Supreme Commander

By Alec Meer Published 18 January, 2007

Alec takes a near-complete build for a spin.

This is the most complicated simple game you'll play in a while. It's the cheerful fling that quickly and quietly becomes something serious, something so intense it's mentally exhausting in all the right ways. Supreme Commander is unashamedly RTS, reduced to the nuts, bolts and panels of bewildering icons that have always defined that most PC of all game genres. Its only pretension is to be really big - it doesn't have Total War's grand strategy map or Company of Heroes' merry gene-splicing of the formula, nor does it need them. It just needs to be huge, and that's where the complexity comes in. Hundreds of units, each with their own handicaps and potencies, maps that'll wear your mouse-arm out to pan entirely across, and constant battles on a good half-dozen different fronts simultaneously. The objective is only ever to kill the other guy, but when there's so much to think about at once, it ain't easy.

I haven't, it must be said, orchestrated a great many real wars (save, perhaps, for an unsuccessful attempt at igniting tensions between a guinea pig and a rabbit). My time with pre-release code of Supreme Commander has me convinced, though, there's something genuine in its evocation of the mental strain, the panic, the satisfaction, the sadistic glee and the cold detachment of the guy calling the shots. There's such an incredible amount to manage at once that the simplest and in other games most tedious tasks are granted feverish intensity. Nipping to the other side of the map to tell an idling engineer to build another power generator feels like dicing with death when there's a slew of enemy gunships knocking at my front door. And a horde of tanks headed towards a vital forward base. And a fleet of battleships bombarding a coastal factory. And something gigantic and spider-shaped loping slowly from the unknown territory to the south. And... is that a nuke?

'Supreme Commander' Screenshot 1

The more powerful the unit, the bigger it is. That's science in action.

Supreme Commander, as you may well know, is the spiritual sequel to RTS legend Total Annihilation. That old dear was the game that first proved that the Command & Conquer approach to real-time strategy wasn't the only or even the best one. News at the time concentrated on how it was the first 3D RTS, but really that was inconsequential. Resource collection and micro-management was stripped down to a bare, self-regulated minimum, in favour of war on a massive scale. It was a phenomenon, recalled with great affection by almost all who played it. But it's a decade old.

Its creator, Chris Taylor, and his current studio Gas-Powered Games, has been off making the look-no-hands Dungeon Siege RPGs for the last few years, but now he's come back to what made him. The Total Annihilation name may rest with Atari (which doesn't look as though it is ever going to do anything with it), but Supreme Commander is definitely TA. Infinite resources, automatically looped building and huge unit counts are still the order of the day. There's no silly lone sniper missions or victory-point capture here - there is only war.

It even looks oddly, charmingly retro, probably because so much of it is harsh angles, gridlines and cubic constructs - almost that image of the future '80s movies depicted. It's actually a spectacular-looking game - zoom right in and its fine selection of robots, tanks, planes, ships and insane experimental machines are intricate and distinct. This detail's almost futile, apart from when you want to savour a sure victory.

'Supreme Commander' Screenshot 2

Meet the neighbours. Then nuke ‘em.

A flick downwards of the mouse-wheel takes you up, up and away to a godlike view that much of the game is spent in. It transforms the 3D battlefield into a sort of maximised mini-map, comprised of coloured squares and triangles for you to command or, uh, conquer. Rather than feeling like some rudimentary throwback, it has the detached elegance of, say, Defcon to it - a cold screenful of shapes and colours is, after all, how a general spends his war. He doesn't need to see the faces of the men (or robots) he's sending off to die - he just needs a means to usher them around, obedient ants in a glass tank of death. It's a trick that really works, both for living up to the game's title and for dispensing with that most irksome of RTS stereotypes, the mini-map. There is one in there as an option (defaulted to off), but against the smartly-integrated ultra-bird's-eye-view, it's suddenly obvious that Dune 2 has been an unwelcome guest kipping on the sofa for far too long now.

