Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: SadisticSid on May 11, 2006, 06:34:48 pm
-
Words cannot express how awesome this is.
Torrent (slightly better framerate) - http://www.supcomuniverse.com/forum/showthread.php?t=410
Video of YouTube - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ACN-SDoDXk
-
Wow...
-
Why, hello (my) most antcipated game how are you?
-
That is truly, truly next generation and amazing. What system is that for ?
-
PC thank god.
-
wow, but uh, what kind of pc. i mean really... that looks like it requires 64 bit / dual core / 2GB ram / Quad SLI
-
wow, but uh, what kind of pc. i mean really... that looks like it requires 64 bit / dual core / 2GB ram / Quad SLI
I doubt it will require a 64 bit processor or multiple GPU units.
-
Wow...thats awesome :)
-
Indeed, but it looks nice.
-
The units are pretty low-poly from what I've seen, although the count scales up with the unit size. Those battleships and Monkeylords (the big LReds on legs) are probably in the thousands. With LOD at even the intermediate zoom levels, it should be playable on present day systems. No idea how much it uses shaders, which are the main performance-gobblers these days.
-
It's more the fact that in this thing rather than the map feeling about the size of a rugby pitch your actually fighting across whole continents in a single mission thats got me ecited.
-
That's the first thing I've seen from Supreme Commander to genuinely impress me.
Looks like micromanagement hell, though.
-
When the 1024x640 direct version is available, let me know, eh? ;)
-
SupComUniverse captured that trailer, but GPG will be releasing a high-quality version "after E3".
-
Holy ****!
-
you can't really go wrong with nukes and apocalypse now-esque fleets of aircraft.....
-
Submarine Aircraft-Carriers FTW!!
-
Submarine Aircraft-Carriers FTW!!
Bet the enemy didn't see that one coming.
-
Would've been more unique should they've been flying carriers dropping submarines though. :D
-
Oh come on, now you're just being silly ;)
-
Give them time :)
Supreme Commander has been on my radar for a while now. The graphics to me are "good enough". The real focus looks to be on making it alot of fun. I think they will have the large numbers of units micromanagement solved so I don't see it as a huge problem. Look how smoothly they zoomed out from battlefield to map view. That is just brilliant work. I was reading in an interview that there will be displayed indications of the ETA that units will arrive at a given area as well.
-
Well, it is the spiritual successor to Total Annihilation. It's what Chris Taylor wanted to do since he was calling it RTS 2.0. From what previews and fansites know about it so far, it looks as if the same concepts in TA have made it through - mass and energy as resources, balancing continuous resource income with expenditure rather than peon harvesting, construction units being able to replicate structures and possibly other units at will, and possibly the ability to divert construction units to help factories build units as well. If you haven't played TA, I imagine it would be a good taste of what's to come with SupComm.
-
It does look quite good in my opinion, but I'm having trouble with the sheer scale of production / warfare.
Perhaps it's because I'm a tortoise commander (like to hole up and use base defenses untill I have some kind of nuclear warhead prepared) and it looks like defending a base on the scale that video shows would be really quite difficult - especially if the opponent comes in from a number of directions at once.
That said... I loved TA and will give this a chance. I just hope it's my brand of vodka.
-
It does look quite good in my opinion, but I'm having trouble with the sheer scale of production / warfare.
Perhaps it's because I'm a tortoise commander (like to hole up and use base defenses untill I have some kind of nuclear warhead prepared) and it looks like defending a base on the scale that video shows would be really quite difficult - especially if the opponent comes in from a number of directions at once.
That said... I loved TA and will give this a chance. I just hope it's my brand of vodka.
Turtles die. They are strangled, grinded to halt, suffocated and separated from their resources and finally they go down.
The only way to win is to be aggressive.
For the Emperor!
-
slow and steady wins the race. Turtles FTW !
-
slow and steady wins the race. Turtles FTW !
Aye, and when was the last time you saw a turtle driving an F1 car?
-
mario kart ? ;)
-
mario kart ? ;)
Exactly, and Toad whipped his ass.
