Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: ChronoReverse on February 07, 2007, 11:06:34 am
-
Grabbed this from Fileshack at 500kb/s (waited 40 minutes in line though). A 1GB demo, they're getting really big these days...
Anyways, first thing is my PC:
Pentium D 820
2GB DDR
9600SE (lawlz)
Needless to say, it wasn't pretty and it ran like molasses (if I'm being generous) at 1024x786 (appears to be the minimum resolution) and minimum settings. This made it kinda hard to get into it and micro was rendered absolutely impossible (instead of being merely difficult). I've only played the first mission but at least that one can be played using purely strategic methods (i.e., build appropriate swarm, send them in, repeat).
The interface feels large. Perhaps it's designed for high resolution, but it felt like it was taking up a lot of space. I'm told there's ways to lower the space taken up so I'll play with that later.
The first mission pretty much plays like TA to me. You get your Commander (that is, you're the commander), you build stuff and you blow stuff up. Pretty basic. It's interesting how the map grows as more mission objectives are given. Zooming in and out would probably be useful and neat if I could get good FPS, but the way it is, it's a tad tedious. AI for the first level was non-existant but I guess it's meant to let you get your feet wet. I'll see what happens in the next mission (looks like it's one from the middle of the campaign).
AA Towers are useless (I built three right under the patrol path of some enemy fighters... I eventually gave up and just sent in the AA vehicles which made short work of the fighters). Didn't get to test the light laser tower. Artillery is fun (and the only reasonable way to assault the plasma towers since those are behind concrete walls). Bombers seem to be more accurate than in TA. For some reason the enemy (UEF) plasma tower devastated my units. My fighters also seem to lose out against their fighters. Probably due to my lack of micro.
Did some overclocking and managed to get my FPS into the 'teens. Just this much already made the game a lot more playable. Those fighters of mine aren't useless after all if I give them a target.
The scrolling zoom is pretty neat, when you scroll zoom in, it'll center on your cursor. I wish there was a way to have the camera follow a group though. The split screen idea is also pretty neat, allowing you to zoom in on two locations at once. I suppose it'd be even nicer with two screen (built in dual monitor support).
Looks like the Tech 1 units are very RPS. They also seem grossly outmatched by the Tech 2 units. At least a huge swarm of artillery bots were able to take out a commander before the commander did that to them.
-
My setup
3.06ghz w/ hyperthreading
1.5gb ddr ram
7600 gs
Ran with settings on medium with changes making not to much difference. It still seemed to be a bit choppy though, which was surprising because I run FEAR fairly well with most graphical settings on high.
I'm not sure I like the way the screen scrolls it seems too jerky. And god forbid one should turn on the tactical minimap, seems to choke the game like no tommorow.
It's playable, and seems fun, I only played through the first mission also.
I'd agree with the comments on the interface. It seems the battle screen only takes up about half the screen vertically. Kind of dissapointing.
I don't know yet, I think there's a lack of decent loding or optimizing or something, it seems as if it should run alot better than it does.
Still seems like fun though. Will wait and see huh...
-
Games are getting out of control. These video cards cost hundreds and hundreds and even the high end ones can't run games very well. that sucks.
-
The game isn't out yet, though. And you don't have to buy it as soon as it comes out either. I'm waiting for video card competition to kick in so I can get a nice one for less money than now... and then I'll look at buying SC. ;)
Games could certainly use more optimization though, I'll give you that. Battlefield 2 still hogs my system, but I've heard it's cause it wasn't steamlined (like the code) very well or something. *shrugs*
-
Well, a 7600GT (which can be had for $100 now after rebates) would run medium settings fairly smooth so it's not _that_ bad. The one thing Supreme Commander seems to like is a dual-core system though. There are reports of people with fast video cards getting lagginess when the battlefield starts to expand and the unit numbers balloon.
For me, I'm utterly limited by my video card at about 15fps so I can't comment.
I wish AMD would hurry up and release the R600 already. I want mainstream DX10 cards with a price-war. A 8600 or the ATi equivalent would be nice.
-
I wasn't very impressed with this. The game performance during the campaign is horrible as others noted (stays around 20fps on an X1900XTX), although the skirmish runs a lot better. However, the game in general feels very slow paced, more than TA ever did. It might be a matter of getting used to it, but I found it getting somewhat boring, even though I loved TA back then.
You need to play it in at least 1280x960, or the interface takes up too much of the screen.
Games are getting out of control. These video cards cost hundreds and hundreds and even the high end ones can't run games very well. that sucks.
Not only that, but many of these games barely look any better than ones from one or two years ago. This has become the new trend in PC games for the last year or so. Check out some benchmarks of SCDA or R6V on the PC, for example. It's downright pathetic. :no:
-
Yeah, it took me 48 minutes to finish the first mission. Rather sluggish (to be fair it was multiparts but still).
I've found out how to unlock the camera btw. Hit Ctrl-V. Then you use space the move the camera, it won't return. Hit Ctrl-V again to revert.
Actually even though I complained about the interface size, it's not really that bad since you have to zoom in and out all the time anyways. I even use the split-screen mode (hit Home to enable, End to turn off) so I can keep an eye on my commander (press T for tracking camera on selected unit(s)) and the other one to control some other group of units.
Formations are formed by right click dragging a box around your group.
-
Thought I'd pop back to comment on the demo since I downloaded it yesterday.
I think I know the reason that the campaign feels slow (or at least the first mission). Your map gets revealed as you complete objectives - so all the defences, units and what have to that you move to the east are suddenly in the wrong position and you need to focus your efforts to the south instead. I can't help but feel that if you started in the bottom left of a big square map and knew you'd sooner or later have to cover all of it - you could build and deploy your units accordingly. It's the rushing from north to south to east etc. that gets tricky.
I've had no problems with the graphics at all untill high-level maps and unit counts come in. I'm running at 1280x1024 (highly recommended) with no AA (not necessary at that resolution) and most options set to high except shadows. It runs fairly smoothly untill things get busy. Another thing worth noting here is that if you turn the game speed up - things get much more juddery. Turning it down has the adverse effect - so playing with the speed controller is a good idea if you need time to think, plan and issue orders.
Overall though the game has clearly been refined since the beta. I'm looking forward to the full release.
-
Is it just me, or does that Dr. Brackman bloke - the guy who founded the Cybrans - sound exactly like Donald Sutherland in the Cybran campaign briefings?
-
Playing on 1600x1200, max settings, with a few minor slowdowns. Question though... why isn't the sound working when I play the game?
-
Games like this are not intended for the average PC gamer ! Its too taxing on the PC !
In the words of Mr Scott from the USS Enterprise : -
"We cannae hold her togetha cap'n! She's breakin aparght! She cannae hold much longa !" :hopping:
-
If you havent gotten the demo yet, get it here http://www.gamershell.com/download_17675.shtml (http://www.gamershell.com/download_17675.shtml)
I played the beta of this thing for months.. its a great game, and even better as a finished product.
-
laggy as a ****er on a midrange system 4000+ 1600pro and 1gb
-
I imagine the game is much more dependent on CPU speed than the video card, which is unusual these days. But given the complexity of a simulation involving maps dozens of times larger than in TA, physics and unit processing, it's unsurprising.
-
I'll have to check out the demo, but to be honest I'm not really enamored of it because, well, it seems to follow the basic concept of "build five hundred of these things and throw them at the other guy en masse with maybe a superweapon as backup". There's no real way to resort to tactical craft or subtle methods when you're dealing with a landscape blanketed in units.
-
As a (big) aside, is it (in your opinion) 'cheating' in games like Rome:TW if you only engage enemies when you have massive numerical superiority? Because it's, like, a valid tactic but also a very cheaty-feeling one....
(this was, incidentally, because I was thinking about the issues of balancing tactical control against 'realistic' real time action; and concluding that the inherent reduction of control through use of fixed keys and ui meant that some form of pause-to-order was perfectly justifiable as still being realistic)
-
Personally, my feeling on that is that too much micro-management is given to the player, you seem to fill about 7 levels in the chain of command. I suppose that it is the only way to do it, as most AI systems I have encountered seem to only be capable of the Rush attack. As soon as you figure out how to withstand the initial assault, most AI's can be taken out by a simple dig-in and build technique.
