StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Anyone tried it? It's supposed to be way more accessible to play than the original.

If I wanted Starcraft, I would play Starcraft. Supreme Commander was a very good game, just like Total Annihilation.

Well, it seems by accessible they meant that mass and energy (the two things you need for your economy) don't really matter anymore. If that's the case, I'm not really sure how big a deal that was, because one of the options available for the first game was to activate a "economy doesn't matter" option, or even "double economy" (twice the amount of resources generated) option. However, if I understand correct, there was no away around it in campaigns. I'm wondering why not just add the options for missions (just as you can control how difficult the AI is) instead of getting rid of economic importance altogether? What I gather is that most fans (and/or potential customers) favor less emphasis on economy, but aren't there still a lot of fans of the emphasis on economy?

Anyways, I was trying to download it through Steam, but I left my computer to go to Trader Joe's, and when I came back it was stuck on 79%... and is still not starting. Hm. Meh.

Alyeska wrote:If I wanted Starcraft, I would play Starcraft. Supreme Commander was a very good game, just like Total Annihilation.

Yeah, what I've been seeing of Supreme Commander 2 made me think Starcraft several times. The research branch, less emphasis on economy, etc...

Also, this emphasis on economy was fun to me because it requires a lot of effort to get used to how to play effectively while managing your resources. It reminded me a lot of playing Tiberian Sun online... using the maps Westwood provided (instead of the "mod maps" that were HEAVY in resources). It made for much more interesting games because everyone couldn't just spam the strongest units.

Whoa. I'll get this when
I get home, but all Supcom needed was customisable squads and a better UI. Research and weaker econ doesn't sound great.

Yeah, one of the things I liked about TA/SupCom was the total lack of a "research" tree, allowing me to focus on strategy and tactics after building a few factories, rather than "tech".

'Teching up' was industrial rather than +1 armor. Oh well, I'll see what it's like. I'll try to ignore how lame it is microing fights without squads.

Stark wrote:[...]Oh well, I'll see what it's like. I'll try to ignore how lame it is microing fights without squads.

Ugh, yeah, I would've liked them to fix that.

Ok, i played trough the demo (tutorial and two missions, all UEF).
You will see most non-experimental land-units in the tutorial, most water units in the first and all air units in the second mission (plus the fatboy).

A few things i noted:
-The economy is much, much easier. There is only one type of power generator and one type of mass extraktor - no mass fabs, no storages, no adjactency.
-However, you still have your infinite build queses and so on - i did not really notice a difference except for building expensive units and buildings.
-Factories can be given various upgrades - auto-firing missile launchers, shields, radar, AA and propably more. You still need to defend them, but those features are propably really great for forward bases. Since you no longer need to upgrade factories, those are much cheaper in general, too.
-The research...well...the research trees look nice, and i see a lot of possible strategies there.
For all those who do not know how it works yet: You gain research points from one specific building - the more you have, the more you get. You invest those points into a phletora of possible upgrades and unlocks - and those really make a difference. Research is instant, upgrades are immedeately distributed to all units.
-In general, i like the new tech-tree mechanic. Basic units and some nice upgrades are quickly unlocked, but you still have to make your own decisions. Upgraded units are much stronger, tough it is not as bad as the old T-Balance - you will really notice it if your enemy invested 10 points into units while you upgraded your buildings.

I can not yet decide wether it is better or worse than the old SupCom.

This is an incredible nitpick on my part, but i've never been able to play Supreme Commander comfortably due to the simple lack of infantry. I don't know, I feel detached from the game when it lacks that human element. It's too bad because it was so close to being a perfect successor to Command and Conquer to me.

After playing the first mission, I have to say that this is a huge step backward. TA and SupCom had a unique approach to tech and economics and with this game they threw it all out the window and said "let's make Starcraft again!" I wouldn't say the graphics are particularly better and it lacks the awesome sense of scale of the original. Fans of TA and SupCom will find everything they loved about those games is gone.

Loved the high-firepower battles played out over huge areas with units exploding left and right by the dozens? Too bad! Hope you like short firing ranges so even a large battle consists of only a few units within each others' firing range at any given time. And it seems like units have about 10 times as much health, so the sense of awesome firepower is completely absent.

Loved the immense differences between tiers of units where massive experimentals were gods of the battlefield, disintegrating whole bases with the slightest touch of their massive energy beams? Nope! The experimentals are easy to build, not much bigger than other units, and they can be easily taken down by a few dozen regular units.

The devs have gone the way of the Democratic Party with this game, responding to every criticism by becoming more like the competition and abandoning everything that made people like their product in the first place. Move on, folks. Nothing to see here.

There is such incredible bullshit flying about this game I love reading it more than actually playing the game.

