Total Annihilation Players!

How so? Strategy in RTS has never been anything more than the build order and maybe where you place your firebases. For SUPCOM 2 I'd rope in the research tree to that category as well.

What did SUPCOM 2 lack in this area compared to other RTS games?

Ok I didnt bother to get into supercom 1 or 2, but I did play many, many years of OTA+cc with some of the best online players to ever play the game. And I can assure you build order is not the deciding factor of a great rts, at least it shouldn't be. The way I look at rts games is similar to the way I view competitive martial arts. It's not about which form or style you play, it's about your level of skill, commitment and creativity that wins the game. This is known as adapting. THE cornerstone principle of any great rts, such as total annihilation.

Btw please keep this about the game and not about your egos or flames. Let's share in this new moment where ta's next successor may be taking shape.

Shollosx, you don't know who Quitch is (re: TA), do you?

This should be interesting, seeing the two of you lecture each other. BRB after I grab some popcorn....

As "great" is an entirely subjective term I'm not sure what your point is. However, build order is and always will be vital, in the same way logistics are a vitally important part of real warfare.

You only get a chance to express you "flair" and "creativity" if you're still in the game, and that means build orders which ensure you have the strong economy necessary. You only need to look at the Starcraft scene (more heavily scrutinised and balanced than any other RTS) to see this. Build orders play a huge part in the game because they determine what you can and cannot do. It's no good being creative if the other guy is out-producing you 2:1.

Think of it like Chess openings, you need to know them so you can develop successfully but also so you can understand what your opponent is attempting to do and counter successfully. You don't need to re-develop the wheel every time and attempting to do so will put you at a huge disadvantage.

Also, bonus points are making a post all about TA and then complaining we're not talking about PA

Well, since we are already bragging. I have a nice Total Annihilation manual with Chris Taylor's signature in it

The necessity of rote learning chess openings is one of the criticisms levelled at that game.
Unfortunately the variants developed to tackle it, such as Chess960, tend to do so by introducing some form of randomness.

I would agree with that criticism and it's one equally applicable to RTS games.

No I'm not sure who he is.. I've been somewhat away for quite some time now, not even playing another game, doing the whole work-eat-sleep routine. hehe

Its not the game of chess, its adaptation. The chess portion of TA comes from unit control, and not build orders. In TA you could win building (within reason) any kind of build order you liked. It isn't the build order that makes the great player, it is what the great player does with what she/he has built.

Also, this post is about TA and PA, I'm not detracting from either points just by addressing TA.

Which is exactly why I prefer games with random map/scenario generation to those with fixed maps and heavily scripted scenarios. If all you have is a finite collection of maps, once you learn the specific tactics that best exploit each situation it becomes boooohrrring. I know why I have this preference: ADD and exceptionally poor memory. I actually started a chess club in high school, but soon enough got sick of the lack of surprises and its utter dependency on rote memorization that I cannot do well. My only strength as a game player is the fluid intelligence I developed to compensate for those developmental shortcomings, so naturally I prefer games that let me exploit that.

Supreme Commander 2 WAS THE WORST in this regard. Frankly the only reason I could tolerate TA was because of (a) the 1400 community maps I accumulated, (b) the massive mounds of mods, and (c) TA:Mutation to lemme manage it all and add a final level of variability with its ingenious procedural "mutator" system. In that respect the TA-like games since TA have actually been a backward regression, again with Supreme Commander 2 being the worst of the whole lot.

If the Uber team fails to listen to this rant and Planetary Annihilation winds up becoming the new low end of that progression, I'll be askin' for a reverse donation from them to my "gaming fund".

You still have yet to state what makes TA different from every other RTS in this regard. Off the top of my head the differences would be:

[*]Economy model (flow rather than stepped)
[*]Scale
[*]Build anywhere
[*]Full control over aircraft
[*]Long range weapons which don't rely on stockpiles

I don't see how any of these prevent build order optimisation. If you want to do that then random maps are your first stop.

First build order is everything. If your build order is superior to your foes you have more resources at your disposal. While it doesn't win you games on its own, it puts you in a better position to do so.

For example back in the day on GOW in TA. Tidal energy was the best, then wind, then solar. Now if you were one of the poor sods building solar panels then you managed to spend more metal for less energy. In TA knowing the map played a small factor, as you knew what method of energy production was the best. In that same game if you made wind turbines then you spent far less metal and produced the same amount of energy. This allowed you to reach tech 2 kbots faster, produce a freedom fighter faster, etc etc... I cannot tell you how many times a single bomber one that match for me, combined with carpet bombing that is.

Build order is very important. All RTS games are somewhat reliant on build order, since you must first establish a base before you are producing units.

I agree with this post. In fact I liked supcom 2 more than supcom 1. Also loved TA <3

so your argument about PA not being something for quitch is invalid! sir!

When I talk about build order not being as important, I imagine I'm playing comet catcher, from the top, and I'm just doing the solar/mex/mex thing.. you can build as many mexes before your plant as you like to help you be able to guard it longer... but it doesn't limit you by how few mexes you can take, either. Every order has its own feasibility, you can make whatever order work, based by what you do with it. Like if you want to rush you don't take as long to build your veh plant. It isn't the order, it is the unit control of what you build. I guess I don't look at build orders being exactly the same action every time, because I always try to do something a little different.. instead of send a unit here, I send it there.. and instead of building my structures here, I build them there. And instead of sending my con to expand right next to my base, I send it to the other side of the map to secret expo and take over as much of the map as quickly as possible.

I don't think its necessary to do comparisons between other games, because I don't particularly care about any other games. I just have TA as an all-time fave, and anyone that has spent any deal of time learning to play the standard Original TA with Core Contingency and the downloaded units, will see that it may not have been perfectly balanced and bug free, but it was a damn close game and it continued to evolve the way it was played, over its 15 year lifespan.

The only reason I ever stopped playing was because it became difficult to find a game. With such a small pool of people actively playing, its difficult to spend time playing it with intent to get better. And we can always get better, thats the awesome thing about that game. There was always something you could improve on. I like that, a sense of perfection that is fleeting the closer you try to get to it. The more you try to do, the harder it is to keep it all running without hesitations such as idle units in general.

Oh ebduncan! Whats happenin' man? haha

not a whole lot man. I remember you to. ;-)

if your on steam find me. Screen name is easy BTU_Ebduncan

Hello, Shollos....

My dear storm! How's your trout-knife treating you in cs?
Nice to see your activity. It's been a real long time huh?

I was remembering the old days when I saw your name. I remember playing you in a tourney, not sure which one, so long ago. It was on a map like c2c or shore2shore or something like that. When I get home ill add you on steam.

It's been retired for a Dgun.... see you on the battlefield, sir