Computers are good at 'logical' things, which is why logistics and resourcing are usually very good from an AI player, but they can't do imagination. I've never seen a computer do a hit-and-fade, or used a small group units to draw off some of your main force and lead them into a trap. In many occasions, at least when one side has been outnumbered, the 'dirty tricks' have had more impact on the battle than melee fighting has.
I think 'Pause to Order' is acceptable as a tactic simply to offset the fact the computer, whilst unimaginative, has instant awareness of every unit on the field, it's current location, action and situation, whereas the player has to take far longer to get that information (as Aldo said, in part because of the UI).
-
To be fair, the AI in SC doesn't cheat in that way. It must also rely on spotters and radar (and this really shows... the SC AI is pretty brain-dead).
-
It would be kinda nice if it built attack units based on your weaknesses. I've not seen any evidence of that yet - but if you have a whole load of ground defence turrets but no anti-air potential then it should start swarming you with bombers - basically forcing you to defend against everything whilst trying to find weak points of your own. If I can see the AI has no anti-air then I'll start bombing the **** out of it rather than risking my ground units to their 25-strong tank platoon.
-
I'll have to check out the demo, but to be honest I'm not really enamored of it because, well, it seems to follow the basic concept of "build five hundred of these things and throw them at the other guy en masse with maybe a superweapon as backup". There's no real way to resort to tactical craft or subtle methods when you're dealing with a landscape blanketed in units.
Damn, this sounds like my kind of game! I hate games that require micro because I always end up getting my ass kicked.
My usual strategy consists of: create a mass of units, preferably a single jack-of-all-trades unit, mass-select them and click inside the enemy's base. And forget all this "rock-paper-scissor" stuff. Juggling anything more than two or three kinds of units is more than I care to handle.
Too bad it would run at 0.5 FPS on my computer.
-
Downloading demo now good thing my fileplanet subscription hadent ended yet ;-)
Played the beta was kinda fun now I will have to see how single player is, Got 90% and Game of the month in Swedish PC Gamer
-
Damn, this sounds like my kind of game! I hate games that require micro because I always end up getting my ass kicked.
My usual strategy consists of: create a mass of units, preferably a single jack-of-all-trades unit, mass-select them and click inside the enemy's base. And forget all this "rock-paper-scissor" stuff. Juggling anything more than two or three kinds of units is more than I care to handle.
You're not going to like SC then. Just because there's less micro tactics, doesn't mean there's no strategy. If you just build units and hurl them it'll be very easy to repel them.
For example, I was playing the skirmish map in the demo. The two land choke points were obvious so I built three laser towers and a concrete wall in front of those. Concrete walls are extremely tough against direct fire but go down under explosives fairly well. A few minutes after completion, the AI sent a column of ground units, mostly direct fire and AA. Three laser towers slaughtered the entire mass because they had to thin out through the choke point and slowed against the concrete wall which also blocked their direct fire. The laser towers could shoot over the walls >:-). The little damage the walls took were quickly repaired by the Engineer I set patrolling the fort.
Later on, the AI built some missile units and utterly annihilated the little fort without taking any damage =/.
Incidentally, the AI gets to have these kind of setups premade in the campaign missions. I generally have to rely on artillery to lob shots over the wall (there tends to be a cluster of Point Defense and Anti-Air Towers behind the walls so direct fire and bombers get slaughtered).
-
All the major strategy games have gone to the Warcraft style of micromanagement over the past decade. SC is a breath of fresh air - it elevates the game from who has the strongest army to who controls map regions, and thus the economic resources. There's no restrictive, artificial unit cap to block a player from becoming too strong so his opponent could catch up, and a balance made by a unit's capabilities - e.g. range, weapon velocity, speed - rather than the usual paper-stone-scissors nonsense. It's TA2 in all but name really.
-
As a (big) aside, is it (in your opinion) 'cheating' in games like Rome:TW if you only engage enemies when you have massive numerical superiority? Because it's, like, a valid tactic but also a very cheaty-feeling one....
(this was, incidentally, because I was thinking about the issues of balancing tactical control against 'realistic' real time action; and concluding that the inherent reduction of control through use of fixed keys and ui meant that some form of pause-to-order was perfectly justifiable as still being realistic)
Not really. I don't think of it as cheating. I've been known to do the occasionally "kekeke Zergling rush" type attack myself. (Though normally I do that kind of thing as a spoiling attack; cause damage and general havoc, force them to commit units to defense they were trying to save, just generally mess with them.) I just prefer to be able to finesse something.
-
Games are getting out of control. These video cards cost hundreds and hundreds and even the high end ones can't run games very well. that sucks.
Gotta disagree with you there. Although I'm considering upgrading now I've had this same AMD Athlon XP 2700+ which is now at 1GB (started with 512mb) and now using a GeForce 6600GT (my Radeon 9700Pro died) and is otherwise untouched and it still plays most of the latest games just fine. Doom III demo wasn't a problem at all...not a bit. Battlefield 2 I've had to decrease some details but is otherwise fine and looks fine. IL-2 is an absolute beast and will eat every bit of RAM, CPU< and video you can throw at it ...and it runs fine.
I don't think its out of control...its quite manageable actually that a 4 year old computer can play new games reasonably well.
The Supreme Commander that's being talked about is a beta as far as I know (game is gold but not out yet I don't think) and I'm sure performance is not yet where it should be. Games are always slower during beta than at release...except for games that get sold still in beta format (it happens). Optimization to make the game run well, no matter the hardware, always comes last.
You guys should have tried the FS2 multiplayer beta. That was slow! But by the time the demo came out on nearly final code. Things were blazing fast then.
-
The Game as it stands in the demo is the finished product minus all the features of the finished products like the rest of the campaigns. Im able to play the game with 0 fps issues. However in the beta i would play with 3 AI sides and after about 30 minutes either my RAM would be running out or the memory leaks in the code would slow the game way down until it ulimately froze. The demo seems to run significantly better so far.
System Specs:
2.4Ghz C2D
2GB PC6400
GeForce 8800GTX
Windows Vista
-
All the major strategy games have gone to the Warcraft style of micromanagement over the past decade. SC is a breath of fresh air - it elevates the game from who has the strongest army to who controls map regions, and thus the economic resources. There's no restrictive, artificial unit cap to block a player from becoming too strong so his opponent could catch up, and a balance made by a unit's capabilities - e.g. range, weapon velocity, speed - rather than the usual paper-stone-scissors nonsense. It's TA2 in all but name really.
Now you've got me interested. I usually suck at RTS games because I don't like having to memorize tech trees/unit combos/etc, and prefer to use actual tactics. Of course those don't work, so I end up just massing a giant army and hurling it at the enemy. SC sounds much more interesting now that I can actually use tactics based on the lay of the land. :) Unfortunately, I must wait until I get a new computer :(
-
Tech 3 units are so satisfying.
The Galaxy Class battleship is just insane. Takes forever to build, but is supremely tough and has really long and accurate range for its shells.
The Plan B strategic submarine is also sweet. It builds and fires ballistic missiles. As in it goes way up, move along and then comes straight down on the target.
Interestingly, the Galaxy Class can survive one nuke blast (the commander is killed twice over).
-
Interestingly, the Galaxy Class can survive one nuke blast (the commander is killed twice over).
Most experimental units can. Other than the units meant to be produced in numbers; ie. Monkeylord and the like, every experimental unit can withstand at least one direct hit with a strategic nuke. Hell, the Galactica Colossus can withstand over 3 direct hits with a nuke, believe me, i've tried.
-
You have a point IceFire, the beta suffered quite badly from slowdown but the demo is much improved in that area so I'm assuming the released game will be similar or (even hopefully better) in performance than that.