The rules are different now, in style and in combat. Like Company of Heroes, victory doesn't come from crazy assaults on the enemy base, but rather pushing gradually forwards, forever creeping your front line further across the map, pushing your foe into a corner. And that maps really are massive - send a wing of gunships to the other side and they run out of fuel halfway across. Send a platoon of tanks over and you'll be waiting ten minutes for them to get there, and they'll probably have been airbombed en route anyway.

What really stands out from the preview code (apart from bringing my better-than-average PC to its knees - if there isn't a lot of optimisation come the final game, this will be very much a luxury item) is the challenge of the game. I could put it down to beta version jitters, but the difficulty, the demands on flabby, unexercised bits of my brain that usually slumber through a gaming session, feels absolutely in keeping with the feel of Supreme Commander.

'Supreme Commander' Screenshot 3

That might look like a lot of planes, but decent base defences will dispatch 90 per cent of them instantly.

It's not often that single-player AI seems to behave anything like multiplayer opponents, but man, those robots are smart. I'm used to exploiting single-player RTS campaigns, to spotting the bits I can attack so that the game will artificially halt my enemies reinforcing themselves. I'm used to my computer-controlled foes not being capable of much more than a soggy pincer movement. I'm not used to near-constant besiegement, to being flanked, outflanked and sometimes, totally humiliated. It could be there's more leniency in the finished code, and that will give more scope to savour Supreme Commander's big stompy robots and to quickly develop tactics rather than panic reflexes, but I hope not - it's good to be challenged. Long-term, it means the tactics I do develop will be that much more considered, playing to the violently-highlighted strengths and weaknesses of my units rather than just zerging here and hedgehogging there. It's good to have a game aimed, for once, more at folk who've been playing this kind of thing for years.

Hot on the heels on the sublime Company of Heroes, if Supreme Commander can successfully mix its challenge/entertainment cocktail, the PC can finally start to shed its reputation of beardy, identikit RTSes for beardy, identikit men. The reason we all played TA, and even C&C, back in the day was because we had fun playing them, not because the tank modelling was 100 per cent accurate or because there were six types of resources to farm. We're returning, at last, to what made those early ones so fondly-remembered - fighting artfully-arranged wars in which stuff explodes spectacularly.

Picture of Alec.

About Alec Meer

A 10-year veteran of scribbling about video games, Alec primarily writes for Rock, Paper, Shotgun, but given any opportunity he will escape his keyboard and mouse ghetto to write about any and all formats.

Read more articles from Alec by visiting the Alec Meer archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (62) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Pike #1 5 years ago

    Looking good. Nice preview.

    Now I only want a preview for World in Conflict as well, to complete the promising RTS preview set.

  • bivith #2 5 years ago

    Looks stunning. Total Annihilation ruled my life for a while.

  • Psi #3 5 years ago

    hmmm i think i'd be getting this. hope net pvp is decent... coh was a let down.

  • mkreku #4 5 years ago

    I saw a video of a nuclear blast in an army camp.. It was also a RTS of some kind. Was this it? I thought that looked great.

  • MrChuckles #5 5 years ago

    I hate build and bash RTS's. The only ones i have liked acter a few games are:

    TA,
    Starcraft,
    WK: Battles,
    Total War Series,
    Company of Heroes.

    Ooh, do game names get longer over the years? :-)

  • T4RG4 #6 5 years ago

    Looks too 'hectic' for me. I like to build me units and line them up neatly before sending a few SAS uber commando types into battle.

  • Ceatlan #7 5 years ago

    Sounds like it will be everything any RTS fan could ever want a game to be, but also doesn't appear to have anything in it to convince a non RTS fan (like me) that this is the game to convert them.

    I'm still waiting for the RTS game that converts me. Company Of Heroes nearly did it, I really enjoyed playing through the training missions when I borrowed a copy from a friend, but as soon as it got to the first proper mission I found all the fun dissappeared.

  • Grim... #8 5 years ago

    Any news on the dual-monitor support?

