What does a commander do?

Sure it is. And there are a lot of other things about "real war" that are boring and undesirable to mirror too.

You misunderstand. No one is proposing that assassination go away, nothing of the sort. We would prefer the commander do *something* other than await his potential doom, or just be a base starter or... etc.

Indeed- discussing wether or not a unit is still viable in late game is one thing. We're talking about the leading character here.
No matter what we decide at the end of this rather interesting discussion, the player has to enjoy being the commander. If it is just some slightly more powerful constructor sat in the back of a base all game long, that is a serious letdown.

So viability late game is linked in no small matter to likeability of the commander. Likeability of the commander in turn greatly benefits immersion of the player.

It basically boils down to this: we want the commander unit to be kickass. How this can be achieved late game, is the question

Like I said before- sticking with the initial idea of the commander gating through (teleporting, warping, whatever) to an unknown, hostile galaxy to build a foothold base while fighting off indigenous lifeforms and enemy scouts and patrols, THAT should be the general image of the end product, in my opinion.

This transposed to lategame- to reach other planets, gateways would be far too expensive so the commander uses rockets to travel to the next planet, where he does exactly thesame thing, remains viable, and kickass all the way until the last planet has been "seeded".

(on a sidenote, this does open up an interesting way to finish every level (or solar system, if you will) in single player- not by constructing the usual rocket, but by building a gateway portal to the next solar system)

eh, you said it better the first time.

I don't need my Commander to be "kickass".

I like the rather simple thought of wanting to identify with your Commander, and for that feeling of identification to continue though to the late game, rather than the Commander becoming a "burden" in your mind.

There should theoretically be many ways to allow you to connect with your Commander. Hopefully these will be with his chosen ideology, and how that affects his battlefield performance militarily, economically, tactically, strategically.

I in no way want to see all commanders follow the same path to "kickass"ness. Each should follow his ideology.

I feel the identifying with your commander as an individual (on more than a aesthetic level) is contrary to the purpose and lore of the game. In both lore and reality (effectively) your control extends to your entire army. As the commander, your army represents your arms, legs, spear and shield. Whether the discrete commander unit or another unit (which is an extension of the commander's conscious anyway) engages the enemy, is irrelevant. Essentially, you are never JUST your commander.

Of course you're not. But as the only unique unit in your army, not to mention the importance the game places upon it and the fact that it's likely going to be the first unit you ever see, humans will naturally form an attachment to it. I know I did with the ARM Commander. Loved that lil' bugger.

I suppose it's just a difference in taste then. I played ARM, but more for their philosophy than their commander (thought the core one was cooler). Also the maverick. Love the maverick.

I didn't know which was which when I booted up the game for the first time. I learnt which had which philosophy later. Always was on the side of the Machines myself, but I liked the ARM units too much to stay away

Fixed.

I never felt any emotional bindings to the commander while playing SCFA, or SC2. So i dislike the generalising here. As for me only the commanders properties where important, building speed and res-generation.

Maybe there are also others that tend to be rather rational about that.

Good point Nanolathe, kickass is not for everyone- but I think Uber has thought of that in allowing us to choose from multiple commanders, each with it's own identity.

Those who do NOT form an emotional bond with the commander, or have no form of identification with it:

I think the player base is quite equally devided between those who do, and those who don't. However, if the commander is likeable, it won't annoy those who don't care. If it isn't likeable, then it for sure will annoy those who want that. So I think for the nature of this discussion, it doesn't really matter. The thing needs to be likeable.