an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threads

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

But then no upgrades leads to the Total Annihilation problem where you had to reclaim the extractor and then build the new one. I'm sure there will be an Advanced extractor of some kind and it would be convenient if it can just be built straight over the top of the basic one.

Edit: Plus the "build over the top way" would allow you to queue up an engineer to gradually replace you basic extractors with advance ones.

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

Would love to hear more on this, I felt the redundant 4 levels (T1, T2, Storage, T3) of MEX upgrades did more harm than good.

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

If I want to beat someone online in Starcraft, I've got to learn all the correct build orders such as the difference between an 8 pool and a 10 pool and the marginal benefit of extra workers -- and I must not queue up unit production because that causes me to stall.

But this is me fighting the game instead of my opponent!

It's not fair! Why is Starcraft making me learn the nuances of the game mechanics and interface? Starcraft is too hardcore, it should be made accessible!

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

Did I miss something here? Thought godde was in the zero-k crowd, not starcraft.

Its pretty safe to assume this game will not be influenced by starcraft by any measureable amount.

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

Yes you did.

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

Anything can be made to work as long as it's clear as to HOW it works. After that it's all a question of what people want to make it work.

And considering Supreme Commander is considered one of the top RTS games of all times, they did something right.

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

According to who?

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

According to the one million plus buyers, as well as the aggregated review scores, that's who.

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html?site=pc&cat=58

I'm not sure how appropriate gamerankings is given neither brood war or core contingency make the first page. But SupCom is #18 on that list so that's pretty good, only a little worse than Plants vs Zombies.

http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/ ... =condensed
http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/ ... =condensed
Interestingly, SupCom doesn't make the first page on metascore for metacritic. It did do well in userscore so I guess it has a cult following. Although Patrician III: Rise of the Hanse and EU3: HTTT still beat it there too.

I liked SupCom but claiming it's the best RTS ever, or close, is silly. Maybe it's your favorite RTS but under no metric is it among the best. There's some pretty scathing reviews on metacritic in particular.

Edit: Oh and it turns out SupCom is the 118th best sold PC game, next to Runaway: A Road Adventure and Tropico, not bad.

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

You forget that Total Annihilation has better scores from both Gamerankings and Metacritic (counting user score on Metacritic).

Also... this blows my mind every time I read it:

SEC Info.com


If you take either Gamerankings or Metacritic seriously then you're a bad person by the way.
I really wish Metacritic would die in a fire... they deny people bonuses based on their game's Metacritic score... and Metacritic uses a concealed weighting system for its reviews.

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

I agree rating sites are garbage which is why I didn't bring any up. TA-style games certainly have a cult following (and with good reason) but sometimes you can get caught up in the community echo chamber. SupCom failed to capture broad appeal, that's why we got SupCom 2. It turned out a lot of what was gutted in SupCom 2 resulted in even less captured appeal. Accepting and understanding the lessons of SupCom will make PA a better game. I think Uber has a good handle on that, they are adding new dimensions to gameplay while still paying attention to approachability.

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

Didn't bring any up? You LINKED to them! Don't give them the extra traffic man!
ayceeem's already been payed off obviously, but just because he's shilling for those sites doesn't mean you should link to them too

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

I don't think Starcraft needs to be more accessible. It is what it is, I don't like playing it, not my cup of tea, etc, etc. I like watching Starcraft streams though. There is usually a very clear focus of the game unlike SupCom and most likely unlike how PA will play. I don't think PA will be as fun to watch as Starcraft because battles might take place on several places at once and it will generally be hard to follow them all and watch the carnage.

That is not a stall. That is reserving and storing resources for future use. It is bad because in order to maximize efficiency you want to spend your resources as fast as possible. It is the same in TA and SupCom. When you store resources that could have been more fighting units or more mex upgrades you are not playing optimally.

Edit:Anyway. The focus on execution skills is too big in Starcraft. I want a game that focuses more on strategy.
About the interface: I'd rather not have to learn the interface. I'd rather have the game read my thoughts.

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

IDK godde, some FA casts are great.

Here's a recent one by Gyle, but ZaphodX, TA4Life, Jacksparrow, and Skwoll are all great too.

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

What do you call one million plus sales for a PC game -- if not a broad appeal? Get your head checked.