  • rudedudejude #9 5 years ago

    God Damn I can only dream of this in a WH40K universe.

  • RMXtreme #10 5 years ago

    Looks too 'hectic' for me. I like to build me units and line them up neatly before sending a few SAS uber commando types into battle.

    +1

    So no turtling then?
    Because I like to ''command'' an impenatrable base, before even attempting to ''conquer'' my adversaries.

  • Xerx3s #11 5 years ago

    TA was the most defining game of it's time, if this is only half as good, it will still be the best game since TA.

  • UncleLou #12 5 years ago

    Good preview, it sounds ace. Also nice that the AI seems to be good.

    the look-no-hands Dungeon Siege RPGs

    Heh. :)

  • TheDifficult3rdAlbum #13 5 years ago

    Does anyone know what kind of spec requirements we're talking about for this?

  • Caimbeul #14 5 years ago

    i heard the beta was a bit of a resource hog and idea on final specs and indeed how your copy ran and on what system eurogamer??

  • smoothn00dle #15 5 years ago

    Great! another upgrade 4 my com. The Upgrade game!

  • Clive_Dunn #16 5 years ago

    This game makes me wet.

  • RMXtreme #17 5 years ago

    Turtling in RTS games is a pathetic tactic anyway, recent decent RTS games by relic have eliminated it's effectiveness by rewarding aggressive behaviour.

    I don't want to turtle because of its effectiveness, but because I like to play the game at my desired pace, which happens to be slow.

  • MadMirko #18 5 years ago

    In war, there's no time to be slow

    That's why he plays a game instead of joining the army to be a general.

  • Pablo2k5 #19 5 years ago

    Quote from mkreku... "I saw a video of a nuclear blast in an army camp.."

    That was World in Conflict by Massive the makers of Ground Control etc... ;-)

    http://www.worldincon flict.com/

  • Moonprince #20 5 years ago

    What makes you think its a game?

    Those are real people down there dieing for you man, REAL PEOPLE...

    Looking forward to the game. Whens it out?

  • Gurrah #21 5 years ago

    uber-big bertha ftw... seriously the first Screenshot made me shed a tear...

  • Pike #22 5 years ago

    I saw a video of a nuclear blast in an army camp.. It was also a RTS of some kind. Was this it? I thought that looked great.

    Sounds a lot like World in Conflict.

  • powerup #23 5 years ago

    Looks too 'hectic' for me. I like to build me units and line them up neatly before sending a few SAS uber commando types into battle.

    If you can do that, the game (or difficulty setting) is too easy. I find it no fun without a strong challenge and tough odds.

    God Damn I can only dream of this in a WH40K universe.

    Fingers crossed for Dawn of War 2. Doubt it will be anything like as large scale as this, but should be worth waiting for.

  • samk #24 5 years ago

    "Resource collection and micro-management was stripped down to a bare, self-regulated minimum, in favour of war on a massive scale."

    Excellent, this does indeed sound like the spiritual successor to the mighty TA.

    Never was a game more aptly named than Total Annihilation. I fondly remember games which featured literally constant large scale battles, dead units numbers on each side which could run into the thousand and so many unit carcasses that tanks had to blast their way through them to reach enemies.

    Can't wait for Supreme Commander. The trailer looks awesome.

    "The Total Annihilation name may rest with Atari (which doesn't look as though it is ever going to do anything with it)"

    Absolute tragedy that a sequel was never done, especially considering the amount of shit games that DO get sequels.

  • sinky #25 5 years ago

    The AI in the beta of the game had various play styles you could select from, like turtling.

  • ED209 #26 5 years ago

    TA was bestest cos:

    I liked the way the boats sank.
    And the way the wireframes were coloured in when building
    And the way the wee cheeky planes buzzed about
    And the way the solar panels hid if they were frightened
    And the way you could tell your wee man to do loads of things and he would go about his business, working round problems
    And the way big bertha fired bullets that can actually miss (unique in any RTS...probably, developers take note, makes it exciting waiting for the hit)

    More TA memories please!