-
Looks helluva fun. I don't think the system requirements will be too high at all. As someone already pointed out, the models seem pretty low poly, even close up, and you can bet there's some crazy LOD stuff flying about.
I hope it has good single player though, personally I only find TA to be any good under multiplayer, but it is a hilariously good bit of fun.
-
Holy crap, the naval battle looked especially awesome.
-
Amazing, just simply amazing.
-
It does look quite good in my opinion, but I'm having trouble with the sheer scale of production / warfare.
Perhaps it's because I'm a tortoise commander (like to hole up and use base defenses untill I have some kind of nuclear warhead prepared) and it looks like defending a base on the scale that video shows would be really quite difficult - especially if the opponent comes in from a number of directions at once.
That said... I loved TA and will give this a chance. I just hope it's my brand of vodka.
Thats a really hard thing to do in any RTS game. WarCraft III doesn't really let turtlers work at all. You have to be agressive and have an army ready. If you don't, you'll get overrun. Dark Reign was the other way around as turtlers were rewarded...basically there were no rushes in Dark Reign because of the very powerful defensive turrets. You must love the Superweapon General in Generals: Zero Hour. The EMP Patriot missiles alone were amazing.
I'll be willing to bet this game will work well for your style of play as well. They are saying you can build walls and fences and various defensive sensors and turrets. No doubt you'll need to have an offensive strike of some kind otherwise you won't be able to defend your base at all but this game will probably be more rewarding to that play style than WarCraft III is.
-
Aaaah Dark Reign, there's an often forgotten gem. <3
-
Since there is no right or wrong playstyle as both playstyles should have their own advantages and disadvantages, both defensive and offensive playstyles should be equally rewarding to the player. Of course one playstyle could have a clear advantage over the other in certain scanarios, but generally speaking "I win-button" should not equal early rush in masses since the other side should have equally powerful defenses at the time. The genre is real-time strategy after all, not real-time zerg rush.
-
It depends what you mean by porcing, really. If you build a single, well-defended base, you'll be outproduced because the other player will have free reign of the map and it's resources and will very likely have a huge economic advantage. It's the same in any RTS really. But, there was often an unusual situation in my TA games where an attacking army would find itself being reduced to scrap outside the defending player's base. One could reclaim the wreckage and use it to build despite the lack of resource control. I believe that wreckage will be included in SupComm too, and hopefully the smart AI will let you reclaim it without micromanagement.
EDIT: Here's (http://www.supcomuniverse.com/forum/showthread.php?t=421) the game in action, with CT showing off some gameplay concepts.
-
My single favorite feature of TA was the SHIFT command queueing. If Supreme Commander has that feature intact, I'll be happy. :D
-
Check out the torrent above, Sandy! Not only can you set waypoints with the shift key, you can also drag the waypoints to amend them without having to start queuing commands again, and the game calculates an ETA at each stage. IIRC armies spread out across the map can also be ordered to arrive at the same point simultaneously.
-
It's downloading, it's downloading! :p
-
My single favorite feature of TA was the SHIFT command queueing.
Agreed..that and the Zippers
-
SHIFT command queueing and big bertha / other stupidly large turret guns for me.
Like I said earlier - I'm a turtle. I'm also not an especially good RTS player and have now doubts that some of you guys would wipe the floor with me :)
-
Any strategy will do as long as you are agressive. Without agression you might as well be playing simcity.
And turtlers CAN be agressive.
-
SHIFT command queueing and big bertha / other stupidly large turret guns for me.
Like I said earlier - I'm a turtle. I'm also not an especially good RTS player and have now doubts that some of you guys would wipe the floor with me :)
You're not alone in that, though.
I turtle. Partly it's because it does make sense to defend (rather than get your arse caught), partly because you can finish off with overwhelming forces. Of course, at any decent AI setting the computer cottons onto it sharpish and harries your forces constantly.....
