commander lock down

now a game is so easy ended with nukes trowing at the commander so i tinked make it more nuke resist with a lock down for the commander thats need to recharge with 15 min

There's plenty of counters to nukes.

Mainly, anti-nukes and keeping your Commander next to one.

Also, scouting out your opponent's nukes and destroying them.

Commander snipes with nukes are easily avoided.

i now but he dont has a change against one nuke ...

The Commander has enough health to barely survive one nuclear missile. It's not a great answer, but nuke play is still a hotly debated topic. It's just taking a sideline to hotter topics right now.

The eyes of the commander are upon you and any wrong you do he's gonna see

Lockdown and escape pod were awesome abilities in supcom2, some good did come out of that game.

Escape pod was cute, but as far as abilities go it was pretty dumb. If an ultimate killbot suit couldn't protect the pilot against an army of killbots, then a 5HP POS flying pod sure as hell won't cut it. PA is a fight to the death, they don't leave survivors. Point, fire, game over.

Hunker was... okay. It was often better to repair the Comm directly, rather than lose all his abilities and the option to repair and the option to run. Lotta downsides on it.

escape pod inst effectually hat i mean only more nuke resist so its inst a instant nuke kil because that takes the fun out of playing (like you have a huge base and are winning but the guy who is loosing has a nuke and fires it on you commander and you lose the game thats no fun )

Hunker was great when you needed just a little bit more time to bring in some reinforcements. And the escape pod was useful if they didn't have any antiair. It improves the survivability a lot.

"Great" describes many things, but not hunker. It only barely helped in a few areas, and even then it was iffy at best.

Escape pod was simply laughable. "Cross your fingers and pray nothing shoots up" is a complete joke.

Just because you were unable to find a use for it yourself doesn't mean it was useless. Do you propose that hunker is supposed to make the com invincible instead of just increasing the time it takes to kill him by a bit? That would be OP.

Hunker was pretty good for negating a bomber swarm's alpha strike, especially if you had the means to whittle them down after the first pass

*Hunker*
Bombs Hit
*Un Hunker*
Bombers get destroyed.

What if the escape pod was send to a different planet Maybe something for an infinite war.

I was thinking about solution to commander sudden death. We could have sturdy building that is "commander backup storage". It can be build only by commander, is expensive and can sustain a lot of beating. As long as at least one such building exists death of commander does not end game, and can be recreated by fabbers, but only near that building. Maybe add to it 3-4 defending turrets and single aa flak, so it cannot be killed by some random patrol.


I dislike how easy is to kill commander sometimes.Or that AIs are hopeless with defending them.

This is a downside of the one current gamemode. This gamemode is all about killing all enemy commanders, and fits the lore of the game. I prefer it, as it ensures games don't drag on when one side has the striking power to deliver a killing blow.

I do think however, maybe they should add a 'total annihilation' gamemode, in which a side loses when all its production capabilities are destroyed (com, fabbers, factories).

Losing a commander in this gamemode imho should still have to be a very punishing thing though. Perphaps a large, hefty resource tax on income for a set duration. On top of losing the best nanolathing unit, this would be pretty damaging but allow for a gamemode that is longer and more involved.