Neutral Units and Alternative to all units dying when their commander dies

Commander Metrarch monitored the progress from his base on the far side of the system that his forces were now sweeping.

I think the word "monitored" means that he watched how they did it, but was not doing it himself. And I highly doubt that he would send other commanders for such boring job.

Individual units do not have Commander-equivalent AI, they are not sentient, but that does not mean they are bricks. They have primitive algorithms, that allow them to function within their role.

Also, I see absolutely no reason to even discuss the lore here. We don't need lore in "no nukes" server option discussion, or in discussion about different victory conditions, why we need it here?

Hi Mike,

I see your point- I wasn't saying that you were wrong either by the way. I was just pointing out that you're coming at this from the SupCom point of view. I see no reason why the units can't be concious- the reason you don't make mass commanders could simply be cost vs combat effectiveness. There could also be an argument for different levels of AI (e.g. like in the matrix), the commander being the most intelligent (and therefore hardest to replicate).

I guess we'll find out as the PA lore develops further. That aside I do like the idea of a players army remaining after his commander is downed, albeit as a toggle-able option as I think it could lead to some fun games. Personally I'd have the units go idle- with an item left in the wreckage of the downed commander. You get your commander to the remains of the dead player, capture the 'core' and then take control of his army. As stated by others it could really promote a more aggressive strategy for FFA games in particular...