-
Screw mass Berthas and units. I always massed atleast 100 nukes and launched them in groups of ten or twenty at a time. Hmmmm gooooooood times. With the power of the nuke in SupCom I hope to god I can still do that. Blow half a planet off, lol.
-
Goddamn torrent. Anyone have a Non-torrent version of it?
-
Have they released an internet version of the trailer yet? We've got that lovely shakey cam...but its still shakey cam :)
-
When does E3 end?
Oh, and... this game will make me get a second monitor. Hands down.
-
Don't steal my ideas! :D I've been planning to get a 19" or 20" widescreen TFT to pair with my current 17" TFT. :) Of course that'll happen when I upgrade my gaming rig anyway, now waiting for Core 2 Duo and NVIDIA G80 so that I have at least some hope in running Crysis in DX10 mode.
-
Is there a specific benefit to a second monitor for SupCom, or just the general benefit?
-
I don't supose there is a demo or anything out yet?
-
NUKE NUKE NUKE BANG
This is looking better by the second.
I don't supose there is a demo or anything out yet?
In our dreams. It's not out till '07 anyway.
-
Is there a specific benefit to a second monitor for SupCom, or just the general benefit?
Have you seen the E3 video material of this game? :)
-
This is exactly the reason why I keep saying the DS is perfect for RTS games. The second I saw the two screens + touch screen I envisioned a C&C remake.
:hopping:
-
This is exactly the reason why I keep saying the DS is perfect for RTS games. The second I saw the two screens + touch screen I envisioned a C&C remake.
:hopping:
I always thought it'd be ace, myself. Bottom screen (touch) could be the tactical control, probably on a nice simple and clear display of your+enemy units, and the top would be information or battle display.
-
Holding one of the shoulder buttons quickly brings up unit/building creation. Touch screen acts like a mouse. IT WOULD ROCK.
-
i can't wait for this game!! aircraft that look like they dogfight! just like in TA! Then theres the naval battles they look simply amazaing, i have yet to see a RTS pull them of decently and this looks to be the one! i hope it somes with modding tools and a mission editor!
-
Is there a specific benefit to a second monitor for SupCom, or just the general benefit?
Have you seen the E3 video material of this game? :)
No. But if it's (insert adjective implying "good") enough to warrant a second monitor, I might have to go shopping. Is it (insert adjective implying "good") enough?
[edit] I watched the video linked in the first post of this thread, but still didn't see anything about special abilities using a dual screen setup. Looks like you can use the general benefit (more on screen at once) but not something like.. one part of the battle field zoomed to one degree on one screen and your base operations on the other screen. *shrugs* [/edit]
[edit2]Making Zylon happy [/edit2]
-
Is it "1337"? No, it's not stupid.
-
And a big thank you goes to Zylon for his unparalleled contribution!
-
http://www.supcomuniverse.com/
Get the gameplay video there.
In it, Chris taylor uses one of his screens for pretty much that purpose. (He could use it for anything though, from a strategic or tactical map, to keeping an eye on the other engagement ect.)
-
So this is like the Earth 2150/60's screen thing?
EDIT:
Just found out that Jeremy Soule (Total Annihilation, Total Annihilation: Kingdoms, Dungeon Siege 1 & 2, Neverwinter Nights, Morrowind) is going to be in charge of the sound department of the game. ;7 :nod:
-
Having a second screen, according to Chris Taylor, gives you a complete second interface to the same mission. Imagine... early on, you have one screen at your base, where you're building structures and the like, while the other screen is locked to a scout unit who is exploring the map.... mid-game, you use one screen for keeping an eye on the main approach to your base, while the other you use to execute hit-and-run strikes on the enemy's outlying positions... towards the end of the level, you could simultaneously manage a two-pronged assault on the enemy's base, either with an attack from two directions, or a frontal diversion and a rear sneak attack. The possibilities are amazing. :)
-
In other words, it is like Earth 2150/60.
-
It just needs quite much more graphics processing power to render two screens smoohtly instead of just one, and figuring from the game's graphics it won't be a a small feat if you plan to use max. or next to max settings. :)
-
This is exactly the reason why I keep saying the DS is perfect for RTS games. The second I saw the two screens + touch screen I envisioned a C&C remake.