  • RMXtreme #27 5 years ago

    The AI in the beta of the game had various play styles you could select from, like turtling.

    Good news, I look forward to the demo.

  • glaeken #28 5 years ago

    Hey go easy on us Turtles

    It really is not a matter of it being a good strategy but how we get the most enjoyment out of RTS type games.

  • Matfink #29 5 years ago

    samk wrote "Excellent, this does indeed sound like the spiritual successor to the mighty TA. "

    That's because he was describing TA in that sentence.

    Don't like the sound of the comment that a lot of the game is spent in the high-up 'icon' view tho :(

  • Turrican #30 5 years ago

    Really interested if the bottleneck on this game will be the processor (to coordinate so many units) or the graphics card. Might be out of my PC's reach I fear.

    People are forgetting the majestic orchestral music of Total Annihilation, do we know if Supreme Commander has similar musical brilliance?

  • glaeken #31 5 years ago

    I heard all the in game music this time around has been done by the Cheeky Girls.

    (this may be a lie)

  • Bonzrat #32 5 years ago

    It is a lie. It's actually by Lembit Opik.
    Edited by 1 at 18/01/07 @ 14:57

  • Collie #33 5 years ago

    Looks great.

    It's a minor thing, but one of the great things about TA before it, was units don't talk when clicked. They make little mechanical noises, almost like groans, but that's it. I hope Supreme Commander carries on the tradition. Why the hell must every RTS game insist on making units say, 'I obey and move with stealth' or some shit everytime you tell them to move another inch? I don't need to be told the same stupid thing by my units every time I issue them with a minor update to their orders, just get on with it. I can't play the Eldars in Dawn of War for that reason alone. Their annoying mechanised ramblings grate instantly. After the first acknowledgment, just make a small click noise or something. It's so embarrassing playing a RTS near other people when all they can hear are the same voices saying the same shit every 5 seconds.

    Anyway, regarding the turtle issue, I suppose as AIs get better, and more aggressive, being able to take advantage of the AI's early lacklustre decisions and build up your base is going to get more difficult. Personally, I like to be able to turtle as overly hectic gameplay frustrates me. I like know my base defenses are fairly solid before marching out a large force to obliterate my foe. It can be so frustrating trying to manage all your forces and build up replacements when your AI enemy is casually massacring your armies in swift and relentless manoeuvres that as a human, you don't have the speed to match. Still that's all part of the challenge I suppose, and if you can live with the carnage and win, well it's satisfying.

    No point me worrying about Supreme Commander though. It'll never run on my rig. I've got more chance running Rome Total War on my ZX Spectrum!

  • zsinj #34 5 years ago

    The beta is great, just to answer some people's questions/hopes:

    "Looks too 'hectic' for me. I like to build me units and line them up neatly before sending a few SAS uber commando types into battle.

    So no turtling then?
    Because I like to ''command'' an impenatrable base, before even attempting to ''conquer'' my adversaries."

    You can definitely try to turtle, but only really on the larger maps. On these most people tend to build up a lot before attacking in some way. There's always a way round a defense which is great design in action. The giant experimental units are the "uber" units you're looking for :)

    "TA was the most defining game of it's time, if this is only half as good, it will still be the best game since TA."

    It is AT LEAST AS GOOD as TA (spoken as a true TA fan).