A couple of other points I realised:
1. Command and Conquer - Tiberian Wars (sp?) is out in March. Should be interesting to see how the two size up against eachother as the daddies of the RTS industry.
2. SC is (in the words of the demo adverts) one of the most moddable RTS games ever apparently. I'll be interested to see what they mean by that, as well as what people can do with it. I would actually quite like to see some total conversions in there and heck - something like a Halo RTS could be fun!
-
Halo RTS is already being done, remember? C&Ds for you!
Be interesting to see if the old BattleTech total conversion for TA gets restarted.
-
Halo RTS is already being done, remember? C&Ds for you!
Be interesting to see if the old BattleTech total conversion for TA gets restarted.
I'm hoping so, although there are inherent limitations in a comparatively simple RTS to the whole damage modelling and customization that make BattleTech such fun. It'll be interesting if they can be worked somewhat around with the scripting engine.
-
I have to echo my corp CEO in EVE and say that the game ending when the Commander dies can be rather annoying.
Case in point: you build up the perfect force to crush their base and then their commander runs out and takes a T3 artillery shell in the face and it's all over.
All you really need to end the game are four or five siege assault bots, a Support Commander or two, and a T3 artillery unit. The great battles I was promised really aren't materializing.
-
Well, there's other modes in the full version you know. Like the complete destruction mode. Besides, the map in the demo is tiny and the AI is really stupid.
In any case, humans wouldn't send their commanders out from the protection of shields. You can build subcommanders to do stuff and T2 (much less T3 or experimental) bots enmasse can easily destroy a commander.
-
Unfortunately though - in the campaign at least - the AI has a tendancy to send its commander into whatever fray it can. On the second mission of the demo, I ended up accidentally beating the map before taking out either of the Aeon or Mach bases simply because the AI chucked both its commanders at my base defences and attack units. End result? The map finished whilst there were still full bases of enemies to be destroyed.
-
and the AI is really stupid.
That does not mitigate the point. Makes it worse, really. If they've shorted the singleplayer experience that badly, like so many other games, then frankly they can suck my balls.
-
I think I'll be playing more online than single player in supcom.
-
and the AI is really stupid.
That does not mitigate the point. Makes it worse, really. If they've shorted the singleplayer experience that badly, like so many other games, then frankly they can suck my balls.
Yeah, you'll notice I've included that in the context of the demo.
From reports, the demo AI is oddly stupider than the beta's (besides leaving out the harder AI modes). We'll see when the full game comes out.
http://files.filefront.com/lua2zip/;6710945;;/fileinfo.html
Download that file and replace the lua file in the demo/supremecommander/gameplay folder. It changes medium difficulty to the harder setting and changes hard difficulty to horde mode. In Horde mode you are getting attack almost constantly after the first 10 minutes or so. It is much more fun that the difficulties available in the demo.
See if that helps any.
-
Son of a *****!
"please verify you can meet specifications"
This is not a bug, it's their lazy way of saying (something about your system sucks, go figure it out yourself!)
I had to dig through their crappy forums as they had 4 separate threads about this problem (what, they never heard of a Fracking STICKY before for important threads? Or are they just clueless on how to set up a support forum?)
Apparently my system meets all the minimum reqs except for one thing, shaders...
I got TWICE the video memory needed (256 vs 128) but I got a ATI 9250 and you need 9600+. Too bad I already upgraded.
Bugger. They made Dawn of War, and it runs beautifully on my system so I thought I would have no problem.
If your system fails the internal check you can't even get INTO the game to deselect game options and turn off shaders (AFAIK). As the game crashes back to desktop after that message on startup. If you can they they don't mention it "just get a new card" they say.
(Now deleting the 1gig demo to free up the space)...
-
Bugger. They made Dawn of War, and it runs beautifully on my system so I thought I would have no problem.
Gas Powered Games did not make Dawn of War, Relic did. DoW and SC only have the same producer, THQ.
If your system fails the internal check you can't even get INTO the game to deselect game options and turn off shaders (AFAIK). As the game crashes back to desktop after that message on startup. If you can they they don't mention it "just get a new card" they say.
I don't think you can turn off the shader effects, you need a card that supports them to even run the game. I had the same thing happen to me with Battlefield 2 demo back when I had a GeForce 4800.
-
how do i verify that my system meets minimum system requirements?
(http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w245/Dagolith/crap.jpg?t=1171320341)
-
If it says that, it means you don't have the requirements. It's just not telling you outright "You computer isn't fast enough".
-
:( :( :sigh: god damit, i need my tower to be fixed already, never use a laptop as your base computer.... i hate myself.
-
Well i got my copy of the Cybran limited edition pack in the post from play.com today and i have to say i really like Supreme commander, brings back good memorys of Total Annihilation
-
i loved TA, i think one of the best things about those games, was the 2000 unit cap, full scale war just got a little fuller.
-
I think the default limit is 50000 this time around in the full version (of course can be set higher later as computers get more powerful).
-
Ugh, be glad you guys can play it!
Those damned bastards changed it just enough from the beta to make it not work in Windows 2000! *cries*
-
WHAT? you can't run TA on 2000? you can still get Absolute Annihilation of the net. it should run fine. you can email or pm me if you need a torrent, or help with torrents. unless thats against the rules ;)
-
I think Cyker is talking about Supreme Commander Dagolith, not TA :)
-
ok wile playing skirmish i seem to have noticed an odd behaviour with the Cybran, and it only does this when i play against AI cybran, on normal AI. The AI NUKES itself!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i have witnessed it 3 times, it will launch a nuke at its own base when none of my units are there! but it dosent do it on the hard AI. I will say i am i a little disappointed with the AI because it does none of the tactics that chris taylor says it does on the making of dvd, ie, if you say have very strong ground defense's but weak air at one side of your base he says the ai should go round your base to the weak side or use bombers to take out your turrets and walls, well it hasn't on any of my games, which has left me a little sad. It does how ever make a very strong and challenge base defense for its own side, i play on map last nite it was an island on 81km by 81km on hard balanced AI 5 hours it lasted. So will the AI is still very similar to standard RTS's i still very much so love this game, mainly just because of the fact that like TA aircraft do proper dogfigthing!!!!!!!!! unlike other RTS's where the airunits just hover and attack.
-
is it just me or
Oblivion cannons == Ori ship main gun (Stargate ;))
theyr like instagibbing godlike wtfpwnageguns
-
I think Cyker is talking about Supreme Commander Dagolith, not TA :)
thats wack.
-
Ugh, be glad you guys can play it!
Those damned bastards changed it just enough from the beta to make it not work in Windows 2000! *cries*
Actually, there's a way you can make it work. You have to copy some of the dll's into the bin folder instead.
-
ok wile playing skirmish i seem to have noticed an odd behaviour with the Cybran, and it only does this when i play against AI cybran, on normal AI. The AI NUKES itself!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You sure that's not just their ACU exploding?
-
Or even a chain reaction of Tech 3 reactors exploding.
Remember, adjacent bonuses with T1 Power == Good
While T3 Power beside anything other than a shield == very bad
-
While T3 Power beside anything other than a shield == very bad
how so?
-
Because when the T3 power goes belly up it creates a sodding big bang that takes anything near it with it...
So it's a bad idea to build a string of them through your base ;)
-
That would explain what happened to my Commander last time around. Short-range firefight around enemy T3 power=bad.
Though not quite so bad as taking a T3 arty round to the face.
-
You sure that's not just their ACU exploding?
i'm sure it is a nuke, i had the nuke warning blips and a icon on a nuke on the mini-map, its weird that it only does it on the cybran
-
I keep hearing people talking about SC, and I can't believe you guys can take these names seriously...:p
-
I keep hearing people talking about SC, and I can't believe you guys can take these names seriously...:p
My Monkeylord will grill you for that, and the Soul Ripper will burn the ashes!
-
I need to get my 800 more gold for a stupid epic flying mount... then... and only then... can I get Supreme Commander.
Otherwise I won't go back to WoW in months... a good thing really... but I need to buzz the tower at Thrallmar....