:hopping:
I always thought it'd be ace, myself. Bottom screen (touch) could be the tactical control, probably on a nice simple and clear display of your+enemy units, and the top would be information or battle display.
AoE:AoK did this and was actually quite good.
-
It just needs quite much more graphics processing power to render two screens smoohtly instead of just one, and figuring from the game's graphics it won't be a a small feat if you plan to use max. or next to max settings. :)
Think a 7800GTX will do the job? Man I don't want to upgrade again, but it's looking inevitable. :blah:
-
I'm sure the game will run on 7800 series well enough, but 7800 may not have enough juice to render game on two screens if using high details. But at this point I'm only speculating as no system requirements and recommendations have been published yet, afaik.
-
Hmm, maybe I should get this in anticipation of SupCom's arrival...
http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/monitor_3007wfp?c=us&l=en&s=bsd&cs=04
:drevil: ;7
-
It's nice indeed, but look at power consumption! 147W to 177W (max)! Jebus! :eek: 20" screens are 1/3rd of that.
-
Besides, having one huge screen isn't the same as two smaller screens for the game's purposes... I doubt you can have two seperate zones of control on one monitor, no matter how large.
As for the graphics power required, remember how he did TA. It was an absolutely beautiful game, and the requirements were extremely low. Despite that, the units were rendered in full 3D against a pre-rendered terrain texture that looked 3D, mapped onto a virtual 3D heightmap. :p Stoke of genius, that.
-
I still don't think that Supreme Commander will need all that much of a powerful PC. Just look at the videos, when he's zoomed in there's not that much detail being thrown about, and zoomed out all the units are replaced by coloured blobs.
I'm sure your computer will have more trouble calculating the trajetory of every single shot than rendering the game on two different monitors.
-
I'm sure your computer will have more trouble calculating the trajetory of every single shot than rendering the game on two different monitors.
Err, you realise that it's essentially twice the work, minus a little for caching, to render for a second monitor running at the same resolution? Calculating ballistics for a few thousand projectiles at any one time is child's play by comparison - they did it in TA 10 years ago, after all.
And if you look at the interview on SupComU:
Like everything else, the water already looks exquisite, powered with all the beauty of Pixel Shader 3.0, however, we were told that Gas Powered is developing new wave technology so the waves will lap up upon the beach, while explosions of naval engagements will send out shockwaves along the sea. The level of detail is incredibly high, however, some clever tricks to reduce poly counts have been implemented. [...] Many of you may have read the press releases by now, but I'll rehash anyway. The ideal system for playing Supreme Commander will be an SLI'd Nvidia rig running an Intel CPU.
I suspect the latter bit's for people who want to play on dual monitors, though.
-
Mother.. looks like the time to upgrade is fast approaching.
-
I still don't think that Supreme Commander will need all that much of a powerful PC. Just look at the videos, when he's zoomed in there's not that much detail being thrown about, and zoomed out all the units are replaced by coloured blobs.
I'm sure your computer will have more trouble calculating the trajetory of every single shot than rendering the game on two different monitors.
I'm not even worried about the physics for each shot. The IL-2 series has long been calcluating the physics required for each bullet fired in the game (with some simplification on the tank and triple-A batteries) including bullet penetration and so forth (they don't likely have to go that far) and with the IL-2 series you've got machine guns putting out 1200 rounds a minute. Multiply that by 4 or 6 or 8 in some cases...the game doesn't even blink. So I doubt that'll be a problem. It'll be the AI that eats the most out of the CPU.
-
It'll be the AI that eats the most out of the CPU.
Eh, I don't think it will need to be that good either, it looks like everything is played out with clumps of units at once, so the AI just has to build a bunch of groups and send them out periodically. Builds base stuff when it needs it blah blah.
The AI will probably not be great, this looks way more like a multiplayer fun fun fun game.
-
It'll be the AI that eats the most out of the CPU.
