Interesting anti-com bomb idea

I was thinking that it would be cool to disallow the use of the delete key on a commander if he is being reclaimed or under fire. While also allowing enemy engineers to reclaim a commander, and not trigger the nuke on death.

It would be very hard to pull off, as the commander would most likely just kill all of the engineers... but SO worth it if you could ever do it.

Maybe even make it so that a commander will not nuke on death if an engineer is reclaiming while being shot at by a tank. Even if the tank gets the last shot off.

how about considering it a valid strategy? after all, the ONLY gametype it will affect is the single army, many players one (i cant remember the official name T_T) due to the fact that if it happens in other game types, the 'com bomber' will be knocked out of the game.

Sure it is a valid strategy, but on that game type it is the ONLY valid strategy. 3 dguns to the face, heal and repeat.

Though my proposal doesn't really have anything to do with changing that part of the com-bomb.. just a little extra option to throw in.

The delete function wont do anything anyway.

First off you'll still have the issue of an early com-rush, he'll run into your base and destroy your eco manually until you blow him up yourself. Which is usually better than directly exploding your commander, except that you probably wont be able to destroy his commander this way... Unless you force him to have to attack you, which will guarantee his success.

Second off you'll removed a little bit of the advantage of comrushing, basically the "if you don't attack me I can still nuke you."

But that still leads me to the first one, if they're not trying to kill you, then they're not stopping you from demolishing their base, AND they let you keep your commander.

Removing it will only make it seem less intentional, however it would ultimately make the skill level of anybody com-bombing actually seem higher, which is not a desired side effect.

The more I think about it, the less it matters.
They have talked about linking commanders and their units together in team games, when they explode, they lose an army and the ability to play.
That should be enough to deter the "lets keep 4 coms and send one in early" strategy.

The "send all 5 coms" strategy is still very strong though.. not sure what to do about that. The amount of healing and burst damage is hard to counter.

I prefer SupCom's approach.

Mike

If they do that then the only difference from the alliance game type will be shared resources. I dont think anything should be changed, learning to deal with commander rushes like com bombs is pretty easy.

Besides, they are only really a problem if you all decide to have the stupid idea of all spawning in the same place.

And what was that? The only reason ACUs were more vulnerable in SupCom was because all the maps were so bloody big that by the time the ACU was in a vulnerable location, both sides had 100+ units to back it up. The only time an ACu would be along against a small group of units would be in a 1v1, and even then, that was only early game. The only time an ACU would die in a 1v1 early game is if the game was HEAVILY unbalanced.

Mid-game? You mean ASF spam and shields?

Late game? Teleport traps, ***-tons of SAM batteries and antinukes.

In fact, I cannot find one thing about ACUs that I preferred over Commander units in TA.

ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh no sounds like some trollage waiting to happen.

Anyways heres some randomness for you all: Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to be a fish and his friends eat for a week.

I get the feeling that you haven't played many games gunshin, let me get my pre-made team and I will show you why spawning all five commanders separately is a bad idea.

Seeing as the rest of the post has nothing to do with the idea of prevent the Commander's use as a Com-Bomb, I'll explain.

The ACU's Death Nuck did reduced damage compared to regular Nucks(75k vs 12.5k if I recall correctly?) and did only a percentage of that 12.5k(?) damage to structures and other ACUs.

So yeah, you could run your ACU in but the player's core infrastructure suffered little damage. Meaning you needed 2-3 to truely completely cripple a player, and that just wasn't good odds.

Some say it's "not in the spirit of the lore", but the great thing is that it's totally irrelevant for 1v1s, because the game is over before the damage has any effect, and works conceptually really well to downplay benefit of combombing.

Mike

Oh... I thought I was posting a simmering argument for a different thread. I'mma sleep now.

But yeah... That would be necessary so long as multi-commander armies are going to exist..,

'Kay, beddy bye time.

Remember when I was like that, haha.

Separation did seem like a fundamentally sound idea, you get more control of the map, faster. Simply because you all spawn in different areas and can build outward quickly. And the basic idea is that with the shared resources getting your factories up and running faster and hopefully be able to defend your individual bases until you expand into allies, or start taking over enemy territory.

