seemed to go on forever until he attacked me. Sort of a stalemate in that he could not destroy me, but I could never build up enough forces to get to his base and attack.

 

[vshah]

Ugh, I hate people trying to make effects replace art : (

i dunno, i think the overall design is much improved. texture resolution is about the only thing i can see that has taken a step back. the effects are better, the landscape is better...many more landscape features that make the maps look interesting. Also the unit/building animations look much cooler now. i love watching the unit cannon load its magazines.

 

[Acanthus]

Well the game lacking cutting edge graphics has certainly improved its performance dramatically, even with 7 AIs the performance is as smooth as butter.

 

[TidusZ]

Well the game lacking cutting edge graphics has certainly improved its performance dramatically, even with 7 AIs the performance is as smooth as butter.

I think it has less to do with the graphical changes and more to do with a lot of the complexity and depth being removed from the game + the physics being dumbed down. Supcom1 was extremely processor dependent, the videocard didn't really matter nearly as much. In Supcom2 there really isn't as much for the processor to work on.

 

[shortylickens]

I think it has less to do with the graphical changes and more to do with a lot of the complexity and depth being removed from the game + the physics being dumbed down. Supcom1 was extremely processor dependent, the videocard didn't really matter nearly as much. In Supcom2 there really isn't as much for the processor to work on.

I keep hearing that over and over and it doesnt coincide with my experience.
Since owning Supreme Commander 1, I have moved from a slow single core to a fast single core to a dual core to a fast quad core, and I never saw any real improvement with CPU speed.
BUT, when I moved up in video cards I saw exponential improvement across the board. It was like playing a whole new game. Why the fuck does everyone keep saying the CPU matters with Supreme Commander? It never helped me.