Eh, I don't think it will need to be that good either, it looks like everything is played out with clumps of units at once, so the AI just has to build a bunch of groups and send them out periodically. Builds base stuff when it needs it blah blah.
The AI will probably not be great, this looks way more like a multiplayer fun fun fun game.
No...AI in general. AI routines for base building and all that stuff is a piece of cake. ITs each of the units that have independant gun positions and so forth. Thats all AI...even your units. That eats into the CPU cycles because AI is just rediculous in how much it needs. AI really hasn't gotten any better despite CPU advancements...its just very hard.
-
Pathfinding was a big pain in the butt in TA. They say Supreme Commander has vast upgrades to the AI of units, in particular the path finding stuff. So I would guess at CPU and RAM being the two crunchers for this game. CPU for AI and physics, RAM for the extremely large battles and maps.
We'll find out soon enough I guess. :)
-
It'll be the AI that eats the most out of the CPU.
Eh, I don't think it will need to be that good either, it looks like everything is played out with clumps of units at once, so the AI just has to build a bunch of groups and send them out periodically. Builds base stuff when it needs it blah blah.
The AI will probably not be great, this looks way more like a multiplayer fun fun fun game.
No...AI in general. AI routines for base building and all that stuff is a piece of cake. ITs each of the units that have independant gun positions and so forth. Thats all AI...even your units. That eats into the CPU cycles because AI is just rediculous in how much it needs. AI really hasn't gotten any better despite CPU advancements...its just very hard.
Supreme Commander units have this? They move independantly? That's pretty cool. Would be great if you could customise units and switch around thier weapons to suit your needs, Mech Commander style.
-
Nice Video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3223875399371663925&q=supreme+commander (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3223875399371663925&q=supreme+commander)
-
It'll be the AI that eats the most out of the CPU.
Eh, I don't think it will need to be that good either, it looks like everything is played out with clumps of units at once, so the AI just has to build a bunch of groups and send them out periodically. Builds base stuff when it needs it blah blah.
The AI will probably not be great, this looks way more like a multiplayer fun fun fun game.
No...AI in general. AI routines for base building and all that stuff is a piece of cake. ITs each of the units that have independant gun positions and so forth. Thats all AI...even your units. That eats into the CPU cycles because AI is just rediculous in how much it needs. AI really hasn't gotten any better despite CPU advancements...its just very hard.
Supreme Commander units have this? They move independantly? That's pretty cool. Would be great if you could customise units and switch around thier weapons to suit your needs, Mech Commander style.
Well most RTS games have independantly moved AI units. Even the good old Dune 2 had this...each AI unit operates with its own bit of AI that governs what the unit does. In recent years we've gotten pretty good at it. In C&C Generals each tank for instance determines its path, what enemy targets are in range, if its being threatened, has a turret that can independantly track the enemy units while moving, and can, to some extent, even determine which threat (if presented with two similtaneously) it can better deal with. Even in C&C Generals your units will respond when attacked and fan out to engage.
What Supreme Commander has takes things a few steps above from the looks of it but its really quite the same. The biggest thing being that units like the Battleship have two or three main guns and a compliment of smaller guns. So what I see is units that act more like they do in FreeSpace. They know how to operate in their 3D space, they know what guns they have, each independant weapon system runs its own AI routines to prioritize, range, and track appropriate targets. So when we saw the battleship go into combat we see the main guns engaging the enemy ships, while the AAA guns track, each independantly, the enemy fighters. With the air units we see them dogfighting in a pattern attempting to gain advantage and fire on the opposition.
Its still not all that sophisticated but its better than we've probably seen.
-
Looks good, though I'm sure I saw some Eagle from Space 1999 in there ;)
-
Well most RTS games have independantly moved AI units. Blah blah blah words.
I know this ****, I'm not totally retarded.
So what I see is units that act more like they do in FreeSpace.
This is what I was asking and as I said before that's pretty cool. Although that begs the question of exactly how much can we even control these units? I never saw him actually tell a unit to attack another in that video, but he just kind of directed them to the right place and watched things blow up.
