Supreme Commander 2 is $10.99 on Steams weekend deal. I've played and enjoyed Warhammer 40k DOW2, Demigod and Company of Hero's online. I'd pick up Starcraft 2 but it sounds the beta is almost closed and I would want my multiplayer fix today and next week in addition to when it comes out.
I have no intention to play the campaign.
Is Supreme Commander 2's multiplayer worth $10.99? And keep in mind I would never play SC1 online for the same reason I wont play SoaSE online, I don't enjoy a multiplayer game lasting over an hour.
-Othello
Ships have to navigate around planets, structures, other ships, etc. Just because there is no physical terrain doesn't mean there isn't pathfinding.
There are? Last I checked, in SupCom2, there are 2. Kill their commander, or kill the commander+all structures. Sins has conquest victory, diplomatic, alliance, and culture. SC doesn't even have diplomacy. Not to mention the fact that SC2 was consolized, so it can't be as complex.
But if you don't like the comparison to Sins, how about the original SupCom? There were about 5x more units and structures to build and the armies were far larger than SupCom2. And it was the same developers and the game supposedly almost didn't get published, but somehow they managed to put saved skirmishes in on release.
Sins has an amazing interface. period.
It just has a few physics problems. For example, the problems with "my capship is turning too wide through that mine field, OH CRAP!"
It isnt really an RTS, technically speaking. IC did a good job with taking the favorite parts of a space TBS and putting it into an RTS form. There are a couple of games out there that are similar, but sins is undoubtedly the best of its class.
I'll tell ya.
I don't like playing sins, but I think its an AWESOME game. Just not for me.
So... does anyone get the feeling that the experimentals in SupCom 2 have no unique features? Here's my list of their "best" experimentals.
UEF
King Kriptor: Walks around, kills stuff. Effectively a GC with air weapons. Unbalance ahoy!
Aeon Illuminate
Universal Collossus: Walks around, kills stuff. Effectively a GC with air weapons.
Cybran
Cybrannosaurus (Jesus... since when do organic-looking units fit into the Cybran style?): Walks around, kills stuff. Effectively a... you get the idea by now...
What happened to the interesting experimentals? The Megalith that could lay unit-eggs? The Fatboy that built stuff, but was relatively fragile? I'll tell you... they've been turned into generic units. The Fatboy and the Megalith to the Fatboy 2 and the Megalith 2. Like comparing Supcom 1 and Supcom 2 really. The sequels are bland, don't stand out... nothing special. At least the Soul Ripper keeps its function (gotta love the Soul Ripper)
...and a single Monkeylord could have killed all of the experimentals in SupCom 2.
Haven't seen all of those, but many. The Bomb Bouncer is effectively a mobile shield that deflects stuff, so yeah that's quite unusual. From what I've heard the Noah Unit Cannon is quite cool, but the "drop pods" can be shot down easily. Still sounds good. Airnomo is experimental AA, so effectively a bunch of guns that shoot up (and an unforgivably irritating name). Space Temple does sound pretty clever, except for the entire "works the other way" thing. Loyalty Gun, no idea. Pulinsmash, same as a Cybran unit (Magnetron), and seems fairly useless (that, or my brother is seriously misunderstanding it). Experimental Transports? Sounds like the Continental to me, and is cross-faction. What I was trying to say, other than the interesting bits of the Fatboy and Megabot being removed (and the loss of the Monkeylord... I swear that was a symbol of the series. I mean, pretty iconic), that a lot of the Experimentals are cross faction. In fact, mosdt of the units seem to be effectively cloned between factions. Now, in Vanilla SupCom, the factions were sort of mirrors in general types of unit, but they all had big differences. Compare the Obsidian, Rhino and Pillar. The Rhino had no arc, so that had to be taken into account. The Obsidian had a shield, and was much tougher against same-tier units than the others. Pillar was... nothing special, which I felt was the idea behind most UEF units.
Anyway, I think that this is a nice debate going on. Anybody want to join in?
EDIT: Just some advice here... I'm really thinking about what faction I should be playing as... You see, I'm always torn between which faction I'll play as. So here's what would decide it for me... I like units that are durable. I don't like sending out Mantises just to have to replace them shortly afterwards. That's also why I like defenses (not proper turtling... that means it's difficult to adapt) because they are durable and they can work and be repaired simultaneously. This would all point to UEF. However, I like many of the Aeon and Cybran units. I particularly like the Wagners and Bricks, as I like having options open. Very few things can counter them underwater, and the Wagner is actually a superior MBT to the Rhino. However, I also like Aeon air and Naval units. I despise the UEF experimentals for their lack of firepower. I mean, the Fatboy isn't meant to be used as a frontline unit. The Mavor's great, but pricey. Atlantises I don't like, and the satellite is actually pretty bad. I like all of the Cybran experimentals, and I like the Tempest, Czar and GC. Not sure on the Paragon, as it takes ages to build, so you don't get to use it often.
So... I'm sort of torn between Aeon and Cybran. What would you say?