-
No in-game experience is quite as visceral as blasting a continent full of enemy bases to hell with a barrage of nukes. And EVERYTHING can be supplemented with engineers or sACUs, meaning if you have stupid amounts of resources you can fire them almost continuously.
Also, the finale for the UEF campaign is creepily similar to the final episode of Stargate Atlantis, which came out at nearly the same time...
-
i didnt see the black sun lift up and fly away .....
-
How many missions are there in the UEF campaign? I'm on mission 6 I think, but have become somewhat stuck - can establish myself easily enough but haven't quite gotten the right technique there yet.
-
When you beat each campaign, DON'T SKIP THE CREDITS. You'll see what I mean after you click Finish in the debriefing...
-
but the whole credits not skipping part lasts about .... 5 min max right? theres nothing at the END of the credits?
-
I bought SC and received it yesterday, I'm on my second UEF mission. So far the game has been very unimpressive. To be honest, I'd be rather watching Simpson reruns than playing SC. I should have downloaded the demo before wasting my money. I think even Earth 2160 was better than SC.
-
Why?
-
Fury tends to be that way about games everyone else enjoys. He responded this way to Prey's demo as well and either could not or would not articulate his opposition in a meaningful way.
-
Some people just prefer to be on the outside looking in, I guess. Or he could just be really anal or whatever.
-
Fair enough!
Anyways... I'm currently enjoying the strategic bombers. Radar proof, fast as hell, pack a powerful bomb warhead and generally 8 of them can take out a shield and whatever's beneath it.
Fun times!
-
patch is out
-
I'm fairly interested in the game, but I'm not very confident in my computer's capabilities. I've got a P4 ~3ghz, 2 gigs of RAM, and a Radeon X700. How good (or bad for that matter) will it run?
-
He responded this way to Prey's demo as well
For the record, I agreed with Fury on Prey.
I've now completed both the Aeon and Cybran campaigns, I guess I have to try the UEF next. The missions are all interesting enough, if a bit repeating. Complete this objective>map expands>complete this objective>map expands etc.
-
Would Supreme Commander run on my:
2GHz AMD
2 gig of RAM
RADEON9800
?
-
It'll run better than my computer (9600se).
Your cpu will be a severe limitation when the map and unit numbers get large though (I'm running dual-core which SC uses, so I'm fine).
-
Like Chrono said.
SC can get very CPU/RAM intensive since every projectile is apparently accurately calculated and when you have such high unit limits, things can get very very chaotic. There are steps you can take to speed your performance up of course...
i. Decrease graphics quality. Speaks for itself... turning off shadows, anti-aliasing and lighting fidelity can work wonders although of course the game won't look as pretty.
ii. I've found that collecting all the wreckages that you can - whilst time consuming - can benefit you in that you get the Mass claimed from the wreckage, it's easier to see what's happening when things get hectic and as there's less things for your computer to render - it should speed things up as well (I don't have numbers to back that up, I'm just assuming that less on screen = better performance).
iii. Upgrade your CPU and RAM. Whilst SC needs a good graphics card as well, a lot of the computational stuff requires powerful processors and memory. Dual core users apparently really benefit here.
Lt.Cannonfodder: While I see what you mean about the repetive formula, it does seem fairly necessary to keep things going smoothly. As commander your objective always seems to end up being "kill their commander" but untill then things can be fairly interesting, with both defensive and offensive objectives as well as escort and capturing missions. Given this is an RTS - there's only so much variety to be built into what you need to do.
I will say one thing about it - it can be annoying as you can spend your first hour fortifying against the enemy in one direction, only to have the map expand and you find all your fortifications are facing the wrong way and you need to shove everything in another direction.
Still, I'm really enjoying the mission play times. I certainly feel I'm getting my moneys worth - and I've only made it to mission 5 of both Cybran and UEF campaigns. Haven't tried the Aeon yet.
-
Speaking of accurate projectile physics. I was playing the final Cybran mission on Hard and had sent a Soul Ripper to help hold a position that was being shelled by a T3 artillery as well as being attacked on the ground...
A T3 shell LANDED ON THE SOUL RIPPER and knocked its hp down to the hundreds. I was like =O
As for missions, I tend to beat them in an hour except the final two for each faction (can take up to 2 hours) when playing on Normal. You usually don't have to fortify that much but should instead be building nice little battlegroups of death and destruction =)
When you beat each campaign, make sure to NOT skip the credits. So far I liked the UEF final mission the best. It was really hectic with lots of OMGWTF moments (hint, don't stop building T3 gunships).
-
Fury tends to be that way about games everyone else enjoys. He responded this way to Prey's demo as well and either could not or would not articulate his opposition in a meaningful way.
Prey was and is a generic FPS which was built around two "fresh" (note: I'm not saying new because the features were hardly new) features that then got overused. Without these two features, it was nothing but as boring and repetitive as Doom 3.
Or he could just be really anal or whatever.
This place tends to trigger that behaviour on frequent basis.
As for SC itself, now that I have played about 1/3rd of the missions, I have to say that the game after all is better than Earth 2160 (which is not a huge accomplishment in itself). I don't know why you particularly care why I don't love this game, but here goes.
- The game is based on "fresh" (again, not new!) feature of map expansion during game. Great, but again this is used in every single mission multiple times. What is it with fresh features that need to be overused?
- Because there are quite few missions and the few are expanded multiple times during mission, the mission begin to feel tiresome and repetitive. You could say it is like FreeSpace's scenarios where you need to protect a cap ship against multiple waves of bombers and fighters.
- Most mobile units are nothing but cannonfodder, often the most officient and quickest way to finish a mission is to send your commander over, except cybran commander which sucks at offensive. Aeon commander on the other hand is so good at offensive that it feels overpowered.
- in SC we finally have static defenses being as strong as they are supposed to be. The downside is that it makes most mobile units often nothing more than cannonfodder unless you send over s awarm of different units, or a few experimental units, or a commander. The turning point of a game seems to be when you get access to T3 unts and buildings, including static artilleries. Which brings me to another issue, artilleries like other units have a priority list of targets, the commander being at the top of the list. This means that if commander is in the range of the artillery, the artillery can finish the game for you without you even needing to step on enemy base. Things get both funny and sad if you get UEF's Mavors built, these things have the range of a whole map, have pinpoint accuracy and fire shells rather rapidly, if one gets built you better say goodbye to your commander.
Anyway, SC is pretty generic albeit decent RTS which overuses its fresh features along with gameplay that aims to drag playtime to as long as possible. Or at the least that's the impression SC leaves to me. That and there are not that much differences between the three factions. The only major differences are in end-game units and buildings, the rest are statistical differences between similar units of the three factions. I'd say that Starcraft had more differences between the dfferent factions' gameplay.
SC does not suck but it isn't all that impressive either, not like the messiah of RTS game like it was touted to be. But then again, hype is hype.
-
Fury, I have to disagree with your assessment of the game as generic.
The shift-button management feature alone is something that's completely changed the RTS experience for me. The use of queuing is brilliant. The economy model, based around flow rather than raw quantity, allows continual production of units instead of those irritating spending sprees.
As for your complaints regarding the use of the expanding-map gimmick, try some skirmishes. It's not present at all there.
-
While I can appreciate someone not liking the game, simply not understanding the game still needs correcting.
- Most mobile units are nothing but cannonfodder, often the most officient and quickest way to finish a mission is to send your commander over, except cybran commander which sucks at offensive. Aeon commander on the other hand is so good at offensive that it feels overpowered.
Um, Stealth+Cloak+Microwave Laser upgrades? The Cybran ACU is the only one that actually can stand against an army and easily survive. Even then, it can't walk into a base because of the omni-range of the T3 omni rader. If you weren't playing easy, even a T2 army would easily destroy an ACU, shielded or not. T3 destroys ACUs in SECONDS.
in SC we finally have static defenses being as strong as they are supposed to be. The downside is that it makes most mobile units often nothing more than cannonfodder unless you send over as swarm of different units, or a few experimental units, or a commander. The turning point of a game seems to be when you get access to T3 unts and buildings, including static artilleries.