With having different targets on each turret, one wonders if we're able to direct units to attck another one at all, will one of the turrets wander while it's attacking? Can we do this anyway?
This game looks brilliant and all, but I'm seriously concerned about how decent the gameplay will be.
-
I don't really have a problem with the game even if it is not possible to directly order a single unit (or group) to attack another hostile one, scale of the battlefields in this game are big enough to warrant focus on macromanagement instead of micromanagement. In fact, I have really grown tired of micromanagement hell where units can't do jack **** unless the player keeps them in hand.
-
I don't really have a problem with the game even if it is not possible to directly order a single unit (or group) to attack another hostile one, scale of the battlefields in this game are big enough to warrant focus on macromanagement instead of micromanagement. In fact, I have really grown tired of micromanagement hell where units can't do jack **** unless the player keeps them in hand.
I'm just concerned with watching the game too much. Maybe this wont happen, meh.
-
So what I see is units that act more like they do in FreeSpace.
This is what I was asking and as I said before that's pretty cool. Although that begs the question of exactly how much can we even control these units? I never saw him actually tell a unit to attack another in that video, but he just kind of directed them to the right place and watched things blow up.
With having different targets on each turret, one wonders if we're able to direct units to attck another one at all, will one of the turrets wander while it's attacking? Can we do this anyway?
This game looks brilliant and all, but I'm seriously concerned about how decent the gameplay will be.
I think that's the point; rather than micromanaging at the individual unit level, you dictate objectives you want them to take at a higher tactical level. Like rather than ordering that pikemen to attack that cavalry and that cavalry rider to attack that archer, you order them to achieve tactical objectives - hold that ridge, attack that position, form a line of defense, move into a flanking position, etc. Like how in reality you don't have generals phoning their troops to tell them who to aim at, or that the RPG guy should attack that tank and not the light infantry, just where to attack or hold, etc.
-
http://www.eurogamer.net/tv_video.php?playlist_id=466&s=l
Trailer.
-
http://thepiratebay.org/details.php?id=3488057
HD trailer - 720p resolution. (176MB)
-
I think it looks like a lot of fun. :nod:
-
That HD trailer makes me drool. :drool:
What, no drool smilie? Argh
-
So what I see is units that act more like they do in FreeSpace.
This is what I was asking and as I said before that's pretty cool. Although that begs the question of exactly how much can we even control these units? I never saw him actually tell a unit to attack another in that video, but he just kind of directed them to the right place and watched things blow up.
With having different targets on each turret, one wonders if we're able to direct units to attck another one at all, will one of the turrets wander while it's attacking? Can we do this anyway?
This game looks brilliant and all, but I'm seriously concerned about how decent the gameplay will be.
I think that's the point; rather than micromanaging at the individual unit level, you dictate objectives you want them to take at a higher tactical level. Like rather than ordering that pikemen to attack that cavalry and that cavalry rider to attack that archer, you order them to achieve tactical objectives - hold that ridge, attack that position, form a line of defense, move into a flanking position, etc. Like how in reality you don't have generals phoning their troops to tell them who to aim at, or that the RPG guy should attack that tank and not the light infantry, just where to attack or hold, etc.
But will it let you, say... order the unit destroy a nuke silo and not having it fire at every other thing on the map before it destroys the silo?
-
But will it let you, say... order the unit destroy a nuke silo and not having it fire at every other thing on the map before it destroys the silo?
I'd imagine so. They'll probably have a system where units will fight intelligently by themselves but can be ordered to focus on specific targets; look at how all those robots team up to take on the spider-tank-thing, for example. It'd be more, IMO, about having units pick sensible targets rather than making the player micromanage each and every unit. Perhaps they'll be some sort of higher level rules the player can set, i.e. to order units (in general) to focus on certain types of enemies or similar.
-
Well most RTS games have independantly moved AI units. Blah blah blah words.
I know this ****, I'm not totally retarded.
One never knows...
So what I see is units that act more like they do in FreeSpace.
