Comments on: The great commander death nuke controversy

By: FieryBalrog

FieryBalrog — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 18:02:53 +0000

Gameplay > Big Pretty Explosions

The problem is, unlike TA, the commander in SupCom is a very powerful offensive unit without putting a huge drain on your econ (like the D-Gun did). As a result, its practically a necessity to Comm Rush on small maps, because if you don’t, you WILL lose map control and thereby the game to your Comm Rushing opponent. T1 armies can’t take an opposing T1 army that is backed by its commander.

By: BentAnat

BentAnat — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:19:00 +0000

4K is perfectly sufficient, IMO.
I know that whenever i play a LAN friendly 2v2 or 3v3, i get PO’ed about the units i lsot killing the first player’s ACU…
It’s most likely my playing style (i like to harass all opponents in the game, adn then mobilize a main strike force to take them out all in a row), but i can not possibly use my ACU offensively without doing a “pitstop” with him in between opponents…
seeing as Assassination is really the only way to play SupCom, i don’t quite see why it should be enlarged…
A larger explosion just means more people getting out of defeat in a cheap way.
Less means no way to get your way out of defeat, even with a bit of skill…

4000 is a balance of the two, IMO… the amjority of the damage to the opposing ACU still needs to be done “manually”

By: Wonder_Bread

Wonder_Bread — Sat, 21 Jul 2007 00:05:59 +0000

I think the death nuke should be 10k hit points (which if I remember correctly is the hit point total of an unshielded commander). This way the death nuke can very easily be fatal to an early game commander, but a shielded one/one upgraded for offense would be able to survive the explosion.

Death nuke needs to exist, killing a commander should be hazardous. Avoiding a suicide bombing commander isn’t difficult if one has a radar station up. You can see their commander coming and prepare by building point defenses that will kill them.

By: Cyde Weys

Cyde Weys — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 18:32:22 +0000

E coli: That would make sense. Make the explosion get larger with every successive upgrade on the commander. I’m not sure if it’d be good for gameplay balance, but it’d make sense. Imagine in a 2v2 ranked game, if you will. One partner upgrades his commander, donates all of his units to his partner, and then com-bombs one of the opponent’s bases into oblivion. That should deliver a sizable advantage.

By: Escherichia Coli

Escherichia Coli — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:34:48 +0000

Why don’t relate death damage to upgrades ?
Stock com : 4000 damage
Fully equiped com : 70000 damage

By: Cyde Weys

Cyde Weys — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:43:57 +0000

I don’t see why there should be a reason for small maps not to work, though.

By: Yhtill

Yhtill — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 10:37:12 +0000

SemperFido, I agree.
WinterDuel comes to mind.

By: SemperFido

SemperFido — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 07:57:21 +0000

The issue may not be with the death nuke but rather with some maps.

By: Meddish

Meddish — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 06:54:40 +0000

think the 70,000 damage worked well…
nerfing it to 4k means u could use ur com offesnively and then stick around for the big bang….
70k means u NEEDED to get the HELL out of there!!!

By: 54pikachus

54pikachus — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 02:50:53 +0000

i totaly agree a 0 dammage one would be totaly un-supcom/TA and if they realy consedered this I would be so discusted i would vomit