Jesus christ. I knew Agent of Kharma had screws loose from reading some of his earlier posts, but this takes it to a whole other level. Btw, welcome to 2004 you useless cretin. Everything you have made mention of is un-parsed regurgitation of conspiracy theory websites that have been repeatedly refuted since over the last 6 years. so not only are you woefully late to the party, but you’re fooled by information that has been shown to be false, over and over again. Idiot.<
-RAISTLIN-
I don’t give a rat’s ass about the score. I [i]read[/i] the review.
single player supcom vanilla/FA/2 sucks.
B5 pioneered the 'novel for tv' format. it is the grandfather of modern scifi/fantasy on television. do not choose DS9 over it or you'll be sorry! yeah, there are some pretty weak episodes (most of them in season 1), but with 110 eps thats to be expected. once the narrative really gets going though you'll have the best part of 60 superb episodes in a row, between season 2 and 4. season 5 is a bit of an anti climax, but you can blame the executives rather than JMS for that. so um, yeah
[quote who="SwerydAss" reply="68" id="2578761"]Sound more like thats a bug that needs to be fixed then(the angle part). And your saying the only difference in the strategic veiw from each is that the first one puts a frame around it .... big deal you still see the whole map at once [/quote] no, its not a bug. its intentional.
[quote who="SwerydAss" reply="62" id="2578164"] It still has strategic view of the whole battlefield... If your talking about how far it jumps with each click that can be changed in the options menu. I think there is a key you can hold to zoom in and out slower or faster as well. [/quote] it also wont let you choose your own playing angle. well it does, but as soon as you zoom all the way out it resets it.
[quote who="GM-morpheas768" reply="51" id="2577596"]I am curious, how exactly was the Com Nuke before the nerf? Like bigger explosion radius? [/quote] it did a stupid amount of damage, like 70K and completely ruined games (ie by people com-bombing in team games). it got nerfed for a very good reason.
[quote who="GM-morpheas768" reply="44" id="2577068"] I had to set the difficulty setting in 1 of FA's missions to "Easy", because I lost 3 times in a row, and could NOT beat the normal AI whatsoever. So either SupCom is a really hard game, or I suck really bad at it All in all, I am glad they made SupCom 2 a lot easier than 1, but it lost its flavor somehow. Its kinda like removing the very hot chilli pepper sauce from a tasty dish, the dish will still be good and
yeah, DA was one of my more bug-free gaming experiences. just finished risen. playing supcomFA always. thats about it at the moment though :(
Nah, I found it wonderfully easy. easiest modern RTS ive ever learned to play for sure. completely self-taught, and I can beat just about anyone on a good day. I found my group of friends caught onto the important basics pretty quickly. mostly due to its transparency. Just got them to forget about their experiences in other RTS games and learn anew. I have no doubt had they played the hundreds of games and watched the thousands of replays I had, they’d be a match for me for sure.<
Just play ranked. You’ll learn (the hard way) soon enough how things work. it really is an easy game to learn. and most players online really aren't very good.
supcom 2 is fun enough but i prefer virtually everything about FA.
[quote who="SwerydAss" reply="50" id="2572913"] Also I would like to add the number one reason I like supcom 2 over the first one is the units are alot stronger than the first. It was like the units in the first one were made out of paper.. That was also my gripe with Red Alert 3. [/quote] supcom isnt about units. its about armies.
It appears I may have been wrong, all over the place! ;) it seems as though the requirement for agreement between federal and state AGs is a recently new phenomenon, with the the passge of the CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) ACT 1995. [quote] The Act provides that publications, films and computer games are to be classified in accordance with the National Classification Code, set out in the Schedule to the Act, and the Classification Gu
[quote who="SpardaSon21" reply="9" id="2571479"]But, why unanimous consent and not a simple 2/3 majority? Also, why was such power given to the Attorney General and not the Governor or legislative branch? [/quote] the governors are a position of formality; they hold no real power whatsoever. and even if it were, you'd be in the same situation. if you really meant "premier" then i don't know; probably because it is assumed that any AG serves at the whim of his premier.
[quote who="Ron Lugge" reply="7" id="2571371"]I apolagize for the overharshness of my post; I'll stand by the sentiment, but the tone was a bit excessive. Does anyone know why such a crazy system was set up? [/quote] Its was a requirement in the constitution to ensure that each state had a say in changes to such laws, which guaranteed the creation of Australia.
[quote who="Resist_The_Dawn" reply="1" id="2555498"]umm.....You do know Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age are published by EA right?[/quote] hahahahahahahahha!
[quote who="davidabc66" reply="28" id="2563056"] Speak for yourself. SupCom has a large multiplayer community, but like most games with a solid skirmish mode, which SupCom has, many people, myself included, play single player. SupCom is no exception. [/quote] if you dont play supcom against other people, you've never played supcom.
Games radar. They have hilarious write ups about any and every topic you can think of.
[quote who="ZehDon" reply="65" id="2553922"]I agree with most of what you said Tiger, especially the part about the numbers; additional information would've been nice. [/quote] just like before ;) http://supcomdb.com/sc2/unitlist
Supcom has a patrol function that works in a similar fashion. Supcom’s zoom and intel options kinda make such necessities redundant (at least in vanilla and forged alliance). Ive never felt the need for something like that. I like that my units do what they’re told, and don’t try and think for themselves. Its too easy to lay a trap for substandard unit AI with any other method. The units have such huge range anyhow they don’t need to do anything other than shoot
[quote who="Splitshadow" reply="59" id="2552246"]They should still auto-target something that is attacking them. If they don't, the micro needed for that game is insane. You could just always create long range units and micro them as to aggravate your opponent.[/quote] no, they shouldn't and they never did in the first one either. imagine how annoying it would be if every time your units were attacked they would go blundering in to respond to whatever was attacking it. youd be constan
have you switched on range rings? the range of units is MUCH shorter than they were in FA. you might find that units werent in range, and defensive turrets outrange your tanks.
[quote who="Splitshadow" reply="51" id="2551210"]Realism is just an excuse for poor gameplay. Nine times out of ten, unrealistic is more fun. Also, the AI for the units is retarded. They won't attack an enemy tower that's firing on them unless you tell them. On the tutorial I had to switch back and forth like crazy just to get them to stay attacking the stupid buildings. (not that difficult, but I'd like a little less mental retardation in my AI thank you) Also, when I say I'm unbiased, of co
you only have to experience the consolitis of many PC titles these days to know that PC gaming is already dead. yes, it remains relatively strong in a few areas, but the console is killing us in the marketplace. hence virtually everyone moving to cross-platform development. and such development often comes with bad textures, poor control options & UI, simplified gameplay etc. piracy has already killed PC gaming. how long the death throes last depends on how many of us stalwarts wi