Except artillery units outrange their corresponding PDs. So are you complaining that you CAN'T just send in units here without thinking? And this is a BAD thing?
Which brings me to another issue, artilleries like other units have a priority list of targets, the commander being at the top of the list. This means that if commander is in the range of the artillery, the artillery can finish the game for you without you even needing to step on enemy base. Things get both funny and sad if you get UEF's Mavors built, these things have the range of a whole map, have pinpoint accuracy and fire shells rather rapidly, if one gets built you better say goodbye to your commander.
Look, if you've spent all the time defending and building the Mavor, OF COURSE YOU WIN. I guess you're not used to having to scout? No one should be able to build a mavor (unless in a corner of an 81x81 map) without you noticing.
Besides, there are four game modes in Skirmish and only one of them is ended by the ACU death. Not to mention that's the whole point of Assassination that you've got to protect your ACU and use stealth. Are you complaining that if you expose your ACU, it gets shot?
Anyway, SC is pretty generic albeit decent RTS which overuses its fresh features along with gameplay that aims to drag playtime to as long as possible.
Hmm. Let me ask you a question that will explain everything. How many factories and units do you have at the 10 minute mark?
-
Also, commenting on the Mavor artillery.. considering how much time it takes the build the thing, it's pretty much your own fault if an opponent ever finishes building it :P
-
I think I like playing Cybran best. Monkeylords are easily mass producable, and extremely destructive. The other factions' T4 units are either stupid(factory, wtf? Useless), or take way too long to build.
It'll be interesting to see how well the modding community turns out for this game. From what I heard it's an extremely moddable game, might be wrong though.
-
ChronoReverse, for the record I have yet to play a single skirmish or multiplayer game. The comments are all based on campaign mission experiences, these games I'll get into once I have beaten the three campaigns, if I bother at the time. BTW, T1 artillery has exactly same range as T1 PD, at T2 artilleries gain larger range than PD.
-
BTW, T1 artillery has exactly same range as T1 PD, at T2 artilleries gain larger range than PD.
That is incorrect. Only Cybran T1 artillery have equal range. In exchange, their artillery has a stun effect. And it works against PD =). Frankly, it's pretty crappy still since they tend to get slaughter while you wait for the shells to land.
-
That's because T1 arty is a mobile unit, T2 and T3 arty can be fixed and have far longer ranges than any PD.
As for the UEFs Fatboy factory-on-tracks - it doesn't have much use up close and certainly couldn't stand against the Aeon Colossus or - probably a Monkeylord either. But if you keep it at range it has some rapid firing powerful guns that can really mince other units - who can't even fire back on account of being too far away. Range is the winner there.
-
Actually there are T2 and T3 mobile artillery/missile units too. And rather devastating if deployed well.
For example, a mobile stealth generator would usually allow a couple of artillery pieces to easily destroy a fire base since omni radars aren't put up in remote bases as often (it's T3 and eats a huge amount of energy). Even without stealth, T2 arty slightly outranges T2 PD while T3 Artillery is fearsome in range and power.
I've also had a battlegroup of mobile shields with some AAs, a couple scouts and lots of artillery. In formation, it makes for a (really) slow group that can literally blast apart equal sized groups of direct fire types. You simply slowly march it up and watch it slowly blow stuff up =)
The Fatboy actually has the equivalent of 4 battleship artillery cannons. That's why it's dangerous at range.
-
I'm loving it, a resource hog and I'm still trying to wrap my head around the resourcing but overall fun.
Nothing quite like fortifying an island with shields, AAA, and pulse turrets (with the shields tripeled up so it can survive any barrages) and then building aircraft, cruise missiles, and nukes to break the siege and blast them to bits.
-
tbh the ai dosent build nearly enough defence, i can do the campaign on hard pretty easy :(
-
I must really suck at RTS games lol, it took me like an hour to get through that Aeon defense in mission 2 of UEF. I sent like 100 T2 tanks a time and they got blasted to hell before I could get close enough to shoot. Eventually resorted to building tons of T1 bombers and destroying one shield gen every wave I sent. Took forever :/
-
It also takes me forever but that its because I like to build bases. Just sitting their, building up my base bigger and bigger...then when the enemy comes put some turrets in front of him and then back to base building...and when I am finaly bored with base building I sent in a big army to finish the game.
What I allways tried in to demo was to find a way to stop a monkeylord just with my base defence. That things are real bastards and most likely the strongest superunit in the game.
-
Guys, how is the performance in the release version ? I always loved Total Annihilation for it's mass battles and certainly want to play this one here. Is it safe to play in 1024x768 (or even higher ) ?
-
Starman 01: Depends on your system specs. SC is very hungry for CPU and RAM power. Dual core systems really benefit. Turning down details can really help but of course then it doesn't look as good. Make no mistake, SC is quite a demanding game.
gevatter Lars: I can assure you they're not. The superunits in the game all have strengths and weaknesses. The Aeon Galactic Colossus is damn tough and kicks some serious ass to boot but it has no anti-air defences and a very slow turning circle so if you can get some fire to bear behind it - and stay there - it can't do anything about it. But if you sit infront of it, it will waste you.
The Monkeylords are very quick to make but not the hardiest. Their laser is pretty hardy though which is handy, and they're fast too.
The UEF Fatboy (mobile factory) isn't fast but it's kinda tough, has anti-air defence and - most importantly - massive range with its (equivilant) battleship guns.
But each unit has its own weaknesses which is quite a beautiful thing as - if you're prepared - there's a way to counter most attacks.
-
I'm running a 3,1 GHz Intel with 1GB Ram and a Radeon 98oo Pro . Is that enough (for high resolutions with good detail). After I saw the game yesterday on Giga TV I even more eager to buy it, but I want to make sure :)
-
I'm afraid to say it probably isn't. You have the CPU power for sure but really you need another gig of RAM and a better graphics card if you're going to really take advantage of what the game has to offer.
For about £150 you can get a rig like that I reckon. Of course, I wouldn't blame you if you didn't have that kind of money to splash out on getting just one game running!
-
Of course, I wouldn't blame you if you didn't have that kind of money to splash out on getting just one game running!
**Cough** Let's say I have money to splash out, what would be recommended ? :) I'm not really uptodate what kind of stuff can give my machine new power
-
I don't think SupCom is really all that RAM intensive. It's mostly all CPU. I run it fine on a mobile dual core with 1gb of ram... Even with a LOT of units. Now, fine is relative but I think ~20fps is good compared to what a lot of ppl are getting
-
I have to admit my FPS are also around the 20 area and I'm running:
AMD 3500+
2GB RAM
nVidia 7600GT
So you're sorted for the CPU and while I think some more RAM wouldn't kill you, it does seem the graphics card is the most likely cause of performance issues. That said the 9800 pro is AGP only isn't it? I have a feeling you might need to think about upgrading to PCI-E which most likely means a whole new motherboard and processor as well. I fear you'd be getting into expensive territory there.
That said the nVidia 7600GT (my card) is an excellent runner for its price - to me it's in the same vein as the 9800 Pro I had before it was, great bang for buck. It's not the fastest but it's still exceptional. If you can go straight for a PCI-E card then I'd recommend it.
-
The only grip i am having with the game is when you order groups of units to move, they seem to take a couple of seconds after where you have clicked on the map before they start to move! which i can say can prove disaster if you are trying to move them into range of enemy units, over half of them are dead before they start to move. Also is the AI in the campaign different to the one used in Skirmish? because when playing the campaign ie UEF, if i have a base with heavy ground defense's i have noticed that the ai will use aircraft instead and will direct its ground units around to the weak point in my defense's etc, but it doesnt do this in skirmish and i have tried all the AIs, it just builds en-mass and sends always on the same route and into a killzone.
i have found my games peformance to be not to bad i get a few slowdowns which i find odd since i have
athlon 64 3200+
2GB DDR ram
radeon X800
i expected it to run very slow. But i still love this game i can't really stop playing it, like FS
-
My rig is almost 3 years old with only video card upgraded once. Current setup is Athlon 64 3200+ (socket 754), 1GB RAM, Radeon X850 Pro AGP 256MB. SC works very well at medium "fidelity" settings.