    "TA was bestest cos:

    I liked the way the boats sank.
    And the way the wireframes were coloured in when building
    And the way the wee cheeky planes buzzed about
    And the way the solar panels hid if they were frightened
    And the way you could tell your wee man to do loads of things and he would go about his business, working round problems
    And the way big bertha fired bullets that can actually miss (unique in any RTS...probably, developers take note, makes it exciting waiting for the hit) "

    Boats sink BETTER :D
    Yup hordes of cheeky tech 1 planes buzz about. The submersible aircraft carrier (awesome btw) can hold 150 (that's ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY!) aircraft at once. And they all launch quickly Cylon-baseship-style...
    The "queueing up loads of orders and leaving them to it" is of course back, and is much better, for example you can drag a queued-up waypoint, move or build order around while it's in the queue! Also you can double-click an attack order and it will form a "co-ordinated attack" simply and easy with any other queued attack orders on the target.
    The giant artillery can quite definitely miss a lot, but when it hits... oh, when it hits :)

    "uber-big bertha ftw... seriously the first Screenshot made me shed a tear..."
    That's right, it's the spiritual big BIG bertha, and it has a range of about 10km (to scale) :o

    "It's a minor thing, but one of the great things about TA before it, was units don't talk when clicked."
    Yep, no pointless unit talking, just robots that go where you tell them with no fuss...

    As people have mentioned you will need insane specs if they dont improve performance much from what it is now. RAM is also a bottleneck due to the size and complexity of whats going on on the map. Apparently its optimised for multiple-core processors so if you have one it could help quite a bit.

    Good job I didn't sign an NDA to play it :D







  • heflys #35 5 years ago

    Can anyone say OWNED. You completely shut down that whiner. This game is going to be awesome.

  • Scimarad #36 5 years ago

    "Nipping to the other side of the map to tell an idling engineer to build another power generator feels like dicing with death when there's a slew of enemy gunships knocking at my front door. And a horde of tanks headed towards a vital forward base. And a fleet of battleships bombarding a coastal factory. And something gigantic and spider-shaped loping slowly from the unknown territory to the south. And... is that a nuke?"

    I think you just described why I can't get into RTS games - I love the idea of building all the units ,fighting the battles etc. but it just gets to frantic to really enjoy. I think I'll always prefer turn-based stuff like Civilization.

  • heflys #37 5 years ago

    And that's why I'll always prefer furious RTS action over the " you take a turn, I'll take turn" gameplay of purely stat-based TB games.

    But we all have preferences.

  • Hypocee #38 5 years ago

    "People are forgetting the majestic orchestral music of Total Annihilation, do we know if Supreme Commander has similar musical brilliance?"

    I'm not; I stuck my TA disc in the CD player more than a few times, mostly for Track 6.
    They brought the same guy who did TA's music (Jeremy Soule) back for SupCom, so here's hoping.

  • Merefield #39 5 years ago

    Go here. End Of.

  • Hypocee #40 5 years ago

    Not end of. I'm sure nobody has anything less than love for TA Spring. I'm sure in another decade, they'll get...somewhere.

  • Shrub #41 5 years ago

    I'm really bored of game designers and reviewers taking any opportunity to rubbish gameplay styles of the past. Just because something is old doesn't make it automatically bad. New is not automatically better etc.

    Like many others, I enjoy playing RTS games at my own slow pace. If I wanted to play something fast I'd play an FPS (which I do from time to time). Of course, its perfectly valid for the developers to choose the apparently frantic gameplay style of TA (caveat: I haven't actually played TA) but please let us not pretend that this is somehow automatically superior to other RTS's where I must devote more attention to controlling resources and building/advancing.

    I'm afraid my mouse hand is getting kinda slow these days, so in all probability I will have to skip this game. Which is a pity, because it looks like I could have enjoyed it were it not for their conscious decision to punish those of us who like to move a bit more slowly.

  • a8a #42 5 years ago

    Never was a fan of TA. I found it to be pretty bland and unoriginal in terms of units. Preferred <a href=http://en.wik ipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Reign>Dark Reign</a>, for both its style and substance, although I realize that probably wont be a very popular outlook around here :p

    And that's why I'll always prefer furious RTS action over the " you take a turn, I'll take turn" gameplay of purely stat-based TB games.

    I hate to break it to you, but all games are purely stat-based ;)

  • -TKF- #43 5 years ago

    Best game ever, the first game to push TA from the top spot...

    One thing.. will a XP 3800 + Nvidia 8800 and 2 gigs of ram do? or do i need more cpu Powar..?