However the ideology is quickly lost when the realization hits that the other team has the same starting resources, and because they can work in the same smaller area they can divide the control of defenses, eco, and offences between each other as necessary, and monitor your slightly smaller (but still expanding) base. With more than one set of eyes, makes their base much stronger than individual "sections" of a base.

And because 4 commanders can build eco while one commander builds a bot factory makes their base start much faster, and since only one base needs to be "turtled" then the focus will be less spent managing the resources to barricade every base, and more spent getting the economy booming, and the military pumping.

The com-bom breaks this unity by diverting one or more commander from base building to try and give you that extra early advantage by destroying their base. But the basic concept is, he will be met by several commanders that have had time to build up a little before you get there, and likely two commanders will walk over and D-gun you into nuke, even if they lose both of those commanders, they still have three more, and had a technical better start than before.

Not to say that using the powerful commanders against the small built bases isn't a terrible idea, but full on com-boming really tends to be smarter later in the game, where you can destroy a huge section of econ and/or military. And possibly get their commander for extra damage. Again, it makes sense to use the commanders firepower until they force you to explode by killing you, you just try to make sure your nuke will do optimal damage to them. If they retreat with their army you'll just go on a rampage and be unstoppable, if they send an army, then they lose an army to the bomb.

That being said, Tass is a fantastic player that I prefer to have on my team, rather than go against him. He's probably one of the most skilled, (because I don't want to offend other streamers I say "one of") I really prefer him on my team mainly because my player speed is basically set on slow, perhaps I just killed my credibility.

I agree with you on every point sherrif, although I am a man of few words... and would never attempt such a protracted response.

I do feel as though it is hard to judge someones skill at this game atm though, as many new units and balances need to be made. The units that are "weak" or not present atm are essential to my "in your face" poking/backstabbing play style. I would take you on my team over many many others.

Less charming than starting with a commander, but:
viewtopic.php?f=61&t=49386

Why not just have commanders not go nuclear inside the radius of enemy bases for the first 5 mins of the game? That solves everything. Com rushes are still valid, but won't screw a player over. The game could say the nuke is "charging" for 5 minutes or something.

Nerfing the nuke damage imo is silly. It's a nuke.

And then at 5:01 minutes every Commander explodes because it only delays the issue, and doesn't actually solve anything.

Mike

tassadar33 mike I can't beleive this thread is being taken seriously, anyhow, just you use that when the game gets launched and see how high you get on the ladder.

com-bombing represents no advantage whatsoever, loosing a base is nothing, sure it's a emotional blow, but that's it, you have all the mass there in wrecks if rebuilding it really fast is any kind of an issue.

You need all the "lives" you're given considering the oppenent is given the same amount. if you have fun combombing right and left don't think you can keep your last commander locked up and safe. any team in their right minds would know how to count and go scout and pull off a 4-5 t2 bomber snipe.

the transition to t2 air is a risk for the general battlfield but at this point a wholly worthwhile investment because might I remind you all the game is OVER when you do not have any coms left.

so toy arround with com-bombing all you want this is not (as of now) a winning strategy.

I can't believe people would consider this a valid tradeoff. Its just make-belive, the truth is if you sacrificed a com your chances of winning are reduced drastically.

And even without the Com's explosion's nerf in supcom, you never saw anyone do it unless they had lost and were either trying to get a draw or spend the last few minutes of game having fun.

tatsujb, obviously it doesn't matter in 1v1s, because in those cases the game is over before the damage has any impact.

It matters when you get into Team games, in particular Team Games with multiple Commanders. Commanders are good builders yes, but on the other hand if you can cripple/destroy 4 enemy bases while all of yours can still pump out units it's far more than an "emotional blow". Especially if the Deathnucks are full powered it's easy to get an Enemy Comm in the blast and removing the "lives" you speak of.

It seems you lack any first hand experience with Com-bombing. Com-bombing is the kind of thing that gets players to rage-quit games entirely.

Mike

nope I host 4 v 4s and 5 v 5s mostly, I don't use combombing, and being combombed has not crippled my team yet.

And it's tatsu, I call you Mike, call me tatsu