My favorite unit in SC so far: Salem. The Salem may be the weakest of the three faction's destroyers, but it can walk on land and has adequate AA and torpedo defense. Rally a few dozen of these buggers to enemy base, their weapon range alone gives them quite good head start.
-
@Fury
Here's a tip for the settings: Turn off AA and Shadows. Then you can set everything else to High.
AA is not ver noticeable in this type of game anyways and shadows REALLY slow stuff down.
I have a x800 and use this.
@Starbug
The problem is likely your CPU. SC is actually quite CPU-dependent and a single core isn't good enough when the going gets tough (SC is built fo multiple cores).
-
I dunno if it's my machine or the game, but in the demo the game felt very slow. Not necessarily laggy, just.. slow. Like when I'd check the time it'd take to build the Galaxy boat from the t3 shipyard it said like 45 minutes! Did I miss something important? I had enough energy and mass coming in to sustain its construction..
I'm running with an AMD Athlon 3200+, a gig of RAM, and a GeForce 6800GT.
-
@Starbug
The problem is likely your CPU. SC is actually quite CPU-dependent and a single core isn't good enough when the going gets tough (SC is built fo multiple cores).
Thats what i mean, i play on eight player maps with 8 teams and i get only a few slow downs, apart from that its pretty smooth on my spec! I was expecting the game to not run with that many units on the screen! I just wish i could find some where i could get an X2 processor in th uk to fit a socket 939 motherboard, every where i have has discontinued them or the one i did find where at £450!!!
My fav unit has to be the UEF battleship, get a group of them at the enemy turn up the bass n sound and then listen to the big guns going off, wow!!!!
-
Like when I'd check the time it'd take to build the Galaxy boat from the t3 shipyard it said like 45 minutes! Did I miss something important? I had enough energy and mass coming in to sustain its construction..
Then the world is about to turn for you my friend.
The more engineers you dedicate to a construction job, the faster it builds.
The downside of this is that it has a real hit on your mass/energy production and can rapidly deplete it if you go overboard. But in theory - I suppose - if you had the mass/energy income you could dedicate enough engineers to a job that you could be pumping out a battleship every second*
*Assuming theres enough space around the shipyard for them all to fit!
Suffice to say - to get an engineer to assist with a job, click on the engineer and then right click on the construction job. It'll then help out with the building.
-
Ahh, I see. So it's supposed to be like 45 minutes, but you can assist in construction to lower that time? Here I thought I had some major glitch, heh. Thanks, Thunder. :nod:
-
A weakness of the Monkeylord seams to be that its quite easy to destroy when in water. Torpedo seam to do more damage then any other weapon can do to it.
Else I allways had problems with that beast. Anti air weapons, the freaking laser that toasts your units and other stuff.
I have only played against the AI so far and found the Colossus to be the easiest destructable unit of the superunits. Haven't played against the other yet. Still stationare base defances are quite uneffective against these units.
@Starman
I think at 1024x786 you should be able to play it....I didn't liked TA that much but Supreme Commander is a nice game. Battles aren't that quick and I realy like the zoom in and out possibilitys and that I could put my TV to use as map to plan things and keep the overview. Only drawback is that when using the second screen my performance gets weaker so I mostly don't use it.
The game also offers a lot of interesting combinations of patrole routes and attack combinations. Like giveing some transports fixed routes to transfere units from your factory to the front over dificulte terrain and such things.
-
GForce 6800GS, 1 GB DDR and the game runs pretty smooth.
Not too impressed tough.. I have to spend too much time building units and things insted of actually finghting, so ot's kinda boring for me.
Since a huge number of units is a must, why the hell didn't they give you a option to build platoons/divisions and control them (like in MTW2)
Overall seems like a good game.
B.t.w. - anyone seen that land battleship?
-
You mean the Cyberian Destroyers that can walk on land or the mobile factory?
-
I dunno if it's my machine or the game, but in the demo the game felt very slow. Not necessarily laggy, just.. slow. Like when I'd check the time it'd take to build the Galaxy boat from the t3 shipyard it said like 45 minutes! Did I miss something important? I had enough energy and mass coming in to sustain its construction..
That's because you don't EVER build anything with just one unit. If you're in Tech 3, you should have at least 4 engineers supporting each factory.
The game is actually unbelievably quick once you start to understand how to play it. It's not unusual to 8+ factories set up and pumping out units for you in 10 minutes.
-
You mean the Cyberian Destroyers that can walk on land or the mobile factory?
Mobile factory, probably.
-
I bought SC and received it yesterday, I'm on my second UEF mission. So far the game has been very unimpressive. To be honest, I'd be rather watching Simpson reruns than playing SC. I should have downloaded the demo before wasting my money. I think even Earth 2160 was better than SC.
Oh please, 2160 = blow
oh yes, i looove waiting 5 mins for a single unit to build. even the cheaper ones, then we can wait an hour and hope the 30 units that have been built by then are enough to take out this guys base, or else its another hour...
-
The Fatboy seems to be the best land based superunit because of its huge cannon range and shield, which seems to regenerate extremely quickly. It'd get toasted by a Monkeylord or Colossus at close range, but it's quite capable of defeating either before they get close and infinitely more effective as a siege unit. Not to mention the fact that it can stop and produce its own army. :D
-
oh yes, i looove waiting 5 mins for a single unit to build. even the cheaper ones, then we can wait an hour and hope the 30 units that have been built by then are enough to take out this guys base, or else its another hour...
Yeah, those 30 units should be enough. At least, unless your opponent has more than three brain cells left, for if so he would have undoubtedly used the hour you so gleefully pissed away to build at least 800 Assault mechs and/or heavy tanks that take all of 4 seconds apiece to build when appropriately set up. :rolleyes:
-
Is there also a single player skirmish where you can fight the AI (and maybe even a map editor) included ?
-
In SC? Yes and - I believe - yes, there is a map editor.
-
i don't think there is an editor with the game, i have looked through all the folders and there is no exe for an editor but there is a file called editor and there is a folder called unit viewer, was the game supposed to come with a unit viewer?
-
I think it was finished too late for release.
-
Hey guys, what is your nickname in GPG net ? I want to kick your ass ><. No, I'm just kiding.
-
Hey guys, what is your nickname in GPG net ? I want to kick your ass ><. No, I'm just kiding.
You might see me kicking around on GPGnet as Hojo_Norem now and again. BTW, I like long and big battles so if you like rushing I won't put up much of a fight. :)
-
Oups, forgot to give you mine : MetalDestroyer.
Butter _> no probs
-
If the copy I ordered ever gets here, I might tell you.
But probably not.
-
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v239/takamizuna/motivator1665641.jpg)
:lol:
-
Unless you're targetting a fully upgraded Cybran ACU. Can't shoot what you can't see =)
-
Arent Cybran ACUs still visible to Omni sensors?
-
I believe so. The description says that the Omni sensor can look past any cloaking device.
-
Only within the GOLD ring of the radar (press ctrl+T). That's the "omni" range of the Omni radar and it will see stealth, cloak and burn through jamming. The ACU and SCUs also have an omni range.
Outside that range, it's free country for stealth.
-
In a way that's good to hear. I was wondering what the point of stealth was if it was so easily defeated...
-
Story Time!
