Role of the Commander

The OP is right commander needs upgrades to make the game more exciting / stop late game commander snipes. Currently in the late game I feel held back by the commander, as I have to protect him and If I look away for a second he could die.

That's what's known as 'Working As Intended'.

Agreed, he definitely holds you back late game. I think there are lots of people that feel this way, I'm optimistic they'll improve the commander's role.

Did it ever occur to you that the Commander is supposed to 'hold you back' during the late game? That his entire reason for existence in the form he is in, is integral to the design?

Project update#40...
"We will go ahead and use that name when referring to this supremely capable Commander"

"Supremely capable" are adjectives Uber is using to describe the commander in latest kickstarter email. I don't think I can reconcile that with a commander that's "supposed to hold you back"....

So... did it ever occur to you that you don't fully understand the vision of the game and the commander's role in it?

I have no idea where this is going! Hence the thread and why its fun to be a backer on this project.

I'm certainly advocating a commander that fits the description of "supremely capable". Why are you advocating to have a commander that holds you back? That's the mechanic in Beta, but looking forward, why not have a supremely capable commander. I think the combo of a power commander, yet weak because is a single point failure is a really exciting element for the game.

Commander upgrades in FA never maintained the commander's position on the battlefield.
The amount of resources spent on upgrades could be spent on something else that achieved your means sooner.
I think the people that are for commander upgrades want a commander that plays like the ACU in T1/T2 battles.

Billy nukes have won games.
Seraphim tac missiles have won games. (Fwippapas killed 3 commanders in a 4v4 with nothing but his com and a transport)
Aeon stun have won games.
A timely overcharge on a near-dead GC has saved countless commanders.

And armies of T3 Bots or Experimentals have won many, many more games than all of those combined.

Mike

The real problem here, is that you have different qualifications than the rest of us. You feel the Commander needs to be a 'supremely capable' combatant while the rest of us realize that the Commander is 'supremely capable' are creating bases to create units to do the fighting.

Mike

Thank you Mike. That was the angle I was getting at.
As for your comment Rockem, My 16 year old handel isn't for show; The Nanolathe is the most powerful weapon in the galaxy.

Keep your armour, keep your shields, keep your 'Uber-Cannon'. None of them is a patch on the Nanolathe.
The Commander is a builder and coordinator, not a fighter.

But there has to be a way to protect the commander. I don't know if shield generators will come or not. So the commander need at least some HP upgrades.

You protect the Commander by building armies, not armour.

Armour won't save you from a Snipe, no matter how much HP you have; Your army however, can, by laying down their lives to save you.

If you feel that your Commander is vulnerable... then build an army to make him less vulnerable. Put a wall of bodies between you and your opponent.

Buff the range of the Uber Cannon. Leave the commander otherwise unchanged. Best way to protect that HP is by blapping anything unfriendly.

Maybe think of it like Chess. You use strategy and tactics to whittle away your opponents army (their pawns, bishops, rooks, etc), until you can trap the King.

The King isn't this giant, indestructible, killing machine - it's a pudgy nobleman who controls a kingdom.

I'm thinking on a snipe. It's only one second were you didn't paid attention and the game is over.

Exactly. Working As Intended.

You payed the ultimate price for making a mistake. Learn from it.

If you want, I can get into the nitty-gritty of gamedesign for a bit. If you don't want to read a wall of text however, I suggest you take it on faith;

The Commander is deliberately designed to be a less-than-perfect combatant and an unavoidable weakpoint.

I can't agree nanolathe. If you play on more then one planet, you can't pay attention.

Pay attention to what?

The only thing that matters is the Commander... and there is only ONE of him. How can you not pay attention to where he is and what's threatening him? It sounds like you're just incompetent and haven't learnt your lesson;

The only thing that matters is the Commander.

Ok example.

You are clicking some buildings in on planet 2. Your commander is on planet one. Exactly in this moment your opponents decides to attack it with 100 bombers. Ok you got some anti air and some tanks/planes are flying around your commander, but 50 planes will find their way to it and kill him.
Even if i would see this, it could be too late. That has nothing to do with "incompetent", i played Supreme Commander since 2006 you can't believe how easy it is to kill a commander.

You failed to scout 100 bombers? You didn't have 100 fighters, which are cheaper than those 100 bombers, patrolling near to your Commanders location? You weren't conducting raids to weaken your opponent's air force? You let him stockpile 100 bombers on the same planet as your Commander? You went to look at planet two... without any knowledge that your opponent had been stockpiling bombers to the point at which he had a critical mass of them to breach your defenses?

Yea I see, you're not incompetent; you're just really bad at coming up with an example to support your argument... really bad.

I've been playing Total Annihilation since 1997. I have a very solid idea of what it takes to kill a Commander. You need a MUCH better example than that.