  • heflys #44 5 years ago


    """""""""" "I'm really bored of game designers and reviewers taking any opportunity to rubbish gameplay styles of the past. Just because something is old doesn't make it automatically bad. New is not automatically better etc.

    Like many others, I enjoy playing RTS games at my own slow pace. If I wanted to play something fast I'd play
    an FPS (which I do from time to time). Of course, its perfectly valid for the developers to choose the apparently frantic gameplay style of TA (caveat: I haven't actually played TA) but please let us not pretend that this is somehow automatically superior to other RTS's where I must devote more attention to controlling resources and building/advancing.

    I'm afraid my mouse hand is getting kinda slow these days, so in all probability I will have to skip this game. Which is a pity, because it looks like I could have enjoyed it were it not for their conscious decision to punish those of us who like to move a bit more slowly. """"""""

    This complaining might actually make sense if the game didn't possess a high degree of customizable a.i. behavior, different size battlefields , high levels of automation (limited micromanagement), and general concepts that limit it turning into a clickfest.

    It's also interesting that you mention slow advancement and building up, since that's exactly what you do in this game; particularly when considering how large the maps are.

    Oh, and TA wasn't clickfest, which you would know if you actually played it. It possessed a high degree of automation also.

    """""""I hate to break it to you, but all games are purely stat-based ;) """""""""" ""

    Please elaborate? I didn't realize tha SC utilized the same dice-rolls, damage modifiers, and general statisical data as a TB game.

    It's interesting to know that things such as gravity, inertia, weather effects, and tangible details all pertain to similiar stats witnessed in TB games.
    Edited by 1 at 19/01/07 @ 07:57

  • a8a #45 5 years ago

    Please elaborate? I didn't realize tha SC utilized the same dice-rolls, damage modifiers, and general statisical data as a TB game.

    It's interesting to know that things such as gravity, inertia, weather effects, and tangible details all pertain to similiar stats witnessed in TB games.

    Ah, youve hit the money there, you see. The key word in your comment was witnessed. Its a lot easier to witness the statistics in turn-based games, given the infinite time allowed, and the general tendency towards externalising them. However, all games boil down to numbers in the end. Its the only thing a computer can process.

  • Ryuken #46 5 years ago

    @a8a: Dark Reign was great too for its time, had much better (friendly and enemy) AI than TA, although I could enjoy both. Only niggles in that first game was the C&C-limitation (only one factory of a certain type can be producing stuff) and the awkward terrain graphics; never felt as clear as in other games (and the latter can sometimes be said of SupCom too though, even from up close it's not always easy to distinguish relevant terrain elevations). SupCom does seem to become a better sequel to TA than DR2 was to DR1.
    Edited by 1 at 19/01/07 @ 15:46

  • heflys #47 5 years ago

    What do you mean only one factory of one type cold be producing stuff? You could build multiple factories of the same type, queque unit production, and generally not limit yourself to particular build options. Also nit sure about the difficulty of discerning terrain elevation, since it's clearly obvious what's a hill, and what isn't ; particularly when you see your units climbing up one. The cliffs even had shadows, and elevation markers.

  • heflys #48 5 years ago

    By the way, I have to find me a copy of DR.

  • Hypocee #49 5 years ago

    Please elaborate? I didn't realize tha SC utilized the same dice-rolls, damage modifiers, and general statisical data as a TB game.

    It's interesting to know that things such as gravity, inertia, weather effects, and tangible details all pertain to similiar stats witnessed in TB games.
    -----------------------
    Ah, youve hit the money there, you see. The key word in your comment was witnessed. Its a lot easier to witness the statistics in turn-based games, given the infinite time allowed, and the general tendency towards externalising them. However, all games boil down to numbers in the end. Its the only thing a computer can process.
    -----------------------
    Stated generally enough any statement can be made true!...and content-free. By that trivial argument, Katamari Damacy is all about stats too. There is an important difference between strategy games which show you die rolls, strategy games which try to hide that they use die rolls behind the scenes, and the few strategy games (TA, SupCom, Homeworld, Sword of the Stars) which use other mechanisms that allow for "emergent" behaviour.