I just played a 2v2 match on a 20x20 map, Setton's Clutch, Annihilation. Me (Cybran), Ally (UEF), Center Opponent (UEF), Back Opponent (Aeon)
I scouted a bit and immediately charged down the middle and went for a quick rush since my Center Opponent wasn't expanding down the middle. Taking the entire land bridge was a coup and I quickly teched up to T2 while maintaining cheap T1 pressure (entirely purposed to waste the Center Opponent's time building defenses, I didn't expect it to succeed)
Unfortunately, they were used to playing +4 speed while I'm used to Normal speed (I'd say that there's more than enough to do clicking non-stop at Normal Speed, much less +4). We had compromised on +3. My T1 and then T2 units were doing a little damage to his initial base which has since been buttressed by units from his ally, Back Opponent, who had all the time in the world to sit back and build up. He also had an auto-rebuild thing set up. I didn't care much since T1 units were super cheap and the point was to waste his resources and time building said defenses. He got the better deal in terms of resources wasted, but I had greater expansion as a result and came out ahead.
I've made a severe mistake at this point which almost cost me the game. I had my T1 LandFabs in my core base and the T2/T3 LandFabs in the land bridge. The reasoning was that I'd get units up the front line quicker. The flaw in the idea was that this was a 2v2 match.
I had a T2 navy already and was teching up my AirFabs. But the unharrassed guy in the back had been building a T3 artillery... which started raining shells on the land bridge (later I found that since he didn't scout properly, he didn't fire into my main base because his Omni Radar's range was short, lucky me). At the same time, the opponent I've been hounding had built up a mess of T2 gunships. Not good, this is what I get for neglecting to scout properly and now I could REALLY use some backup. How did he manage to build so many even while I was harrassing him? (he had a secondary base and didn't build naval)
My Ally came through... sort of. He had a mess of T2 units marching up the land bridge, but they were being torn up by the gunships (why was there not AA?). He also had a Fatboy and T3 Battleship (is this what you've been wasting your time on?). Luckily Center Opponent decided to waste time blowing these guys up instead of rushing my core base. Meanwhile, ever since I've glimpsed the gunships, I've started rushing building T1 AA units and as well as moving my fleet of T2 ship back from bombardment to defense. It turned out to be just barely enough to hold back the gunships. Back Opponent also sent a group of T3 units at this point. It was the combined effort of the single Battleship, my swarm of Walking Cruisers, and my rushed T1 units (to slow them down), that staved them off.
It was at this point where the final mistake was made and the results of the game was decided. Having learned my lesson, I resumed scouting and finally had the time to build an Omni. No time to properly set up T3 reactors and mass fabricators with shields; I sprinkle them around to avoid a chain explosion with T3 AA and hope for the best. I've also set up a Quantum Gate in the meantime just in case
I've been upgrading my ACU after noticing the minimal number of Omni Radars being constructed. Also starting to mass produce T3 Engineers and T3 Bombers
And thus stealth wins the day
I blitzed Center Opponent's base with a small squadron of Revenant and found his ACU =). He almost got away (must've been stealthed) but nope, Boom. What I didn't know is that he had built another huge mass of T2 gunships and that he had just sent them against my Ally (hence his relatively undefended base). My Ally was pretty much overrun. I start moving my army of AA ground units back into my core base in anticipation. While the gunships were blowing up my Ally's base (BOOM goes his ACU), I desperately sent my T3 bombers stealthed... as AA. Fortunately for my bombers, my Ally had a single cluster of T3 AA (which was bypassed earlier conveniently like the Maginot Line). The Gunships were destroyed and Center Opponent is pretty much finished. Too bad the core of my Ally was also wiped. He won't have time to rebuild since the game was going to last only 5 more minutes.
Only ones left are the Back Opponent and I. I didn't have a chance to build up, but I've been spamming as quickly as possible; I even had 4 SCUs in case something BAD happens
Scouts reveal a base set up with shields, artillery and AA. He was building T4 and had three T3 Artillery. WTF, I had been wondering what he was doing; he screwed over his ally by not supporting him. Too bad his ACU was sitting beside his Omni Radar. What he didn't know was that I had my ACU cloaked, stealth and with a Microwave Laser, sitting JUST outside his Omni Range. Again, not scouting is not smart. Then again, it's entirely possible that even then he'd miss my ACU. Gotta love the invisibility.
Oh sh**
--Back Opponent as 20 T3 bombers mop up his ally's base
Boom goes his ACU and Omni, then I wipe the rest of his base with my ACU. Turns out he didn't even know what it was (yay for Cloak)
Twas fun. I wonder what will happen once they gain more experience and learn how to play
I wasted mega time and resources because of the +3 speed. Total Gametime: ~1:05
-
That seems about right.
-
T3 bombers rarely get by me :) i build lines of T3 antiair and divide them into numerical groups, so when they come in with their bomber rush i manually tell them to attack and change targets so rapidly that it totally wastes them.
-
I still need to finish 1-2 missions from each three campaigns, but I have to say that I don't have much interest left for that. That's mainly because the three single player campaigns feel so flat and unoriginal coupled with cheesy voice acting. I'm not much into pointless skirmishes or multiplayer. Multiplayer is not my cup of tea mainly because I'm a turtler and not even nearly aggressive enough.
With half-assed single player experience, SC is only worth the bucks it costs if you like multiplayer. Long gone are the days when games had good stories and overall good single player content.
-
T3 bombers rarely get by me :) i build lines of T3 antiair and divide them into numerical groups, so when they come in with their bomber rush i manually tell them to attack and change targets so rapidly that it totally wastes them.
While I tend to do that myself, it's actually laughably easy to get past if you spend the time to micro a little bit. Besides, it just makes them more vulnerable to ground.
There's always a counter tactic =)
-
It's kinda funny you come in here bemoaning the crappy single when I actually rather enjoy it; the voice acting was also better than I've heard for an RTS in some time, the story is not totally original but it's a far cry from the tired rehash you want to paint it as. It's not to be played in a low-energy state, otherwise the minutae can wear you down pretty quick, but it's not as bad in this sense as a lot of other games. (Starcraft and Company of Heros come to mind.)
Honestly, Fury, I can't help but wonder if you're trolling on purpose. Your views never seem to sync with anyone else's, perhaps even reality.
-
I'm not much into pointless skirmishes or multiplayer. Multiplayer is not my cup of tea mainly because I'm a turtler and not even nearly aggressive enough.
If you have still your copie, just try to improve your strategy. I was a turtle player in RTS game but since I got my hand in Supreme Commander since the Beta, I change my mind to pull effort into rushing strategy. Just watch some replays and analyze how some gamers are playing. With time, and some plays, you will little by little improve yourself.
I think Supreme Commander is a little hard for those who didn't have the chance to play TA. But, when you know how to use each features that SC propose you. You'll see something very different with other RTS. And rushing make SC more and more nervous and very exciting ^^.
-
It is indeed a very different game.
I played a "for fun and profit" match against someone who just got the game yesterday. He clearly had some good instincts and was actually able to keep up for a bit. I decided to show him how fast one can get into T4 instead of properly building up.
He was rather surprised that his "rush" at about 10 minutes, despite destroying my satellite resources, did almost negligible damage to my economy. It simply came too late as I was starting in T3 and will have started my MLord at 13 minutes in =)
It was enough damage that I couldn't finish the MLord in 21 minutes (I took the time to prop up some T3 defenses at that point because it was clear he wasn't going to really turtle) but rather in 26 minutes. It was fun walking that into his base.
-
Honestly, Fury, I can't help but wonder if you're trolling on purpose. Your views never seem to sync with anyone else's, perhaps even reality.
Well I am truly sorry if I am not entitled to my own opinions if I think that SC is generic but yet decent RTS with few good innovations but is nothing special, least of all this Jesus of RTS' it is touted to be.
If you're saying that the single player campaign and its lines were decent or good, then you really have low standards. It is no wonder that there are only a few good developer firms left, playerbase apparently doesn't tend to demand a lot.
-
TBH I think they made the best of the limitations of the format with the single player. In a game of that scale the actions of a single individual are utterly insignificant, in contrast with things like Warcraft where you have heroes thundering about the map destroying all in their wake and being the centre of attention. To make things worse, a good plot is much easier to produce when you have RPG elements to work with, which is what nearly every "RTS" since Starcraft has had - in SupComm there're none of those. It might be a lame excuse to some but I think crafting a more epic story for SupComm would take more than the average writer.