Experimentals are no longer the terrifying weapons of doom they used to be, they just seem like any other unit.
Research is meh, can pick your own path or way to go but neither here nor there...
Economy is now arcadish. Too easy. Getting rid of the infinite "build slowler" when out of reseources was a crap choice.

SupCom2 now seems to be nothing more than a Starcraft clone as mentioned above. In short I wont be buying.

Also wasnt the Square Enix partnerships supposed to bring about an imporovment in the storyline/script? If the demo's anything to go by its got the same cheesy drivel as the original...

atg wrote:Experimentals are no longer the terrifying weapons of doom they used to be, they just seem like any other unit.
Research is meh, can pick your own path or way to go but neither here nor there...
Economy is now arcadish. Too easy. Getting rid of the infinite "build slowler" when out of reseources was a crap choice.

SupCom2 now seems to be nothing more than a Starcraft clone as mentioned above. In short I wont be buying.

Also wasnt the Square Enix partnerships supposed to bring about an imporovment in the storyline/script? If the demo's anything to go by its got the same cheesy drivel as the original...

They've decided to kill the concept, so they're cashing in on the title associated with it one last time before dumping it completely.

Have you read the names of the Aeon units on the website? What the freak. Chris Taylor, you've lost your head.


Interestingly Command and Conquer 4 of all things feels more exciting than supcom 2. Oh the mighty have fallen.

Ryan Thunder wrote: They've decided to kill the concept, so they're cashing in on the title associated with it one last time before dumping it completely.

Really? That sux in a way. Oh well, guess I'll just get Napoleon:TW instead.

atg wrote:

Ryan Thunder wrote: They've decided to kill the concept, so they're cashing in on the title associated with it one last time before dumping it completely.

Really? That sux in a way. Oh well, guess I'll just get Napoleon:TW instead.

Well that's what it looks like. They've killed off all the interesting features of the original games.

I wrote the game off as soon as I heard Square Enix were going to be involved with the game design. There was no way they would stick to the TA/SC franchise's strengths.

I am saddened to be proven right though.

Shinova wrote:Have you read the names of the Aeon units on the website? What the freak. Chris Taylor, you've lost your head.

Had to have a look at that and... oh dear...

UEF: Demolisher, Titan, Meteor, Archanist, Sharp Shooter, Rock Head, Wasp, Eagle Eye, Broadsword.
Cybrans: Loyalist, Cobra, Adaptor, Brackman, Renegade, Gemini, Dragon Fly.
Aeon: Yenzoo, Fistoosh, Crashdow, Bodaboom, Sliptack, Harvog, Vulthoo, HeeHola, Weedooboth (A dual-purpose Fighter/Bomber. I kid not).

Shinova wrote:Have you read the names of the Aeon units on the website? What the freak. Chris Taylor, you've lost your head.

How much do you want to bet they hired him just so they could attach his name to it?

I've played through the demo, plays like any RTS to me. This will come down to how the story line is reviewed (not a MP gamer here) more than anything, I felt the game play was decent enough.


Re: Experimentals not being powerful. If you are talking about the experiences in the demo missions I have a feeling those experimentals were gimped for the purposes of the mission.

Re: Experimentals not being powerful. If you are talking about the experiences in the demo missions I have a feeling those experimentals were gimped for the purposes of the mission.

Well, you can get everything via debug/cheat and the only problems I saw were that they appeared to be a weak when it came to DPS (This may be different in skirmish/MP even with the spawn menu) but HP wise didn't appear any worse than vanilla SupCom1 where most experimentals can get taken out by a not necessarily impressive amount of enemy forces (The only noteable exclusions here are the Colossus and the Soul Ripper but the latter may be because of my lack of good AA).

My biggest beef is that the Fatboy II is such a step down in both design and function.

Teleros wrote:

Shinova wrote:Have you read the names of the Aeon units on the website? What the freak. Chris Taylor, you've lost your head.

Had to have a look at that and... oh dear...

UEF: Demolisher, Titan, Meteor, Archanist, Sharp Shooter, Rock Head, Wasp, Eagle Eye, Broadsword.
Cybrans: Loyalist, Cobra, Adaptor, Brackman, Renegade, Gemini, Dragon Fly.
Aeon: Yenzoo, Fistoosh, Crashdow, Bodaboom, Sliptack, Harvog, Vulthoo, HeeHola, Weedooboth (A dual-purpose Fighter/Bomber. I kid not).

The hell is this?

Last I remembered, Aeon units were named stuff like 'Sprite', 'Aether', 'Harbinger', 'Deacon', etc. They were NOT named after Pokemon.

I predict that SupCom2's first mod will be a one that renames the Aeon units.