Poll: Do you feel that the commander we have seen since TA improves the game?

I apologize to all for my error. I read the FAQ before posting and must have missed that. I'm sorry that I asked something that had already been answered. If ruffled anybody's feathers, I unequivocally apologize.

this.

I am not 100% sure about this, but if the enemy death explosion kills your commander, won't you still win? Doesn't he get kicked out of the game first since he died first?

This has never happened to me. 0.0

It didn't, I was just sorry it was a waste of time and effort on your behalf. You didn't know any better and I imagine it probably lowers your morale a bit.

Anyway, as far a commander upgrades being out of the picture, I use my commander all the time and my impression is he is irreplaceable and effectual. He really does contribute many units worth of power to a fight when he is in one. It is still difficult late game to use him because the enemy constantly keeps tabs on location, but he is still a generous fabricator when assigned a project. Matter of fact, whenever planetary travel is concerned, if it isn't a planet the enemy has dangerous attack power on, it is best to use the commander because of his multirole and his generous fabrication skill.

He isn't boring. He is mildly troublesome to protect, this game lacks many "good" snipes that a losing player could accomplish. Usually commander death accompanies them losing the game already and a lot of their stuff being destroyed in the process already, which yes may include nuking but that destroys your base so you'd lose to armies afterward anyway. Orbital laser is usually the one way a commander can unfairly die, and sadly one can avoid that by just having their commander walk around aimlessly on a small area patrol because the laser satellite is too slow to catch up and shoot it.

ASK FOR REMOVING DEATH EXPLOSION OR DRAWS: The death explosion does make team games have a manner of comeback, where if one loses their commander they can at least try to use retribution to gain some ground on the field. Ask for draws, I like how if a commander dies you have approximately 8 seconds to somehow kill the enemy in order to draw the game. I mean if you have bombers, you could still do it, reguardless of commander suicide explosion.

it's a question of time difference. i think 3 seconds approximately. Or just the time it takes for the game to stop. Once the game is stopped if all parties have been thrown out then it is a draw.

Huh that's odd. Usually when I ride my KEW straight to my enemies head he always ends up the winner. I quess I am just unlucky or something.

When you lose your commander

This reminds me of one of the Gnug tactics from TA

I've done this and it is quite effective as a last ditch effort when my base was all but obliterated.

dude there's not even a ladder or replay files yet, draws aren't implemented yet.

[quote="ragzouken, post: 840990, member: 1798809"]

[/quote]

The Commander has many benefits.

Energy and Metal storage. Energy and Metal generation. It builds at the same rate as an advanced fabber, with half the energy. You're right, it is a small amount, but it's the same as three power generators.

But the point is, if you don't want the Commander, wait for a different game type.

He's the only thing protecting against an early rush and can be used as an early aggressor unit.

If you have issues with someone dropping in a Commander and blowing it up, you can do the same. There's many different tactics in the game.

What's more, if you don't like rush tactics, then hang in there. In the future we'll be able to start on a different planet. If you don't like the "liability" – then wait, there will be a game mode for that too.

There's many different ways to rather easily protect your Commander. First off, put him in the middle of your base. If your enemy gets to him, that means you've already lost most of your base anyways. Put him next to an anti nuke, and besides, if he gets nuked to death, then the nuke explosion from his death is the least of your concerns. And lastly, have plenty of anti-air – which is something you should have anyways.

tldr; If you don't like it, there's nothing that can be done about it right now. However, there will be game modes and setups in the future to accommodate for your game preferences.

Then why were you talking about a draw? If the end game score screen says that the guy who killed the enemy commander first wins then I see no problem.

just be warned, it won't. it'll say draw.

I went from TA: Spring to a *lot* of SC2 - so that is where most of my mindset comes from. There seems to be a pretty major aspect to general gameplay that most of the people in this thread disagree with me on, which I'm very surprised by:

If I out play my opponent on all/most levels, don't I deserve to win? How is it that sniping a commander for a win when you're seriously behind is acceptable? I mean, TA/PA has always been one of the most large-army-focused, strategy-focused RTS games ever, yet one of the 'strategies' is to focus on an individual weak point? I don't like that. It's always been there, but I find it interesting how adopted it is as a completely acceptable avenue to success.

lol, why would you be?

this is a different game. It seems near-logical you'd suggest this coming from spring and SC2, games that took very experimental routes astray from the heritage.

....interesting. but not what the mainstream TA/FA fans want.

*deleted* it was just a quote - not sure how it ended up being posted.

You lose when your Com Die... if he Die, then you Die, and is a 1v1, it became a Draw(Both lose)...

Don't feel bad. I get it from someone nearly every time I post. glad to have you with us.

Last time I did this was with an AI several patches ago. It said "Winner: AI", though it died first.

Also, I don't see the need for it to explode like a nuke if it doesn't have a D-gun.

I'm not sure what you're saying with this... Are you referring to TA heritage? Because if that is the case, spring did not stray far from TA, and SC2 is... entirely different, and definitely not 'experimental'.

Anyway, my point was more related to my concept of an honorable win. It wasn't formed by SC2 or spring - it was formed by achieving wins I was proud of and wins I was not, and appreciating the difference, in every competitive game I've ever played. Today, playing in a space where there is no prize, I would rather lose than to win in a manner I deem unworthy. Sniping a commander is definitely an aspect of the game, but I feel it bypasses the whole point of why I play the game. A problem arises when someone else shits on my parade and snipes my commander. These are the scenarios where I nerd rage.

One of the best features of TA was the commander. We always played commander death as a victory condition. What made this cool was that frequently when one player was clearly losing, he could try one last desperate attack, and if by chance he could sneak his commander into range and catch you napping, suicide, and get a draw. It didn't happen often, but it was worth trying if you were losing badly, and spectacular when you pull it off.