-
Those are good points regarding the lack of quality story being due to the larger scale of the game. I have to agree... to an extent. :p After all, why couldn't "they" have included specialty hero units - not ones that are overpowered, but perhaps ones that have unusual abilities. For example, one hero unit could have a sight range 1.5 times as long as a scout plane - but nothing else particularly special about it. Another could have the ability to "rally the troops" around him, as it were, making them fire more accurately, and at an increased rate, while in the vicinity of the hero. Things that can be quite useful, but don't in and of themselves tip the balance of a game. :)
But anyway... I bought SC and installed it despite only having a Radeon 9500 Pro (I have a GeForce 8800 GTX sitting right next to me, but for want of a PCI-E cable... long story. ;)). I wasn't expecting to get much performance out of the game at all, but I'm surprised. Granted, I have a C2D, but "only" 1GB of DDR400, and yet with everything at the lowest settings besides texture and detail level, which are at the middle setting, it runs quite nicely. Wish I could up the fidelity level - that makes things look SO much nicer - but it drops the FPS down to around 10 or so. Ah well. Soon, my pretties... soon....
-
Actually hero units and such are unecessary, simply more creative mission design which is story-oriented.
Such as an assault on an Aeon temple on the top of a mountain which stores the codes needed to teleport further into their territory. Of course the base is shielded and inaccessible so the only means of pressing on is building tactical missiles on a nearby ridge. All the while dealing with elite warrior monks who are being dropped from support structures in orbit. (and you need to protect your power plants which are tied into fueling the orbital counter-attack)
More minor characters (such as the naval officers giving orbital support) and such would also help. Plus if all three campaigns were tied into one story...
-
More minor characters (such as the naval officers giving orbital support) and such would also help. Plus if all three campaigns were tied into one story...
I believe it was specifically mentioned in the manual that moving ships via gate technology is extremely dangerous and equally energy intensive. You have to remember that you're not being dropped from orbit when the mission begins, but gated in.
-
Hehe, just played a 3v3 versus match on GPGnet.
I managed to upgrade my ACU with Stealth, Cloak and a Microwave Laser. After getting rid of the Omni Radars, my ACU waltzed into their bases and blew everything up =D
I had to reassure them I wasn't cheating and my ACU was just upgraded lol. They tried to blindly shoot and drop bombs on my ACU (from the laser origin), but I started to micro a bit and zig-zagged my ACU, taking minimal damage.
That army of T3 Siege bots didn't even know what hit them =)
-
Hey guys tell me one thing - Do I sux or do gameplay sux (comparing to TA gameplay)?
I mean I feel that defensive structure are way too powerful comparing to ofensive structures.
In UEF mission 2 when I have to destroy main Aeon base:
T1 anti-ground battery+ wall could eat dozens of my medium tanks but one T1 artilery could outrange it.
T2 anti-ground battery + wall destroyer my 50 heavy tanks with ease.
few T1 AA plus one T2 AA destroyed 100 of my Attack bombers (only few mannage to drop bombs only to be negated by shields).
It looks that defence like:
few T1 anti-ground + 2 or 3 T2 anti ground + 2 or 3 T2(T3?) artilery battery + few T1 AA + 2 or3 T2 AA + 1 or shield emiters plus few lines of wall (plus 2 Anti-nuke) = death to any number of T1, T2, T3 , ground or air.
Only way is a joint attack of large number of T2/T3 units covered by + >8 experimantal units (ground or air) or build few experimantal artilery to blow this **** up.
-
Only two anti-nuke? A few nukes should do the trick.
If not, bring shield units into the offense as well, and just press on with the attack.
One thing I've been having fun experimenting is attacking with Czars and then making them fall over a good portion of his base/defenses. :drevil:
-
Do there is an option to order units to move in formation (so I can use shield units well)?
coz when I order to move +30 units they tend to create long column that is easy prey to defenders :(.
-
hold down right mouse drag and when the "hallow" units appear click left mousebutton
-
Alt-Right click moves them in formation, Ctrl-Alt-Right Click does an Attack-move in formation.
-
One thing that I do find slightly irritating, if totally irrelevant, is the Icon. It's exactly the same shade of blue as a highlighted icon on my desktop, it's not important, just offputting :) I got it yesterday, good fun, but I need to practice at these more 'throwaway' type RTS games, I usually prefer games where you can level up units by keeping them alive, but as enormous war simulations go, it's very impressive.
Must admit though, the way the single player works, by extending the map with each new objective, is very similar to Warzone 2100, there are a few more similarities as well, but I guess that's to be expected, after all, radar can only really do one job ;)
-
One thing that I do find slightly irritating, if totally irrelevant, is the Icon. It's exactly the same shade of blue as a highlighted icon on my desktop, it's not important, just offputting :)
Being a little picky, huh? Hadn't even noticed that and I've owned the game some time now. :p
-
:lol: I just tend to click on the desktop when I see a higlighted icon, in order to unhighlight it, I clicked about 3 times before realising why it wasn't working :p
-
I remember being told to wait out the credits, but having completed the UEF campaign recently, I got the final cutscene and the credits never even came up. I just sat there staring at black screen for a few minutes before I brought up the task manager and killed the process.
So what was I waiting for, exactly?
-
I dunno, I've owned the game a little over month now but never brought myself to finish the campaigns last 1-2 missions. :nervous:
-
You must have encountered a bug instead of the video.
It turns out you can go back and watch the teaser without waiting through the credits if you just select it manually in the Campaign Start area.
-
1) Does walls count as unit in unitcount?
2) Where I can check the unitcount (I use the smallest interface set) ?
-
Press F2 to see score/unitcount. Not sure if this works in Campaign though.
Walls don't count as units though, at least not that I'm aware of. :nervous:
-
They do.
-
Yep. Although only towards 0.1 of a unit per wall.
So ten wall pieces = one towards your unit count.
That said, there are ways to mod the game, and included in the code are settings dictating how much each unit costs towards the unit count (Experimentals take up more than one unit count per unit I think). So it's possible to change that and have an unlimited number of units (potentially).
-
The 1000 unit cap there can be modded (just like in TA). It's just that current PCs would explode (figuratively) if you set the cap too high, so they put it at something reasonable (for now).
-
The 1000 cap is ok, but if you look in the campaigns they deliberately limit you and only increase the cap when the map increases in size.
Which can be annoying if you're turtling up before continuing the mission
-
I hit the wall head on in the last UEF mission well below 1000 I think...and with only a single Fatboy in play, too.
-
You need to destroy your infrastructure to get past the 500 limit (at the end of the last mission). I basically start replacing everything with SCUs, had very few land units, a dozen battleships, a dozen Atlantis, a dozen fatboys, and a HUGE swarm of Broadswords =)
-
That's the trouble, there's a period where you're wiping out what you started at so you can replace it with something better that leaves you very vulnerable indeed!
-
Well, you can easily beat it with "just" 100 broadswords. And you don't have to tear anything down to do that.
-
Funny you mention that mission, I just beat it today (loosing 3 times in a row no doubt). I finally take out that Aeon base and then WTF, Im rushed by 4-5 Monkeylords... I die, reload savegame (made just before I wipe the Aeon base).
I turtle like mad and let them come. Most of the upper half of my base gets wiped but I survive... only to hear "Strategic launch detected" about 5 times in a row with my defences in shambles from the first Monkey attack.... time to reload. Third time some strat bombers hose my commander when it strays out from under the massed shielding to put up more guns.
It's not until I pull down every wall, get rid of all my non t3 powerplants, more PD, more t2 arty, more tac missiles, more strat missile defence, spamming t3 gunships and the tactical use of strat missiles that I survive taking hardly any damage, heck that czar stood no chance and that commander fell pretty quickly as well.... all without using any experimental myself.
twas quite satisfying to push the 'I win' button at the end of all that! ^_^
I'm enjoying SP more than MP at the moment. At least I don't get instantly steamrollered by the enemy, even the hard AIs in skirmish make light work of me.... T_T