Supreme Commander 2

**Blitz Ap0C 552** · January 9th, 2010, 05:05 PM

In this new article about SupCom2, they state that it will fully utilize steam browser system for its online. I am super stoked.

I am super excited about this game, and highly highly endorse it. If you enjoy RTS there is no real way you can go wrong with this one.

Supreme Commander was the deepest RTS ever made. It focuses very heavy on grand scale strategy. Full diverse land, air and naval unit tree's. Massive scope and scale.

The major difference between SupCom, and its sequel, will be in a more simplified economy. By no means a "simple" economy. Just more simple than the original, which was a science, and very overwhelming for many players.

Supcom2 will basically be SupCom original, but with a simpler economy, and more streamlined tech and upgrade system.

Anyone else interested in this?

You can view a great walkthrough here.

**Mr Fax Sender** · January 9th, 2010, 05:15 PM

Supreme Commander was so fun, but raped my computer after so many hours of playing just because of the shear number of units on the map.

I'd be very interested if I ever upgrade.

**Blitz Ap0C 552** · January 9th, 2010, 05:22 PM

GPG claims one of the design goals of SupCom2 was to make it more accessible to all PC. Hopefully the new AI pathing system is less CPU intensive. I also think that with the revamped economy, dead unit shells do not stay permanently in the game.

I think just a bunch of little optimizations like this are what they did to alleviate CPU strain. GPU is not sweat you can always just turn down the detail.

I think that with the optimizations, along with the fact that it is like 3 years later, means that this game will be way more accessible to the average PC. I sure hope so, I want to play this game lots. Though the SupCom community was always active. I could go grab a game right now.

**Gorbachev22** · January 9th, 2010, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by Blitz Ap0C 552

Supreme Commander was the deepest RTS ever made.

You always make such reasonable statements. However, I did enjoy Total Annihilation and am curious as to what has changed in the series.

**Pharmacy** · January 9th, 2010, 06:05 PM

Originally Posted by Gorbachev22

You always make such reasonable statements.

It's as if you read my mind Gorb

**Blitz Ap0C 552** · January 9th, 2010, 06:35 PM

You always make such reasonable statements.

I would like to see you contest that claim, instead of just slander it without really demonstrating you are in any position to even do so. But w/e carry on.....

**Gorbachev22** · January 9th, 2010, 06:57 PM

I think the burden of proof lies with you

You imply that you have played all RTSs, which is unlikely (but who knows, it could be true). Even if this is true, it seems like it would be very difficult to make a convincing argument that one RTS is "deeper" than another if we restrict the sample to "good" games. For example, Dark Reign is my favourite RTS, but I have no idea how I could go about arguing that it is "deeper" than Starcraft.

**M Kraft** · January 9th, 2010, 07:11 PM

Originally Posted by Gorbachev22

I think the burden of proof lies with you

+1

Also, I was never a big RTS gamer but if it has full Steam support I can foresee myself being suckered in to playing it (like with HoN) as well as just plain sucking (like with HoN).

**Blitz Ap0C 552** · January 9th, 2010, 08:48 PM

I think the burden of proof lies with you You imply that you have played all RTSs, which is unlikely (but who knows, it could be true). Even if this is true, it seems like it would be very difficult to make a convincing argument that one RTS is "deeper" than another if we restrict the sample to "good" games. For example, Dark Reign is my favourite RTS, but I have no idea how I could go about arguing that it is "deeper" than Starcraft.

I have played quite a few RTS, and those I haven't I know enough about. I spent most of my time bs'ing about RTS on gamereplays.org.

Of course "deepest rts" is subject to interpretation - an argument that would be quite abstract, but I am sure I could prove it in a court of law. I don't think we want to get into that though. Well I know I do, but I am sure everyone else does not.

Just one piece of a much larger picture.....but check out the units...

I would say "depth"=total available possibilities of course of action

Which would be derived from amount of total gameplay premises (if situation X then Y)

amount of total gameplay premises derived from broad characteristics such as...

-Total unit and structure classes
-economic control and detail
-depth of layers (pretentious way of defining if there are land units, land and air, or land air and naval)
-Layers of intel (what you can see, how you can see, what can make sight and block it)
-You could really keep going defining gameplay premises.

Supcom really is champ in everyone of these categories. It really is the deepest RTS ever. Not necessarily the best (although I would say it is).

I do believe depth and skill level are not synonymous. Starcraft could be a more skillful RTS, by way of tactics and unit control.

The easiest way you can know for sure if SupCom is the deepest RTS is for you to play it. After you fully learn the game, you will know for sure there is just no way there is an RTS as mammoth as this. That really is the bottom line. Take my word for it.

And of course at the end of the trailer it says it is.... :D

**Pharmacy** · January 9th, 2010, 09:41 PM

Originally Posted by Blitz Ap0C 552

I have played quite a few RTS, and those I haven't I know enough about. I spent most of my time bs'ing about RTS on gamereplays.org.

Of course "deepest rts" is subject to interpretation - an argument that would be quite abstract, but I am sure I could prove it in a court of law. I don't think we want to get into that though. Well I know I do, but I am sure everyone else does not.

Just one piece of a much larger picture.....but check out the units...

I would say "depth"=total available possibilities of course of action

Which would be derived from amount of total gameplay premises (if situation X then Y)

amount of total gameplay premises derived from broad characteristics such as...

-Total unit and structure classes
-economic control and detail
-depth of layers (pretentious way of defining if there are land units, land and air, or land air and naval)
-Layers of intel (what you can see, how you can see, what can make sight and block it)
-You could really keep going defining gameplay premises.

Supcom really is champ in everyone of these categories. It really is the deepest RTS ever. Not necessarily the best (although I would say it is).

I do believe depth and skill level are not synonymous. Starcraft could be a more skillful RTS, by way of tactics and unit control.

The easiest way you can know for sure if SupCom is the deepest RTS is for you to play it. After you fully learn the game, you will know for sure there is just no way there is an RTS as mammoth as this. That really is the bottom line. Take my word for it.

And of course at the end of the trailer it says it is.... :D

It always makes my day when you talk about logic, Apoc.