This is what I was asking and as I said before that's pretty cool. Although that begs the question of exactly how much can we even control these units? I never saw him actually tell a unit to attack another in that video, but he just kind of directed them to the right place and watched things blow up.
With having different targets on each turret, one wonders if we're able to direct units to attck another one at all, will one of the turrets wander while it's attacking? Can we do this anyway?
This game looks brilliant and all, but I'm seriously concerned about how decent the gameplay will be.
I expect the gameplay will be like TA...maybe better...and that means its going to be in the top 5 RTS games for gameplay. I still think Blizzard probably has the RTS formula down pat...but one can only play so many WarIII games before you get a little tired of the whole thing. I love it but I've seen and done most of what there is to do. This is new, exciting, its on a big scale, and it looks like fun.
The demo where we didn't see him issuing orders...I suspect they cut the interface out of the whole presentation screen so we didn't really see most of what was going on in terms of the orders and issuing. I think the AI looks alot more capable on its own than in most of the old RTS games but I'll bet that you can still click on a tank and say attack this guy.
-
What I hate in Warcraft 3 and other similar RTS's is the fact that the stuff you research in one mission does not carry over to the next one. It just does not make sense to research everything again in every bloody mission.
-
I imagine that units sent to attack a specific target will, by default, engage other targets while en route, but concentrate solely on the target once in range. That would give you the most efficient application of firepower while obeying the user's directives to the click.
-
I imagine that units sent to attack a specific target will, by default, engage other targets while en route, but concentrate solely on the target once in range. That would give you the most efficient application of firepower while obeying the user's directives to the click.
...while at the same time eliminating any form of stealth they may have held. As long as the ability to tell a group of units to advance to a target without engaging en-route, i'll be happy.
-
TA had that option on a per-unit basis, so I'm reasonably sure it'll be included in this too
-
:nod: I'd expect so, It might seem strange but im three quarters curious, and one quarter excited to see what new movement / control schemes they have implented in SC. In particular, Formations, Squad tactics, And possibly inter service linkage (Think guarding a battlehip with torp bombers but on a much grander scale) and complex
-
I'm thinking that a method to mark enemy units as a high-priority would work too. Move your groups of units in, double click on that huge thing the enemy has that you want taken out and watch the sparks fly as they concentrate on it without totally ignoring everyone else.
I mean when you play RTS's normally you have a large group of units and you tell these to do that, those to do that, those to do that or just tell them all to kill one at a time. One is tedious and one holds no strategic thinking what so ever. SC colud throw all that out of the window.
-
I hope it does.
-
You guys know that what you've been talking about has been discussed by chris taylor?
Single click attack = attack this group of enemies
Double click attack = attack this group of enemies but foucus on the one I clicked!
Tripple click attack = KILL THIS NOW! I DONT CARE ABOUT THE OTHER ENEMIES!
-
So do you have to lasso these enemy groups, or does it just figure them out dynamically?
-
For the single click I'd say its more like move, but attack bad guys they see once there.
Sounds good though. :)
I only played War3 for the story. The gameplay is too watered down and rock-paper-sissors like. I prefer games like the Total War series (Medievil two looks kick arse) where its more heavily about strategy and how to pull off a battle or engagement. Rather than just a Grunt or Zealot rush type thing.
TA was good in that it had the best of both worlds, the base side micro mangement and development, and the tactical thinking of how a battle will be fought etc. (Ie. bombard defenses with artillery, strike with a ground rush of tanks concentrating on air defense, follow up with a few air raids or Hawk swarm taking out nuke defenses, then make the base a warm cloud of radiation.)
SC looks to do it again, Total War -esk battles with base building. :) = :yes: :yes: :yes:
-
Tripple click attack = KILL THIS NOW! I DONT CARE ABOUT THE OTHER ENEMIES!
"Supreme Commander will use your mouse-click frequency as an active aid in prioritizing attack strength. In other words, when you're panic-clicking over and over again on the one target you really want to destroy, the game will take note of your intensity and will earmark all available units for an all-out assault on that target."