  • a8a #50 5 years ago

    Yup, I was stating it very generally, especially in my original comment, which was a one line throw-away comment with a winking ;) smiley at the end!

    Technically, it could also be argued that real life could also be boiled down to statistics and numbers :p I wasn't trying to say there was no difference to real-time and turn-based games, just making a comment that came to mind on the back of a post about a different topic :p

    As to Dark Reign, I kind of agree with Ryuken - the terrain graphics DID feel a little awkward. I could always tell where the hills were, but not always whether they were going up or down :p Id love to see a new Dark Reign game though, that was more true to the original than DR2... my overriding memory of DR2 was being fairly hopeful through the first few missions - thinking that I was working through the grunt units, and would get to the fun, exciting units like in DR1 soon - and then slowly coming to the realisation that there WERENT any more units. The engine and all was pretty good for the time, but it didnt have all the elements that made DR1 so good.

  • heflys #51 5 years ago

    """"""Stated generally enough any statement can be made true!...and content-free. By that trivial argument, Katamari Damacy is all about stats too. There is an important difference between strategy games which show you die rolls, strategy games which try to hide that they use die rolls behind the scenes, and the few strategy games (TA, SupCom, Homeworld, Sword of the Stars) which use other mechanisms that allow for "emergent" behaviour.""""""""
    This was precisely my point. There is difference with the term "stats" in videogames. It would be ridiculous to state everything is purely stat based in regards to such mechanics as dice-rolls, and the generally stat dominated TB genre. In SC, you're generally watching things blowing up, not worrying whether this type of terrain has -2 defense on a particular unit, or that unit has a +4 attack against that unit.
    Edited by 2 at 19/01/07 @ 21:15

  • Hypocee #52 5 years ago

    It appears that I overreacted and agree with both of you. Apologies for failing to spot irony.

  • Ryuken #53 5 years ago

    "What do you mean only one factory of one type cold be producing stuff? You could build multiple factories of the same type, queque unit production, and generally not limit yourself to particular build options."

    You could but only one Infantry factory f.e. executed the infantry queuing (you have to select a primary Infantry factory or Barracks, like in C&C).

    DR1 isn't easy to get now but it is possible to play it on XP. More help/directions here: http://dr -mission-series.7p.com/instruct...

  • Oblexar #54 5 years ago

    SPEC GUIDE


    Ok guys, about the type of rig you need for this game, first off in all honesty I have heard mixed responses from all types of various configurations, I have seen people with crap rigs tell me it runs great and people with good rigs tell me it chugs late.

    The truth lies somewhere in between.

    First off I will tell you right of the bat it is a FACT that this game does NOT eat up your ram!

    1 GiG is plenty and you can still play the lesser maps with 512 even!

    As long as you have a 6600GT or better your GPU will NOT be an issue, but the game won't look pretty on it, nor will it be the cause of your chugging if you lower the settings enough

    CPU this is your bottleneck, if you are going to upgrade for this game their isn't even a shred of room to argue about it. The game is CPU limited.

    If you have a single core CPU you will be able to play 1 vs 1 games that don't go over around a few hundred units fine.

    Dual core is what this game is about, I know you may have seen benchmarks with dual cores before showing minimal performance gains, but this game especially latter into the game will give you gigantic performance leaps.

    If you have any dual core, at least a 6600GT and 1 gig of ram their is nothing in this game you wont be able to do given you adjust the settings properly


    Dual cores like the 3800x2 are pretty cheap now so it won't set you back really.

  • Hypocee #55 5 years ago

    I've been planning to build a new rig for this game, and that's pretty well in line with what the developers recommend. Thanks for taking the time to post it.