SupCom 2 factional differences are mostly aesthetic. I mean, there are a lot of differences, but in gameplay, there are choices to make regardless of your faction. To go air or land, this research line or that research line. What is my opponent spamming? How do I counter that? And so on. I liked the old factions and their variety. I am just whining, dont pay attention to me.
SO the best way to kill it is to attack it from your usual range. i.e. from the ground. It seems to me that you have to use this against artillery or bombers, and anybody smart will simply not attack the Bomb Bouncer.
How did they manage to balance that? Bet that causes rage quits
I personally don't like the idea of carrying experimentals, unless the transport is very weak. That way there's a risk to the reward of a quick-deploying Experimental.
Ahh... I get it. Still, I can never forgive the name. Also, I dislike the idea of it being that similar to the Magnetron, but hey.
Also, it seems to me that the sense of realistic scale is gone slightly. If you were to compare units standing next to each other, naval units were huge, as in real life, and you really got that sense of scale, whereas in most RTSs everything is a similar size. From what I've seen, the units aren't so well proportioned. Also, a thing I can't stand is the short barrels. The Rockhead looks like the kind of thing that would be used to blow walls at close range in urban combat. Its guns are too short for it to be an effective and accurate MBT. Same applies to some warships in SupCom 2. They'd be hopeless when it came to accuracy. I know it's to do with stylising the graphics (even if I do think everything looks like it's made of plastic in 2) and that a game with 6-legged deathbots isn't known for perfect realism, but at least most of the non-Experimental units obeyed basic laws of weaponry. Long barrel=Accuracy, in general. It also means slower rounds, but the difference is bairly noticable. Even some of the laser-firing Aeon units had believable weapons. What I'm saying sounds really stupid, I know (tbh, GCs are the height of realism ) but it does bug me when there's a modern-looking tank (this applies to, say, the Rhino as well. Not just UEF units) that has a barrel that short.
The BB can be manually charged though, at the cost of energy.
I don't really like the short barrels either. Their sizes increase with an upgrade though, that increases the damage.
The loyalty gun captures ONE unit at a time, very slowly. That is how they balanced it.
Doesn't the magnetron also give the owner mass for every unit killed by it?
Which, you know, makes sense when you're talking about the various technologies available to the various factions (extracting mass straight from a planet to instantly convert it to usable building materials and energy/mass conversion as a T1 technology).
My biggest problem with SupCom2 is that you have these three factions with ridiculous technology levels who used to be able to build giant machines of war, and now they suddenly can't. The Fatboy would be ashamed of his second iteration.
Afraid I'll have to disagree there. If you zoom in close (I did this once, jusdt for my peace of mind. I'm a sad person.) to a tree, compare the rough size of a person to the tree (it's very small even at full zoom), then look at one of the tanks, the scale fits to most modern tanks. I am yet to see a tank that is as big as a tree. Just because they can knock down trees doesn't make them as big as them. The Germans busted into France in WW2 by ploughing through a forest from Belgium. They didn't have tree-sized tanks. I think that the scale is good, tbh. Comparing my in-game-human size to the tanks, I'd say that the Rhino would easily have a crew of three (if it wasn't a robot, but I always find myself thinking of them as manned). One thought, why keep a design like a tank if you aren't shoving people in it? Isn't the design of a tank a metal box with guns on the outside, and people on the inside? Why not just have guns on wheels?
Hmph... Now I'm over-analysing again...
But it's not really relevant anyway. If we want a tank to be like a normal tank and a battleship to be like a real battleship, then the tank would have to be very tiny and the battleship extremely huge. And that would be impractical from a gameplay perspective.
Hell yeah, score one for the Limey. TBH, any experimental which walks should collapse the moment the delicate things that make its legs work are broken. The only excuse I can find for why the GC isn't toppled by tanks and T3 Bots is because it's SO FRICKIN' HUGE!!!
I mean, there must be metres upon metres of armour plating on that thing!
The old Megalith was even bigger and could just barely destroy a GC, making it the largest and most likely strongest single assault unit in-game.
Ridiculous amount of mass in that thing. It was fun to watch it plow through armies and forests.
Hooray for Megalith!
Karma for a pic, because I'm lazy!
Courtesy of Gamespot.
Sins is a shallow RTS and even shallower 4X. That’s what happens when you mix genres. Still an amazing achievement, but like I said, its not as deep as warcraft or master of orion 2.
Yes, its still has to do extremely minor pathing. But in any case, my original intention was just to point out its silly to compare 2 hugely different games and attack 1 for not having what was standard in the other. Sins games last hours and hours, so obviously it was built around saves in skirmish. Supcom 2 games are much shorter, so saving in skirmish is far less important, AND had significant technical challenges GPG had to overcome. There are loads of things that the supcom universe does that sins doesn’t, but that in and of itself doesn’t make sins a bad game.
Well, the sale is over. Think a few people talked about that.
And the Chipotle barbicoa burrito I bought instead of SupCom2 was very satisfying.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
