Things you disliked about Supcom that you hope wont be in PA

Re: Things you disliked about Supcom that you hope wont be i

But land batteries totally did exist. We called it artillery. It turns out that humans can't survive 20 inch shells to the face. In fact they have a hard enough time surviving any sized shell, so you can save a lot of money by using small guns. People also have a hard time HAULING around 20 inch shells, and seem to work much better carrying small guns. So land combat evolved in that direction.

Surface vessels are a nice way to mount large cannons that can move pretty easily. But the large size of boats is mostly due to human concerns. Big boats need lots of crew. Crew need living quarters, 3 months of food, showers, etc.etc. It's pretty much all wasted space for a machine that only needs engines, guns, an ammo generator, and armor. A boat with a gun and no people is actually pretty damn small, all things considered.

Archimedes also plays some role in boat size. A solid hunk of steel isn't going to float, after all. Super large boats will especially have problems as they demand lots of light materials which will compromise heavy armor.

Re: Things you disliked about Supcom that you hope wont be i

There were 2 main things i disliked: inability of aa units and interceptors to attack land (while interceptors were shooting grounded aircrafts just fine), so gamey; and inability to recall your commander, with mandatory nuke. I hope PA will make defeat with destroyed commander far more severe than defeat with recall.

Re: Things you disliked about Supcom that you hope wont be i

Well not realy. Because the Surface of a convex 3d body, tends to only grow quadratic to the size (radius, side length), while volume tends to grow well cubed.

So it could be easier to build a super large high amored boat then a small armored boat.
There are even variants of Metall using blowing agents or styrofoam to increment volumina of metall. Which can result in "solid" floating metal blocks.

Re: Things you disliked about Supcom that you hope wont be i

yeah I have zock looks like he has upwards of 250APM, napalm is also full of ****.

and again, you can have under 1apm in a paradox game if you want and still do everything perfectly because of time manipulation.

it's a wonder nobody told hitler he could've won the war by massing artillery

i can explain this for you though, mobile units favor dynamic fronts, static emplacements favor static fronts. Static emplacements are thus very effective as coastal defense and mobile units are thus much more effective on wide open land masses.

Re: Things you disliked about Supcom that you hope wont be i

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=jc-lA-S9 ... e=g-subs-u

250apm....

High APM is useful in supcom, but not required. A lot of it is trying to reduce the APM you need, and I agree that this is a problem.

The question is do we want a game where only one APM is required?

There must be a balance of APM and strategy, but how far should it be skewed?

Re: Things you disliked about Supcom that you hope wont be i

You know artillery walking, shelling the area ahead and then moving up incrementally was a fairly popular ww2 tactic?

In fact I'd like to see that as an easy command in PA.

Re: Things you disliked about Supcom that you hope wont be i

i'd imagine even more so during ww1

in supcom i believe if you used attack walk with artillery they would fire from their max range and continue to attack from their max range up to where you ordered them to walk.

Re: Things you disliked about Supcom that you hope wont be i

They only do that if you have vision on the enemy. You can't make an attack order into the fog of war and have it work out so well. There's ground attack but that's micro heavy.

Hence I'd like an easy command.