  • heflys #56 5 years ago

    ''''''''''You could but only one Infantry factory f.e. executed the infantry queuing (you have to select a primary Infantry factory or Barracks, like in C&C).'''''''''

    Whoops, I thought you were referring to TA. My bad. He,he,he........

    '''''''DR1 isn't easy to get now but it is possible to play it on XP. More help/directions here: [link url=http://dr -mission-series.7p.com/instruct...'''''''''''
    ]http://dr -mission-series.7p.com/instruct...[/link]

    I'll have to find it somewhere.
    Edited by 1 at 20/01/07 @ 15:31

  • subtlesnake #57 5 years ago

    "Resource collection and micro-management was stripped down to a bare, self-regulated minimum, in favour of war on a massive scale."

    Did the author even play TA? The game was hugely resource cantered, revolving almost entirely around map control and effective coverage of the metal patches. If you stayed in your base and didn't cover the map, or manage your metal effectively (never producing more than you could store) you would be completely crushed.

  • Hypocee #58 5 years ago

    He's talking about mindshare and amount of management. The importance of resource collection was not stripped down; the amount of players' time it took up most assuredly was. Compared to other mainstream RTSes before and since, you don't have to do things like produce, assign and shepherd harvesters/SCVs/peasants, you don't have to worry about resources being depleted, and you only have to juggle two resources. You plonk down metal or energy production, and it takes care of itself until someone actually attacks.
    Edited by 1 at 21/01/07 @ 17:33

  • Mudo #59 5 years ago

    This games looks like a remarkably average run-of-the-mill RTS which seems to innovate precisely nothing.
    After the genius of Company of Heroes, we should all expect better.

  • subtlesnake #60 5 years ago

    "He's talking about mindshare and amount of management. The importance of resource collection was not stripped down; the amount of players' time it took up most assuredly was. Compared to other mainstream RTSes before and since, you don't have to do things like produce, assign and shepherd harvesters/SCVs/peasants,"

    Well, you did get a constant, automatic resource stream yes, but the resource management focus was simply shifted elsewhere – you had to be continually producing new construction units, and continually assigning the existing ones new tasks. And I would say that the bulk of a competitive players' time would be spent doing this. He'd be building metal extractors at various corners of the map, working on getting that geothermal plant up (assigning more and more construction units as time went on) then the moho metal maker, and so on. In TA you never reach a plateau where you can say "lets just focus on building units from now on", as the Eurogamer quote implies – you have to be continually expanding, faster and faster – and you can always use more resources or more construction units.

    "you don't have to worry about resources being depleted, and you only have to juggle two resources. You plonk down metal or energy production, and it takes care of itself until someone actually attacks."

    You have to worry about your own resources being depleted, and any metal you produce over and above your capacity is wasted, so the challenge is never allowing your metal bar to completely fill (or empty). That's pretty hard when you're continually undertaking new projects, and the resource demands are continually increasing. Also, in the early game metal is very much at a premium, so absorbing rocks or wreckage can give you a decisive advantage.

    There isn't any point where you can just forget about resource production.

  • heflys #61 5 years ago

    """""""This games looks like a remarkably average run-of-the-mill RTS which seems to innovate precisely nothing.
    After the genius of Company of Heroes, we should all expect better."""

    Seems? From what distance are you viewing it from?

    This game has gargantuan maps (can take units 10 minutes to reach the other side in some instances).

    Physics play a role in gameplay. No, longer is weapon damage/range based entirely on random stats. Bullets actually have momentum, and obey gravity.

    A streamlined interface that makes running an army easier. Hell, almost everything can be automated it seems. You can even setup transport routes whilst you're conducting war.

    The ability to zoom out to extreme distances, and quickly zoom back in.

    Advanced a.i. programming, and diverse a.i. behavior which can be adjusted by the player.

    The ability to conduct war on land, sea, and air.

    Now tell me, does CoH, bless it's soul, possess any of this?

  • Hypocee #62 5 years ago

    Easy there, man. Please breathe before feeding trolls.