Pfft... I don't visit Metacritic nor Gamerankings beyond just searching for Supreme Commander scores on the internet, so sorrrrrry then. Perhaps Amazon customer reviews are more to your liking?:
Supreme Commander: 3.6 stars
So not exactly best game scores. But just for comparison:
StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty: 3.3 stars

Reading down the mixed to negative reviews, these are all the complaints I counted in order of frequency and most helpful: (warning: list may contain redundancy)

High system requirements: 14 reviews
Icon wars: 13 reviews
Similar factions: 12 reviews
Uninspired aesthetics/presentation: 12 reviews
Lackluster campaign/story: 9 reviews
Things Total Annihilation did better: 8 reviews
No strategy: 7 reviews
Strategic zoom: 7 reviews
Poor net coding: 6 reviews
Bad pathing and unit A.I.: 6 reviews
Lackluster single-player: 5 reviews
Imbalances: 5 reviews
Boring maps: 5 reviews
Unoptimised for larger maps: 4 reviews
Weak A.I. opponents: 4 reviews
Poor tutorial: 4 reviews
Clunky user interface: 4 reviews
Bugs: 4 reviews
Performance issues: 3 reviews
Falsely advertised game's appeal : 3 reviews
Badly structured missions: 3 reviews
Simcity: 3 reviews
Misleading system requirements: 3 reviews
Broken/inoperable purchase: 3 reviews
Unresponsive commands: 3 reviews
Overpowered defences: 2 reviews
Overpowered metal makers diminish map control: 2 reviews
Abusive server/forum admins and moderators: 2 reviews
No humans: 2 reviews
Patching issues: 2 reviews
Crashes: 2 reviews
Confusing user command interface: 2 reviews
Sim economy: 2 reviews
Too large maps: 2 reviews
Overly long games: 1 review
Too long to build anything: 1 review
Exponential economy(which Total Annihilation did better): 1 review
Things missing from Total Annihilation: 1 review
No unit special abilities: 1 review
Rushing: 1 review
Small armies: 1 review
Text accompanies in-mission voice tracks: 1 review
Cheating A.I.: 1 review
Unit limit includes structures: 1 review
Poor multiplayer client: 1 review
DRM: 1 review
Upgrades: 1 review

So some outcries against the economy did crop up after all. But what there is is buried under a plethora of other, ultimately more pressing sh!t.

And reading through all the mixed to regative Metacritic user scores -- they all cite being unable to handle huge map scales, icon wars, "derivative combat" and huge system requirements; not so much the economy system.

But it totally does qualify as stalling! -- my production slowed because I queued unit production; and we all know slowed production is the arch-nemesis of anti-stallers! If I didn't know not to do this, my opponent could outproduce me!

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

I think that what Uber has created with the ChronoCam will change this. PA may very well be entertaining to watch if casters master this tool.

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

I don't agree with the conclusions but I have to say if that list is unadulterated that's a very useful post. I think the reviews should be approached as a designer and in that case some of the most common complaints might indeed be related to the economy. For example if the complaints about "no strategy" are actually related to an over emphasis on economic micromanagement then addressing the economy might mitigate those complaints. Either way there's still some QQ about the economy and Uber made the right move addressing it.

Most of the top complaints will be non-issues for PA: system requirements are more reasonable, only 1 faction, unique aesthetic, no campaign, flow-field pathing, optimization, etc. That leaves Icon Wars and Strategic Zoom (which I assume are the same issue) and "No Strategy". So It may very well be that an over emphasis on the economy turned a lot of people off in SupCom. I know the economy is your wedge issue but I think this might be a rare case where we can have our cake and eat it too. The economy can be streaming, interesting and easy to grasp as the original TA was. And this time around we will have 6 months of community testing to hammer out glarring turnoffs.

This is particularly good advice.

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

That depends on what you want to produce. If you want to produce marines and queue up marines in one barracks when you have several idle barracks then you are stalling production on your marines. However if all your barracks are producing constantly then queuing up marines in the barracks evenly doesn't stall your marine production. If you should make more barracks to produce marines faster is up to the player to solve.
This is a lot different from when your Flash tank production are slowed down because your solar collector production is draining all your metal production. And it is worlds beyond stalling on energy and losing metal production in the process.

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

It is just my personal opinion. For the broader audience I don't think the large scale of PA will be good for e-sports.
Don't get me wrong. I think large scale battles raging across several battlefields is fun to play but I just don't think it is as fun to watch as a focused Starcraft battle.

I want to play largescale warfare but I don't think it is accessible for broader audiences. But who knows.

Re: an SC2/SupCom noobs take on the economy/econ-crash threa

yeah I'm not in any position to make an assertion, just thought I'd link you some FA casting if you weren't already familiar.

According to ayceeem's critic sample "Icon Wars" are a big turn off to people. Maybe that can be looked at again. Bigger more legible units could mitigate that, then again I liked the SupCom scale-zoom-icon system. And I can't play RTS without strategic zoom.